Since Smogon's super unstable right now and everyone's

>>31390884
yes

I'll check in with this trip periodically, if this thread is still around later I'll set stuff up, or I'll post a new thread again.

Main goal would be to figure out what the initial tiers would be, how they would be established and managed, and how changes would be set up. I have personal interest in some sort of non-biased automated "move things with this usage up and things with this usage down" but that's just me. Seems like an abusable system on the surface, needs work.

First step ban stealth rock.

/vp/ doesn't know shit about competitive, so no.

If you're serious about it OP, go for it. Could probe for some interesting alternate play.

Though if you really want to surpass Smogon, you're gonna have to dedicate yourself. Can't half ass it. Smogon has "recognition" for all thats worth.

At the very least, I personally would like to see a competing format come out. For one, it would help idiots realize that Smogon is just fan rules. But more over, competition forces quality to increase.

Evasion bans, yes or no?

>>31390884
This was attempted several times. It ended up having very similar tiers to Smogon and then imploded

I personally would love to see a point buy based system where every pokemon is legal but stronger shit will cost you more points. Granted trying to quantify how good every fucking pokemon is into a numerical value is an absurd undertaking but it would be a refreshingly different rule set.

I have always mused if a points based system would work. Start out with points = base stat total and have the limit set to 3000 (basically the BST of 5 pseudo-legendary pokes). This would give a reason to run the poorer pokes or not fully evolved mons as they cost less to include.

Items would have a points value, +ve or -ve and megastones could be +100 points since they add that amount of BST.

As the meta progressed you can shift points values around based on usage or how shit/good a poke is, as well as items. If shot like Speed Boost Blaziken started becoming a problem, add a 1.2x multiplier to the cost of using Speed Boost. People could still use it but they will have to sacrifice other stuff in their team.

>>31390884
ban stealth rock

>>31391075
>>31391096

Get out of my mind

>>31391075
Pokebattle flopped.

>>31391096
that would not work, not even on an initial phase, because something like Scizor costs less and it's way more useful than Articuno that costs an extra 70 points

>>31391099
Fuck off Volcarona

The game doesn't need fan rules anymore, only reason Smogon still exists is because they live under a rock and can't detach from their 10 year old culture

>>31391075
>>31391096
Pokebattle already did a point system but after some initial interest it disappeared. I never tried it though

>>31391120
>The game doesn't need fan rules anymore
It kinda needs when you're doing single battles and you want to battle something other than UBs, Tapus, legendaries and Garchomp/Toxapex

Wait what's going on at smogon?

File: cheuck barrry.png (135KB, 335x288px) Image search: [Google]

135KB, 335x288px

>>31391096
>>31391075
This is actually really interesting. Would Definitely try out.

>>31391096
This would be fucking hype. A massive challange to balance but could be really cool.

>>31391130
How does that make any sense when those Pokemon are just as common in Smogon? Smogon even has more legendaries since they allow mythicals and things like Kyurem-b

>>31391131
I'd say new gen usual crap. Tiers are just starting to form so we can't say there will be stability til mid-May at my best guess.

>>31391096
>have the limit set to 3000 (basically the BST of 5 pseudo-legendary pokes)
This would have to be combined with tiers, because I'm sure many Ubers could solo sweep a team that reaches 3000 BST
>megastones could be +100 points since they add that amount of BST.
Some Megas also have abilities that would necessitate higher point values (Kangaskhan)
>As the meta progressed you can shift points values around based on usage or how shit/good a poke is, as well as items. If shot like Speed Boost Blaziken started becoming a problem, add a 1.2x multiplier to the cost of using Speed Boost. People could still use it but they will have to sacrifice other stuff in their team.
I'm still not convinced this would allow all things to be used in the same meta. Mega Fug is still gonna rip and tear through 3000 point teams, on top of this Mega Fug can still have back-up unless you multiply his points by 3.8.

>>31391170
That's at least more diversity than only box legends. Smogon may not be perfect but at least they are trying towards creating a more diversified meta.

>>31391170
They are, but since they also have lower tiers, you can use effectively weaker pokémon without them being deadweight

Saying fan rules are not necessary, you're pretty much shitting on anything currently UU and below, because they won't be seeing much use with UBs, Tapus and legendaries around

>>31391075
great idea but if you base it on the pokemon then your ignoring things that can be really cancerous like heavy stall, stealthrocks sleep spam, evasion spam that make the game less competitive and more based on luck.

>inb4 the game is about luck
evasion spam places to much emphasis on luck, it makes the whole game about hoping your move to hit instead of fighting against your opponent.

>>31391208
>evasion spam places to much emphasis on luck, it makes the whole game about hoping your move to hit instead of fighting against your opponent.
>Aura Sphere
>Swift
>Magical Leaf
>Aerial Ace
>Miracle Eye
There's more counters to evasion than entry hazards
On top of this, those counters:
>have better distribution
>can double as coverage moves
>have higher BP than rapid spin

>>31391208
Yeah, like I said
>trying to quantify how good every fucking pokemon is into a numerical value is an absurd undertaking

You'd need to weight abilities, typings and movepool. Even then it probably miss a lot. Like Spinda's potential movepool is fucking absurd and he'd get weighted higher than his stats probably support. Or Breloom who on paper really doesn't seem all that great.

>>31391182
Fair point. The BST points system was just a starting point to costing things up quickly. The points limit could be decreased, potentially to 2400 or 2000. I honestly just pulled a number that looked reasonable. I can see the need to tier still, either by having lower points battles and/or traditional tiers.

