Jump to content

WC4 Format Options pt.lastonemayb (POLL)


Format??  

99 members have voted

  1. 1. Format??

    • 5 Tiers (OU/UU/NU/LC/DUBS)
    • 8 Tiers (OUx2/UUx2/NUx2/LC/DUBS)
    • 7 Tiers (OU/UU/NU/LC/DUBS/Captain's Choice x2)
    • 8 Tiers (OU/OU/UU/NU/Dubs/LC/Captain's Choice x2)
    • 4 Tiers (OU/UU/NU/DUBS)


Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)

For now, we're establishing that showdown will not be played and that little cup will stay. *cue angry old people noises*

 

Regarding LC, it's not for sure staying, as we'll need to evaluate signups and team compositions. In the event that it gets removed, just imagine an extra OU slot wherever you see LC. 

 

Regarding Captain's Choice, the captain for each country will only be able to choose between OU/UU/NU (doubles or LC will not be permitted).

 

**If the format you would like isn't up here, please comment a reasonable format that you would like to see please!**

 

 

Edited by calidubstep
Link to post
2 minutes ago, GasaiYunoSan said:

OU/OU/UU/NU/Dubs/LC/Manager Choice/Manager Choice

This is my suggestion

added

 

1 minute ago, CHUCKunso said:

I don't think captains choice is a good direction considering we are not drafting our own teams but more so get thrown together.

the idea behind the choices is to try and merge smaller countries of 5 or 6 players into regions of 10-12 while also limiting the splitting of a country as much as we can. Because a captain can pick 1 of the extra tiers being played, there's really only potential for 1 duel to be relatively uncomfortable for a team to cover.

Link to post

Merge country is a bad idea ,people wont be as involved as they could be if they represent a "rest of ..." or something else. Also having too many tier means that belgium will merge with other small country, imagine a world cup without the current world champ. 

Link to post
7 hours ago, calidubstep said:

For now, we're establishing that showdown will not be played and that little cup will stay. *cue angry old people noises*

 

image.png.a8d8626b39de4dac13f4315a77aa81cd.png

Link to post
Posted (edited)

Last year I believe we (France) were the smallest group and all of us had to play every matches (6 I think).

 

I was the only one signed up as "LC" and I pretty much didnt know anything about that tier (or pvp) before the competition. I think it's not an issue at all that players dont have assigned LC, and it's a more popular tier than you are letting think, even if it is not popularly PLAYED, a lot of players CAN play it and know what they are doing. I dont like these players boohooing about LC being a dead tier yet refusing to play it when they have opportunity. 

 

I dont get the hate on captain choice, it allows big groups to make more players play on their tier, and small groups to cover the lack of tier diversity in their group. 7 is maybe too "high" to make sure a country can have its team... but since a lot of players cheat anyways in their nationality I'm sure its gonna get filled. 

 

EDIT : As I said in other post I could see LC being a manager's choice, if ppl really dont want it, and have the format OU/UU/NU/DUBS/x2 with 6 ppl, meaning little groups for little countries. 

Edited by Poufilou
Link to post
Posted (edited)

When ? Now.

 

Ain't a big competition scene the best way to reintroduce a tier that is still well liked within the community ? Ain't that the only thing we can do to play it, since it is harder to host regular unofficial?

 

Edited by Poufilou
Link to post

No. It should be the other way around. If there are enough unofficial tours going on for LC then it becomes apparent that it deserves a place in a competition like WC/PSL. Making room for it in a competition like this to breath some life into it is backwards thinking. 

 

That said we've had LC and showdown in PSLs as well and the overall level of competition is higher in PSL, so for WC it doesn't matter that much what tiers the hosts do or don't want to include.

Link to post
21 minutes ago, ThinkNicer said:

No. It should be the other way around. If there are enough unofficial tours going on for LC then it becomes apparent that it deserves a place in a competition like WC/PSL. Making room for it in a competition like this to breath some life into it is backwards thinking. 

 

That said we've had LC and showdown in PSLs as well and the overall level of competition is higher in PSL, so for WC it doesn't matter that much what tiers the hosts do or don't want to include.

There are more big competitions than unofficial tournaments, those has become less and less active because of matchmaking.

Your point makes no sense ; there hasn't been OU, UU or NU unofficial tours active aswell to "deserve" a place by that criteria. 

Link to post
8 minutes ago, Poufilou said:

There are more big competitions than unofficial tournaments, those has become less and less active because of matchmaking.