You can easily make a take a look at certain obvious mons and increase (or decrease) their cost to something similar in power. Scizor could just be straight up bumped to 600 and treat it like psuedo.

>>31391236
forgot to add, having traditional tiers seems counter-productive to even doing a points based system in the first place.

>>31391231
If you use Rapid Spin once, you get rid of all hazards permanentely.

If you use Aerial Ace, you can hit for that turn, but if you get killed, and send out another pokémon you're fucked.

Setting hazards is risky business. The more hazards you set, the more free turns you give your oponnent. Evasion has a snowballing effect, it actually becomes easier to set-up

And furthermore, Aura Sphere has shit distribution and most of those moves are hella weak. Anything remotely bulky using Evasion will laugh at your pitiful attempts

>>31391182
>This would have to be combined with tiers, because I'm sure many Ubers could solo sweep a team that reaches 3000 BST

i agree, but i think the way it should work is that we set soft tiers by giving player certain amount of points per tier. This way we could have a situation where in you could pull like 1 or 2 stronger mons from the tier above, but in doing so you've stunted yourself so much that to fill the rest of the team you have to use garbage from tiers below as well. This way we get another layer of complexity to the team-building process.

>Some Megas also have abilities that would necessitate higher point values (Kangaskhan)

again totally agree personally a +100 is to arbitary of a point score to give and instead we should set megas as different pokemon their non-mega pokemon and then judge them like we would any other pokemon

>I'm still not convinced this would allow all things to be used in the same meta. Mega Fug is still gonna rip and tear through 3000 point teams, on top of this Mega Fug can still have back-up unless you multiply his points by 3.8.

Another valid point, and is definitly a problem in the soft tier system i'm proposing. unless we do something like having a ban system for each tier. However we would have to be very limited in what we are banning as to prevent this from just becoming smogon

I'm definitely strongly against a point cost system as currently described, pokebattle already went up in smoke. I could see hidden "power ratings" determining tier though (ie 500- Pokemon tier, 400- tier, etc.) Makes team building simpler too. Start with rating = BST and then skew from there based on abilities/learnset/etc.

>>31390884
Banning should only happen when something is seen as essential by every team, shooting its usage to 40%+ like gen 4 Garchomp, and even then it's questionable.

>>31391208
>>31391233
I should have read your post more closely.
I'm personally not opposed to stuff like evasion clauses but when you open up the whole breadth of pokemon more potential counters do become available. No Guts users like Lycanroc-M, Machamp, and Golurk who will never see OU this gen get new potential life. Unaware and Keen Eye are other potential way to deal with this stuff. If I personally were running this I'd try without first just to see how it played out.

>>31391272
It's not as linear as you might think. A big thing about Evasion is that almost every single pokémon that can learn TMs can learn Double team, so it's not a simple matter of bringing in a No-Guard User because it might happen that your oponnent is abusing evasion with a pokémon that destroys your "counter"

>>31391231
i'm guessing you don't play much competative becuase you seem to not understand teambuilding.

If evasion spam is allowed, you have to build an evasion counter into your team. This means giving up moveslots on your pokemon for moves such as swift and magical leaf, The problem is that these moves don't really serve
much focus outside of evesion countering. This limits what your pokemon can do and who you can bring, as it forces you to essentially waste move slots to counter evasion spam.

It centralizes the game and limits the diversity. and at that point we might as well just use smogon.

>>31391272
>No Guts
No Guard, Christ I should go to bed.

>>31391261
how is what you are suggesting different from smogon?

>>31390884
>>31390914
from what we've got so far a point based soft tier system seems cool

>>31391231
Don't forget
>No Guard
>Odour Sleuth
>Unaware
>Sweet Scent
>Foresight
>Gravity
>Defog
>Haze

Theres actually quite a few tools. I understand the valid complaint of Evasion-boosting's snowball effect, but the same could be said for DD users, or defence-boosting+recover stallers.

I've been interested in seeing a private AG room on showdown where Evasion is allowed, just for a week or so, and see how people adapt to it.
Maybe now certain sweepers are less powerful as they have to spend the fourth moveslot on something that deals with Evasion.

>>31391319
Smogon's system is based on usage (Politoed is a crap mon but it has Drizzle, so it became popular to have on a team), whereas that anon's is based on pokemon base stats. All pokemon over 500 are in a tier, all over 550 are in another, 600+ in theirs and so on.
Then over time, account for which ones are dominating -too- well in their tier, and raise them up a grade. Vice-versa for underpeforming mons.

Okay I'll be honest, /vp/ is terrible in competitive battling. Like there's no hope. If we wanna play for fun then we can invite each other on showdown and bring whatever

>>31391500
ok, but smogon's basis of using usage is that good mons get used more, Politoed base stat wise is a shit mon, but overall with its ability factored in its a good mon. firstly this shows a weakness in using base stats to initially tier pokemon.

Secondly because ultimately what we a basing the tiers on in the long run is the same (dominace) the tiers will inevitably look very similar to Smogon.

This being that case i suggest we stray away from this specific idea as what is the point of making a new format if it will eventually end up as Smogon2.0

>>31391500
>Then over time, account for which ones are dominating -too- well in their tier, and raise them up a grade. Vice-versa for underpeforming mons.
And over time, you'd just get a slightly more unbalanced smogon meta. Tiering based on BST is pants on head retarded.

>>31391096
But BST isn't necessarily indicative of how good a pokemon is. If you used this system it would just be Breloom/Azumarill/Clefable general.

>>31390884
BAN GENIES

BST is just a method of initially costing the pokes because trying to cost them one by one would take forever. Once that has been done you have a starting point to adjust values to the mons as the meta shakes out or to ones who obviously need it.

>>31391256
i love the BST / point limit. though to work, this needs to be meticulously built

>>31390884
Nothing is wrong with smogon
the game just isn't meant to be played on a competitive level in 6v6 single battles

How about
>base point system on Smogon tiers
>OU/BL mons cost 4 points
>UU/BL2 cost 3 points
>RU/BL3 cost 2 points
>NU/BL4 cost 1 point
>PU mons are free
>you can spend up to a maximum of 15 points per team

>>31391669
i think at this point in time, using base stats is just an arbitrary way of suggesting that we need something to base each given pokemon's points on. It doesn't have to be Base stats.

Personally i think it would need to incorporate factors like their individual strength e.g. base stats, ability, move sets, types and so on. and also their ability to create synergy with other pokemon or their 'team' strength. e.g. baton pass or working well in weather or trick room teams. the kind of strengths that don't work well on their own, but in conjunction to other factors.

The problem then is how to quantify that.

>>31391717
The problem here is that, while it's not 100% accurate, smogon's usage based tiers are the best and most efficient way to quantify that.

That's why no community has ever really challenged smogon's ruleset. Because they all just devolve into smogon knockoffs.

>>31391717
>>31391750
>>31391709
thoughts?

>>31390884
bans
1. any pokemon with more than 335 hp+def+spd
2. scald
3. all cover legendaries except suicune
4. OHKO moves
5. mewtwo
6. stealth rock
7. gengarite and salamencite
8. moody


rules
1. sleep clause
2. since you have 24 possible move slots on a team, at least 14 of them have to be attacking moves

perfect tier desu

>>31390914
>"move things with this usage up and things with this usage down" but that's just me. Seems like an abusable system on the surface, needs work.
In gen5 there was a guy that managed to get electivire and emboar and some others to move up a tier by playing like 1000 battles a day, he didn't win many of them but he played them.
smogon has since implimented a 1650 elo minimum to actually count for shifting a tier

>>31391777
explain why they are valid bans and rules

(some are obvious, but lets try and keep this objective).

>>31391709
>>31391776
Well, I thought the point of this thread was to move away from Smogon's tiers. This kind of defeats the purpose. Though it's a neat idea for Smogon's Other Metagames. You should go there and suggest it.

>>31391791
if we are going the points based system would that be valid criticism? Why would anyone want to move mons into a higher tier or rather make mons more expensive to use on a team?

>>31391812
valid, still need to solve the problem though.

>>31391807
1. stall is not pleasant to play against
2. fuck scald
3. should be obvious
4. obvious
5. obvious
6. there has never been a more centralizing move in the game, you can put it on any pokemon on any team and it will be good, much to overcentralizing please ban
7. should be obvious
8. moody is basically stall except rng where you just spam spiky shield/spore and hope for +(s)def and +evasion then pass to something else when you have the boosts you want

1. should be obvious
2. stall is not pleasant to play against

>>31391709
quag,shed,mega-sable,chansey,dugtrio,togekiss is a fine stall team for 15 points

I just want all battles to be fought in objectively the best format. Rotation battles.

A point system is a lot more complex than just tiers.
Take Mawile for example, she has a measly 380 base stats. 480 when she mega evolves, however these 480 base stats are a hell of a lot stronger than something like slaking or regigigas with 680 base stats.

>>31391686

>>31391108
That's why when the meta settles Scizor's point total would be higher than normal and Articuno's would be lower.

>>31391807
They aren't valid, that guy is clearly biased against stall.

>>31391839
Pack wallbreakers and get good if you hate stall so much.

>>31390884
Would we be able to set up our own clauses? I've always wished there were a Base Stat Clause, which would cap the total base stat points of your team. Something like 3300 (average of 550 BST per poke).

This would discourage people from just drafting 4 pseudos and 2 legendaries, and instead would promote a healthier mix of tiers and roles. Players who insisted on having all pseudo/legendary pokemon would simply have to run lower leveled pokemon to reduce their BST total.

Thoughts?

>>31391976
Have you actually read this thread?

>>31391976
That's a terrible idea for reasons that have already been outlined in this thread.

>4 pseudos and 2 legendaries
Serious question, do you even play competitively. Because, knowing all the pseudos and non-Uber legends, that sounds like a pretty poor team.

>>31391976
BST simply does not determine how good a Pokemon is in practice. Slaking and Regigigas have BSTs of 670, but they're not used because their ability makes them trash.
Azumarill has base stats of 420, but access to moves like Belly Drum and Aqua Jet, as well as its Huge Power ability, make it better than two Pokemon with BSTs 150 points higher.

Is there any way to actually create a good meta? Smogon is bad but it probably the best you can get while being a inclusive as possible

File: Link Shock Faces.jpg (56KB, 736x736px) Image search: [Google]

56KB, 736x736px

>>31390884
>Since Smogon's super unstable right now and everyone's pissed about their "rampant bias"

What are you talking about? Link?

File: pepe gun.jpg (67KB, 709x765px) Image search: [Google]

67KB, 709x765px

>>31391120
>He enjoys watching timer stall in VGC

>>31392023
Nope. Smogon has endured because it really is the best approach.

>>31392035
I mean, Showderp shows that mememons can still survive

>>31392026
Well it is unstable because it's a new gen and drops/bans are flying left and right but that's par for the course at the beginnig of any gen. Not sure what the rampant bias talk is about. I think it's just typical "Smogon supports stall shit", which is just business as usual.