Your point makes no sense ; there hasn't been OU, UU or NU unofficial tours active aswell to "deserve" a place by that criteria. 

lol

Link to post
Posted (edited)

If you want to compare what tiers deserve their place or not in a competition, do it with a criteria that can actually compare them. And maybe think that a competition like this doesnt HAVE to reflect what we have in our competition scene. On the contrary, it is especially an opportunity to show its diversity, considering WC is a competition of diversity. And it is foolish to say that LC has not enough claim to be part of it, considering all its history and attrack of players still to date.

 

And idk, big competitions or unofficial tours, having a tier in there won't affect its glory or whatever especially if LC. It's pvp and people will play, I don't get that a tier still have to "prove" something to be part of a competition, we have only 5 "tiers" that are actually playable in MMO, removing one because it go abandoned by official or have difficulty to be active doesn't mean it won't be a good addition to a competition

 

Edited by Poufilou
Link to post

@Poufilou

Yep you are correct, a lot of the community still plays lc including the Spanish community who hosts their own tournaments and psl there is a lot of interest still from lc and a lot of new players started playing. 

Link to post
28 minutes ago, Poufilou said:

I don't get that a tier still have to "prove" something to be part of a competition, we have only 5 "tiers" that are actually playable in MMO

yes when we have 1v1 and monotype in world cup smh

Link to post
Posted (edited)

The number of tiers reflects on the amount of players required for a country to participate in the WC, right?

 

In WC 3, we had 28 teams and 6 tiers had to be played every week. Of these 28 teams, Poland dropped out after the first week due to lack of players. We also had countries like Venezuela, China, Colombia, Argentina and Peru that had two teams representing them. I was captain of team Canada and I know for a fact that we did not have 6 Canadian players on my team. We also had Rest of Europe, Rest of America and Rest of Asia as teams competing.

 

What is the objective basically? Do the hosts want to fill a 16 teams pool bracket? In that case, we need way more than a 5 tiers format since competing teams will need be huge. Do the hosts want to fill a 32/36 bracket? In that case, you need 4/5 tiers format because last world cup we clearly could not even get 28 competing teams for a 6 tiers format.

 

Imo, the ideal format is a format that ensures we don't end up with "Rest of ..." teams. Those are incredibly unhyped and the direct result of requiring too many tiers having to be played each week. Last WC, team Poland was unable to have 6 players rdy to compete each week, but if they only needed 4 players each week, they probably would have been able to participate. Netherlands had 6 players last WC, but because Rest of Europe needed more players to get a complete roster, Netherlands were denied their team and had to play for Rest of Europe.

 

For that reason, I believe a 4 tiers format is ideal: OU/UU/NU/Dubs. Those are PokeMMO official tiers. It allows us to have more teams which means players are more likely to compete for a country they will want to represent and not somethign meaningless like Rest of America. As for countries with very large amount of players, I think it's pretty simple to divide them in a meaningfull manner. In all sports, we see teams from the same country compete all the time because the teams playing represent cities. So for China, instead of dividing their player base in China A and China B, why not divide them based on China regions/provinces? I don't know much about Chinese culture and geography, so it's probably best to ask chinese players themselves what division would make sense. Let's keep in mind that in WC 3, all the countries that had 2 teams conveniently never had to face each other and were spread into different pools. That's not really fair imo and it would not be necessary if for instance we had to South of Argentina facing the North or Argentina. It might be the same country but the players competing against each other represent different people and different cities.  Once again, I know absolutely nothing about Argentina and I don't know what kind of seperation would make sense. If I take France for instance, if the country was divided between Team Pain au Chocolat and Team Chocolatine, I can assure you these teams would compete against each other with everything they had because these two teams hate each other and would never conspire to let one team win to boost their score. For USA, you could have Republicans vs Democrats. It really depends on the country, but there should always be a way, whether that way is geographic, political, cultural or something else, to divide a country into meaningful competing teams.

 

Voting for a format means a lot basically since it dictates pretty much every aspect of the event, so think it through guys. I wouldn't be surprised that with people voting for 8 tiers, we end up with Rest of America A, Rest of America B, Rest of Europe A, Rest of Europe B, Rest of Asia A, etc. That would suck...

 

Edited by gbwead
Link to post
24 minutes ago, gbwead said:

The number of tiers reflects on the amount of players required for a country to participate in the WC, right?

 

In WC 3, we had 28 teams and 6 tiers had to be played every week. Of these 28 teams, Poland dropped out after the first week due to lack of players. We also had countries like Venezuela, China, Colombia, Argentina and Peru that had two teams representing them. I was captain of team Canada and I know for a fact that we did not have 6 Canadian players on my team. We also had Rest of Europe, Rest of America and Rest of Asia as teams competing.