>>31392045
But they can't thrive.

>>31392087
I mean of course, but you're never going to create a meta that can support both competitive Pokémon and meme sets

>>31392026
i don't think there is one, this thread is more about making a new format, smogon can be cited as unstable due to the new gen-7 meta. but this thread is not a reaction to anything specific.

>>31392033
don't ruin this thread.

>>31392023
Smogon is Good, but it's become to centralized this thread is the chance to create a new meta and i reckon with some work its certainly possible.

>>31392087
If they thrived, they would just be competitively good Pokemon, not mememons.

>>31391826
simple he didnt want them in the lower tier

DID YOU BAN STEALTH ROCKS YET?

Anyone who objects is a fucking dumb bitch. We dont need stealth rocks if we already have spikes and using spikes involves more skill and thought

>>31392157
>It involves more skill and thought because it takes more turns to properly set up.

Using an inferior option doesn't mean you're more skillful. It just means you're using an inferior option.

>>31392157
Read this >>31392166

Ok, with point based system we need a method of giving points to pokemon.

Options so far:
>use pokemon base stats and then adjust accordingly

the problem with this is that high base stat =/= good pokemon.

>use usage

But we want to move away from smogon.

>use a combination of base stats, move pool, ability and type.

but this is practically impossible, in the sense that there is no way to actually do this effectively.

my personal solution that may or may not work
>use base stats as a base. we also judge abilities and they are used to modify the score (e.g. ability pickup gives the base stat a x0.8 modifer while drizzle gives the base stat a modifier of x2) we also do have a modifier for types and a pokemons move pool. Items would each be assined a number of points as well (e.g. choice scarf is 100 points) and those points are added ontop of the multiplied score.

This would have to be tested and if certain mons are found to be punching above or below their points worth then we can increase or decrease their point value.

thoughts?
and do we have any other ideas on how to give points values?

>>31392033
>timer stall
>vgc17

Pick one.

>>31392178
I like so much how this is shaping up, would definitely love to play this
But it's HARD, VERY hard work to really balance it.

I think we have to begin considering usage as a starting point

>>31392178
Your personal solution doesn't work either. You can't give abilities, items and moves their own fixed score. Contrary is a godly ability on Serperior and made it OU worthy, but it's shit on everything else that gets it.

This whole point system needs to be dropped from discussion because it's not going anywhere. A Pokemon's viability in any given metagame depends on a combination of factors and the value of these factors depend on they all come together in a case by case basis.

tl,dr The whole is greater than the sum of its parts.

>>31392280
This is why smogon's system works. It's because there's nothing arbitrary about it. If a pokemon is good then people will use it more/win with it. From there you bump the weaker pokemon down, then repeat the process over and over until you have your sets of pokemon. Then you ban the pokemon that are too good in these naturally formed sets, then you have your final tiers
That last part is what most people have a problem with, but the first part is rock fucking solid and I'm not sure there is a better way of doing things

>>31392230
That would be the most practical approach, it would be much easier to fine tune using this as well, we could give points to pokemon based on their individual viability rank within the game and so when usage changes the points change or we could tie them directly to pokemon in general?

we then need to start thinking about how we actually weigh the points. Should point system be a linear or increasing?
(e.g. if shitmon is worth one point, should averagemon be worth 2 and good mon be worth 3, or should it be more like shitmon is worth 1 averagemon is worth 3 and goodmon is worth 9)

>>31392280
>>31392359
Thoughts on
>>31392359

if usage becomes the method of deetermining how much a pokemon is worth, give that data a value and then use ideas from earlier in the thread to give players a total number value they can have per team in each tier making the overall level of usage per team equal, while having soft tiers that all pokemon can be part of

For example lets say the tiers value is 60 points. this means that you can either use 6 pokemon worth 10 usage points each or you can use a pokemon worth 30 points but then you've only got 30 points left to fill your team with.

this should also be ant-centralizing because it means that if a 30 point pokemon is always used it becomes more expensive, making it less viable, meaning that we *might* not have to ban overly strong pokemon like M-ray as their usage spikes and makes them very very expensive.

Thought?

Remove the genies and I'll play whatever you make.

>>31392373
we need a unit of measurement, and caps.
I'd use large scale numbers on the hundreds, example:
in your team you can't have more than 400 points, stuff like mega-salamence and aegislash should be very close to the 100 forcing you to play a sunkern if wanna go with a team of 6

>>31392515
yeah, definitely. my example of one three and six is just me pulling number from the air.

i'm also think about this soft tiers idea, if we go with that we can have something like a cap of 1000 in tier 1 so that those that want to play with lots of strong pokemon can do so while in tiers 2,3, e.c.t the cap would be much smaller e.g. 400 so that people can choose how much 'power' (based on the points given from the usage stats) they play with. while also allowing as many pokemon to be used in all tiers.

e.g. tier 1 has a cap of 1000, people can use M-salamance ageislash and other strong members. tier 2 however has a cap of 500, so while you can still use M-salamance and ageislash, you may not be able to use them on the same team and by sing them you would have to use pokemon with lower point values than average.

>>31392468
>>31392515
>>31392622

How would these tiers be maintained? If highly used pokemon cost more, then they'd have to be used with the lowly used mons that cost less. But then logically, the lowly used mons would be highly used and the whole usage/cost system would be out of whack and in constant flux.

>>31392639

Very valid criticism

one option is to go back to not tying usage to the points given, but that loops us back to previous problems.

a second option is to figure out a way to only use usage stats while still avoiding the problem (but i can't think of one off the top of my head)

A third option is to combine usage and arbitrary values to the points system that way we can minimize the problem that arbitrary values has on determining the true value of a pokemon while also allowing us to prevent weak mon's points from rising to far.

e.g. we can give each pokemon a score arbitrarily that determines how much usage affects the value of the pokemon, using M-salamance and sunflora for example, Sunflora's arbitrary score is low and therefore large amounts of usage do not increase the score much. M-salamnce's arbitrary score however is much higher. and so the same amount of usage as sunflora impacts his value much more?

its not perfect and we probably need a better solution, but its all i've got for now.

>>31392469
>Still being butthurt over genies

>ban all legendaries
>ban stealthrock
>ban stall
>ban psuedos
>ban toxic and protect
>get rid of tiers
>get rid of evasion clause
>get rid of sleep clause
>allow ohko moves
>allow moody
>dont ban any pokemon other than legends and psuedos
There, now we have a fair and balanced meta game.

This thread is autism.

File: 1429074545355.jpg (31KB, 620x349px) Image search: [Google]

31KB, 620x349px

>>31393004
>ban things I don't like, allow RNG that lets me win

>>31392796
I think usage should only be used as an indicator of if a mon needs (how much of) an adjustment, I think it would balance out eventually. Though it depends on if people would end up using fodder to allow free switch ins or use lower costed mons which have some use, such as something that can throw down some status effects or other support moves. Eventually the switch in fodder would be priced similar to the genuine cheap mons that it would become better to use the cheap mons than fodder.

>>31391075
>>31391096
not even counting the fact that BST isn't a foolproof indicator of how good something is (Mega Mawile has sub 500 BST), the problem with this:
what you think happens
>I want to use Keldeo but I'll have to take a Wigglytuff to balance it out
what actually happens
>I want to use Rayquaza so I'll take a Swinub to balance it out

>>31393069
That could work.

>>31393191
this is just theory at the moment but if it was the case that something like M-ray becomes really dominant then we we increase his value to something like you have to drop to 3 pokemon to use him. and if he's still an unquestionably dominant threat then we can we ban him, but only after we try every possible method of balancing a team that has M-ray.

>>31393191
Shit like Rayquaza would end up being costed way up to a point where you need to be entering in high point battles to see it. Standard battle = 3000 points, broken legendaries = 3200 points, with the "Uber" teams having something like 10k to spend. That way they are not shitting up the standard play.

OP here again, still very against a point buy system. Again, Pokebattle already tried this and went nowhere.

Tiering based on BST and shuffling based on usage makes the most sense to me so far. I hear "but that's just Smogon", but we also control what clauses we use, the point at which we consider something "over-centralizing", and we can set up explicit formulas and rules to avoid claims of bias. So it's not guaranteed to become Smogon 2.0

>>31393463
i'm glad you're back Op, can we get more elaboration on pokebattle and where it went wrong?

>>31393463
It will become smogon 2.0. Exactly how different do you expect your rules, clauses and formulas to be?

File: e2f1b7c74d441e0243c6ef36209e446a57ccb7f2.jpg (514KB, 880x784px) Image search: [Google]

514KB, 880x784px

>>31392359
Basically my impression of how this should go down as well. Very few people are against Pokemon Showdown, but there's enough people against Smogon's clauses and certain bans to justify creating their own playground, so I see no issue with borrowing the usage system since that's not what people dislike about Smogon.

Granted, people will still complain about how Furret isn't OU (or whatever tier system /vp/ decides on), but those are people heavily biased towards their favorite mons and should be ignored anyway. Smogon didn't make the Pokemon in NU and PU bad, GameFreak did. Put them in the environment they can work well in otherwise they'll just be dead weight.

In my eyes, the biggest challenge this project has, apart from setting it all up, is to agree on what things to allow, be it legendaries, evasion, no restriction on sleep, and so forth.


>>31391055
Is there a link to any of those earlier attempts? Could save us some discussion or just be fun to lurk.

>>31393511
I only tried it briefly, but it just wasn't fun to build teams. Either you spread your points evenly, meaning you ended up with a standard team for the tier, or you picked an ace and then filled the rest with fluff. Team building is hard enough without adding the complication of optimizing your team points. Led to a lot of "these pair always because they add up to a nice number" kind of shenanigans.

Amazing thread, really shows /vp/'s competitive genius. Fuck the smogonfags amirite XD

Sort of an unrelated thought, but I know an idea was discussed at one point of doing some sort of point based tiering (not point buy) and then periodically buffing/nerfing Pokemon to try to get them closer to the same level (like if after a period is testing, Smogon have BST to every uu and removed BST from every Uber). Obviously huge problems with that, but kind of related to what we're discussing, and fun to think about.

>>31393530
I'm not saying we would or wouldn't do this, but something as simple as banning stealth rocks would probably shake things up a little bit.

Or even if we use the same clauses, just a different number of tiers could produce wildly different metas.

>>31393617
>but something as simple as banning stealth rocks
[VOLT TURNING INTENSIFIES]

>>31393565
really? i would have thought that points would have made a more interesting dynamic.

lets scrap points for now then, if we are going to use a smogon style with different clauses what clauses should we break? and what should we bring in?

File: sample_6426d52117fdf38453c600a3a2eff6137415538b.jpg (239KB, 850x1138px) Image search: [Google]

239KB, 850x1138px

>>31393617
That idea is basically an Other Meta, since any respectable battle simulator shouldn't touch the raw stats and values of what you battle with. Only thing that Smogon is guilty of directly interfering with is the Sleep Clause, since in-game, using another sleeping move won't fail if something else is sleeping, but that's something most people agreed was a price to pay.