 

What is the objective basically? Do the hosts want to fill a 16 teams pool bracket? In that case, we need way more than a 5 tiers format since competing teams will need be huge. Do the hosts want to fill a 32/36 bracket? In that case, you need 4/5 tiers format because last world cup we clearly could not even get 28 competing teams for a 6 tiers format.

 

Imo, the ideal format is a format that ensures we don't end up with "Rest of ..." teams. Those are incredibly unhyped and the direct result of requiring too many tiers having to be played each week. Last WC, team Poland was unable to have 6 players rdy to compete each week, but if they only needed 4 players each week, they probably would have been able to participate. Netherlands had 6 players last WC, but because Rest of Europe needed more players to get a complete roster, Netherlands were denied their team and had to play for Rest of Europe.

 

For that reason, I believe a 4 tiers format is ideal: OU/UU/NU/Dubs. Those are PokeMMO official tiers. It allows us to have more teams which means players are more likely to compete for a country they will want to represent and not somethign meaningless like Rest of America. As for countries with very large amount of players, I think it's pretty simple to divide them in a meaningfull manner. In all sports, we see teams from the same country compete all the time because the teams playing represent cities. So for China, instead of dividing their player base in China A and China B, why not divide them based on China regions/provinces? I don't know much about Chinese culture and geography, so it's probably best to ask chinese players themselves what division would make sense. Let's keep in mind that in WC 3, all the countries that had 2 teams conveniently never had to face each other and were spread into different pools. That's not really fair imo and it would not be necessary if for instance we had to South of Argentina facing the North or Argentina. It might be the same country but the players competing against each other represent different people and different cities.  Once again, I know absolutely nothing about Argentina and I don't know what kind of seperation would make sense. If I take France for instance, if the country was divided between Team Pain au Chocolat and Team Chocolatine, I can assure you these teams would compete against each other with everything they had because these two teams hate each other and would never conspire to let one team win to boost their score. For USA, you could have Republicans vs Democrats. It really depends on the country, but there should always be a way, whether that way is geographic, political, cultural or something else, to divide a country into meaningful competing teams.

 

Voting for a format means a lot basically since it dictates pretty much every aspect of the event, so think it through guys. I wouldn't be surprised that with people voting for 8 tiers, we end up with Rest of America A, Rest of America B, Rest of Europe A, Rest of Europe B, Rest of Asia A, etc. That would suck...

 

I remember wc3 i had like 15 players , didnt know how to make them all play lol , dont talk about your case only

Link to post
Just now, Tawla said:

I remember wc3 i had like 15 players , didnt know how to make them all play lol , dont talk about your case only

I'm not, that's why I explained to how divide these 15 players in a meaningful manner. Team Africa could easily be seperated into different teams if the player requirement per country were not as restrictive. Madagascar can probably make their own team this year for instance.

Link to post
1 minute ago, Tawla said:

I remember wc3 i had like 15 players , didnt know how to make them all play lol , dont talk about your case only

He's trying to solve a problem where countries with few people could even participate. Looks like you're the one here who is only concerned with your case.

Link to post
9 hours ago, CHUCKunso said:

I don't think captains choice is a good direction considering we are not drafting our own teams but more so get thrown together.

And thats exactly the reason manager choice should be added.. Because since players arent drafted teams are gonna end up with multiple players playing one tier.. And a manager should be able to utilise that and not be forced to play said players on a role they wont be able to compete aswell

Link to post
37 minutes ago, Umbramol said:

And thats exactly the reason manager choice should be added.. Because since players arent drafted teams are gonna end up with multiple players playing one tier.. And a manager should be able to utilise that and not be forced to play said players on a role they wont be able to compete aswell

But surely the reverse is true? That because a captain/manager can choose a tier, the other team's manager may be forced to put a player in a role they don't usually play because the team couldn't draft an extra player for that tier. If we're using set tiers which only has one match in the less played tiers, it will be less likely that a player has to compete in a role they are unfamiliar with.

 

On a slightly different note, players who sign up should understand there's a chance they won't be able to compete, but that doesn't mean they aren't involved, its on them to actively help out in the practice and team building for the main roster player. Newer players will learn a lot more from getting involved with the preparation part of any given week than from actually partaking in that weeks battles. So I don't think its an issue if there is less tiers played per week because we chose to remove manager choices.

Link to post

We've had this discussion before and it's really up to the hosts to decide what they want WC to be. Just a fun event, not much concerned with the level of competition? Then really there is not much harm in having B and C teams and having more matches per week to give a chance for everyone to play. 

 

Do the hosts want a more prestigious competition? Then it will mean that not everyone is going to be able to play (note, this doesn't mean that not everyone can participate like Havsha pointed out). Most of the complaints about tier selection, showdown/lc really come down to what this competition wants to be and the lack of clarity in that matter.

Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.