>>31393565
This system also means that if Pokemon received different values based on how good they were, some even ridiculous costs just so that people wouldn't use them, then it's not really too different than Smogon's system already. That, and like people already mentioned, would be easily exploitable since msot shitmons can perform at least one task well (Focus Sash lead, Scarf users), in order to support that one very expensive mon so that it sweeps the opponent's team. It doesn't promote variety and people using their favorites, it promotes min-maxing.

>>31393672
Sleep Clause is from fucking Pokemon Stadium, which is older than the English release of gen 1.

>>31391075

That's been attempted before, all that happens is people use 5 shitmons and an uber. It doesn't work.

>>31390884
Gee dad! How come mom lets you have TWO peepees?

File: wee-bey-gif.gif (1MB, 200x200px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 200x200px

>>31393689
Shit, completely forgot about that. Still not something used within the canon games, but it can definitely be seen as something allowed to implement.

>>31393717
Pretty much this, everyone will blow their points on Mega-Fug and pad out with shitmons. At that point in order for this system to thrive they will have to start banning shit. In the end it will end up like Smogon tiers except more restrictive.

I don't know why people think a point system would work

/vp/'s clause list:

>ban stealth rocks
its overcentralizing ,lets create more variety

>evasion clause
its uncompetative becuase it gets easier to pull of the longer you spam it. and it makes the game to chance focused.

>sleep clause (1 sleep at any given time)
>prankster spore would be way to strong and there is little chance for comeback the the sleeping user.

>item clause (only allowed to use an item once per team)
limits the effect of leftover spam on stall teams, makes the game more dynamic

>ban heliolisk
just to piss that one faggot off

>>31391839
That's a very subjective explanation. If you're trying to make something better than smogon and you ban a fuck loads of Pokemon because you don't like them, you're basically becoming what you originally set out to succeed

>Playing around in RU with an experimental team
>Some guy is using Thunderous
>Check Smogon
>It's currently UU
???

>>31391075
You push this every goddamn thread and it never makes any goddamn sense.

>>31393787
Tapu koko fucked him up good.

>>31391297
This. Whereas I usually don't bother with a rapid spinner/defogger and it's not a huge issue because I don't have many mons with SR weaknesses.

File: 1376362320343.jpg (39KB, 721x550px) Image search: [Google]

39KB, 721x550px

Why the FUCK do you faggots want evasion so much? Do you really want to deal with a minimize chansey or DT Clefable or some shit?

Evasion fuckery is the exact opposite of fun. If I lose, I want to lose because I fucked up, made a bad switch, didn't predict well, or was out-fuckin'-skilled. I don't want to lose because I just couldn't land a fucking hit on some tanky bastard who just recovers off the damage and slaps me with a status and laughs its way to the PokeBank.

>>31391889
Or look at fucking Pelipper or Klefki.

>>31393799
No I meant how did he use Thunderous in RU if he's currently listed as UU?

File: 1460826230466.jpg (16KB, 276x215px) Image search: [Google]

16KB, 276x215px

>this whole thread
LMAO thanks for reminding me that /vp/ doesn't know shit about competitive. This project is pointless, assuming this actually takes off (it won't) it will fizzle out like others have before because

a: you'll discover that whatever rules you guys make will be more complicated than smogon and it will turn people off

b: whatever tiers you come up with will either be a clusterfuck or just end up as a copy of smogon's tiers

But that's assuming this project even takes off in the first place. These threads will be gone in a week max.

>>31393829
>swift
>smart strike
>aura sphere
>rain+thunder
>hail+blizzard
>bodyslam
>infiltrator phasing
>prankster toxic
>haze
>>NoGuard
>keen eye

>>31393829
I very much doubt people will have their evasion checks when it counts the most. Same thing with Ohko attacks.

>>31393890
That's certainly a possibility, but I'm interested in letting all of the people who complain about Smogon put their money where their mouth is. Either it'll take off, or it'll be something to reference when discussing abandoning Smogon in the future. I don't really care which. I'm in it for the experimental nature.

>>31393913
You have to hope your eva-checker has type advantage against their eva-mon though, or you have to run multiple eva-checkers with different coverage. It's not as simple as something like rapid spin, where a single move always 100% removes the problem. I'm personally against removing evasion clause, I think less RNG is better. But if there's enough push for it I'm willing to try it out.

Maybe the solution is changing clauses on a regular basis. Maybe a month with several clauses, followed by a shift. I think the appeal of a project like this is to try new things out at a faster pace than Smogon would allow.

>>31393913
top kek
Have fun loading your team with all of these and then getting destroyed when someone that doesn't use evasion comes up.

>>31393913
>Two weak moves
>One strong move with incredibly poor distribution
>Two situational combos
>Body Slam???
>An ability with poor distribution
>An ability that doesn't work on dark type pokemon
>A move with poor distribution
>An ability with poor distribution
>An ability not affected by evasion

>>31393946
Better yet, have fun getting scouted for your evasion check(s) and having them KO'd or rendered unusable

>>31393982
Or better yet, have your evasion checks decimated by the evasion user itself, because since EVERYTHING can learn Double Team, there's a high chance the evasion user might also be able to slap the shit out of your checks

>>31393941
>I'm interested in letting all of the people who complain about Smogon put their money where their mouth is. Either it'll take off, or it'll be something to reference when discussing abandoning Smogon in the future.
Or it'll be forgotten and smogon shitters will keep shitting on smogon because they won't know their solutions have been tried and failed. Just look at pokebattle and this very thread.

>>31393956
>Body Slam???
Body slam and dragon rush won't miss and deal double damage on a mon that has used minimize.

/vp/ has been having these threads since its creation. They've failed every single time. Mostly because you're a. all idea men, b. just as biased in different ways, and c. shit at the games you're obsessed with.

>>31394021
Dunsparce at least tried with his own pokemononline.eu server.
It still failed because what almost everyone wants is Smogon tiers or VGC and his server was eaten alive by /tr/ocketry.

>>31394021
This.

You should all just accept that anything you make will be a discount smogon that'll never catch on.

Give up and accept your Koffing Overlords.

>>31393989
>Send out [some powerful tanky mon like Buzzwole]
>Force a switch
>DT
>Can't hit it easily
>recovers HP while attacking with LL
gg

>>31391485
Except with DD users you can still hit them easily. Send in like a Weavile against a Salamence you can KO it despite its boosts with Ice Shard. But generally the minimise users read bulky with recovery and you can't be sure that your sure hit move will do enough. I mean aura Sphere on chansey your will take a couple of hits to kill. The only 100% stops to Evasion boosting are Haze, roar and whirlwind which all are dead weight on hyper offense teams.

>It's a "Smogonfags throws baby tantrums because someone points out that stealth rocks is objectively more overcentralizing than evasion" episode

Smogon is prefect the way it is. It's successful because it's smart, and you can't reinvent it. If you want to play by a competitive 6v6 Singles ruleset, Smogon is undoubtedly the best.

Anything that /vp/ thinks of will be trash and die out. You could have good ideas on paper (Points System.) but they don't work in reality.

>>31394122
It's not though

>>31394158
Evasion has a truckload of counters.
Stealth Rocks counters can be counted on one hand.

>>31394122
>>31394158
>>31394179
let's not devolve into this shit anymore than we already have please. An alternate server could be used to try out this sort of thing, there's not point in arguing about it now.

>>31394153
>The one thing I've ever tried is best and no one will ever come close
pretty narrow-minded

>>31394122
>be this guy
>be supremely mad about Stealth Rock
>get BTFO
>resorts to posting stale bait to convice himself he won

embarassing

>>31394186
Not him, but I came into this thread hoping to find suggestions for alternatives to smogon. All its done however was reenforce my thinking that smogon is the way to go.

>>31394186
What about a round-robin type system?

Ban genies and legendaries pls pls

>>31394340
Yeah, ban Articuno and Regigigas shit's broken yo

>>31394336
>round-robin
You're going to need to be about five times more specific than that.

>>31390884
Any tiering system is bound to look a lot like Smogon's. Look at battlespot, top tier battlespot are the shit that's banned from Smogon-OU plus some of the top tier of Smogon OU.

Nintendo held a LC tournament awhile back and it was absolutely dominated by teams made up of Smogon LC's banlist.

If you want to do an alt-meta, I'd just as soon go for a full modded meta where the community mods pokemon to make them better/weaker to try to make usage as balanced as possible.

Some basic mechanics mods would also be interesting
1. Pseudo-sleep clause. Sleep works on a global turn timer, putting a pokemon to sleep starts a timer of 3 turns, even if the pokemon isn't in play it will wake up after that period, and putting another pokemon to sleep ticks down the timer by 1 on any previously sleeping pokemon.
2. Remove random criticals. Criticals remain on high crit ratio moves (buffed to incorporate the base crit rate) or pokemon holding crit boosting items, using focus energy, or with crit boosting abilities.
3. Remove evasion as a stat modifier
4. Ice types gain a 50% defense boost in hail, similar to the rock boost in sand.
5. Baton pass passes status effects as well as boosts/drops

I'd also like to play with item clause because it makes item choices a bit more interesting.

this thread is a comedy goldmine

If you hate Lando-T so much, just take the battlespot system where they add the 12 most used pokemon to a ban list each season.

>ITT: one anon tries to start discussion on alternate rulesets with people explaining their reasoning, and others saying why said reasoning will or won't work
>also ITT: muh smogon persecution complex shitting on the discussion here, who will turn around and complain about Karenfag and stallgon bait threads
It's like no matter what gets talked about there's going to be shitters

>>31394374
>each month a certain pool of pokemon are allowed for play
>at the end of the month the pool is randomized and the meta changes with the pokemon
>three tiers: standard, standard+ with box legends allowed in the pool, and ag with no clauses
>YTBD: how many pokemon allowed in the pool, finding a good system to remove too powerful pokemon

>>31394179
Those aren't counters. It's been explained why multiple items. Stop being a retard.

OK, so if I was going to set up the format today, what rules would you want to see? Actual rules will be synthesized out of the thoughts following this post.

File: popcorn.jpg (58KB, 300x360px) Image search: [Google]

58KB, 300x360px

>>31394877

Honestly, I'd just change Smogon's rules a little.
Apply the tier rules to certain suspect moves.
Add an OU usage ceiling, Pokemon above 20~25% usage get shifted to uber.
Sleep was nerfed, test a sleep clause that is more relaxed.
Whenever a new game drops, reconsider all ban moves made fewer than 2~3 games ago.

I'm a big fan of level balance.

>>31391839
its obvious that you're a casual player. your opinion is disregarded.

File: moshi mosh.jpg (72KB, 797x1021px) Image search: [Google]

72KB, 797x1021px

>>31394877
Depending on what I overall feel is /vp/'s general opinion, I'd say

>ban Stealth Rock
>every mon that Smogon banned is back
>remove genies

Not that I agree with them all, but let's just see how such a meta would look like. If you want more precise opinions, then make a bunch of straw polls.

>>31393191
What about point-buy with a banlist, or rotating available mons?

>>31395237
>rotating available mons
Nobody is going to be invested in a meta that just randomly bans stuff each month.

>>31395274
League disagrees

>>31395287
League lets people ban champions before the match starts though and people can still play the champions they bought.

>>31395287
This isn't league, this is pokemon. Different kind of autism. Rotating mons means people will just go back to smogon if they can't build the team they want.

>>31394010
literally everything
EVERY THING
that learns minimize learns double team

>>31395205
You'll just get Smogon's preban metagame, except with more VOLT TURN because you just removed the superior entry hazard

If you want a points system, the best way to do it is to use current usage stats to gauge what is objectively good then assigns costs to each pokemon based on usage. BST doesn't mean anything, but usage is directly coorelated to a pokemon's power. Adjustments will have to be made, but usage is a better baseline than BST.

>>31391791
>>31391791
http://pastebin.com/9msAQPwe

Ironically, Amoonguss would then later grace OU without ihabt's hand down it's pants. Presumably.

so since people are talking about evasion

tell me, how do you deal with a mega-sableye spamming evasion?

>>31395369
>literally everything
>EVERY THING
>...learns double team
ftfy

>>31395449
tbf Amoonguss was total cancer in gen5 NU, so I thank her for that.

>>31395452
Haze technically. Either that or send out a mew and tox Sableye to Synchronize the toxic poison.

>>31395465
true enough, was just pointing out how moves that specifically counter minimize have no impact on the evasion debate given nobody would ever use minimize

>>31395521
substitute would block the mew strat and don't forget the damn thing has taunt which it can use to catch hazers on the switchin, or just taunt it after a haze and start re-teaming because mega-sableye isn't exactly frail to begin with

not to mention what happens if the rest of the team is specifically dedicated to destroying anything resembling a haze user since its not exactly a move with the greatest distribution

>>31395571
>substitute would block the mew strat
Would it? I think the priority is Bounce>Sub

>>31395586
Magic Bounce only works if the move actually targets the MB user. It wont, because Sub.

>>31395586
still, even if a toxic mew is a good counter to sableye evasion, its not a particularly healthy one

mega-sableye is a useful pokemon in a wide variety of situations, double team on it just amplifies everything useful about it. Toxic on a mew less so and requiring everything to run mew isn't particularly fun either.

>>31393004
>Ban tiers, so that anything that wasn't graced by gamefreak to be good never gets used because it's shittier than the options still allowed, and there's no way to have it go against things of similar power level

Your meta will either become exactly like Smogon or will be VGC level centralized

Honestly your best chance is making a meta that works with the Nintendo ban list (aka all mythics and strong legendaries banned automatically) or some other gimmick. Otherwise you'll become Smogon eventually

>>31393004
That is absolute worst suggestion I have ever heard. Congratulations everyone else, you are now above the bell curve

>>31390884
Pressure.jpg

>>31393913
Enjoy your double team Mimikyu meta.

>>31390884
It will never work but here is how you do it anyway.

Initially nothing is banned except the Pokemon "made" to be Uber like Mewtwo, Rayquaza, et al. Basically ban anything banned in Nintendos official format.

Come to an agreement with your initial user base about an arbitrary cut off point for banning something. A Pokemon should only be banned if it actually, in practice, centralizes the meta. Agree on a usage percentage that represents this (for example, a Pokemon is over centralizing if you are more likely than not to face it in two out of any given set of three matches) and then ban anything that reaches that threshold.

Do not have "arguments" about what should and should not be banned. No theorymonning. No "this pokemon is anti-competitive so let's ban it". Make every decision based purely on usage and make the threshold clear from day one.

>>31398169
But Gamefreak bans things that don't need to be banned - a good chunk of the mythics AREN'T too strong, and are in fact overshadowed by a bunch of other shit.
Like Mew, for example. Or Diancie. Or Meloetta, or Victini, or Jirachi.

This meta would be my ideal:

>Ban Stealth Rock
>Ban Legendaries
>Ban Megas
>Ban Z-moves
>Ban evasion
>Ban sleep
>Ban Baton Pass
>Ban Chansey and Skarmory
>Ban retarded shit like Funbro

>>31390884
I've been interested in a level based restriction system. Pokemon that do well, are given level penalties, pokemon that do poorly get level bonuses.

E.g. If you want M-Rayquaza you can, but it will be level 1. If you want to use a Caterpie it would be level 100.

>>31390884
rule 1:
mono-type clause is in every tier
fixed it

>>31395205
good luck fighing mega-mewtwos and mega fugs

smogon was made irrelevant by VGC anyway

>>31400505
>He actually believes this
Nigga, if anything, VGC has only made Smogon more relevant since it's the only way to play 6v6

>>31392093
Can we make a meta that supports meme sets, but not competitive? That seems like the best outcome for a 4chan meta.

BAN ALL LEGENDRIES

>>31400721

>anyone wanting to play 6v6

LOL!

>>31392639
There are ~800 pokemon, so on average each pokemon should be used ~0.7524%, so we round that to between .07% and .08%, if a pokemon has a higher usage rate than that in a month, they get bumped up by one point, if it's lower than that they lose a point.

>>31400962
how many are fully evolved?

File: 1476060226924.png (418KB, 637x643px) Image search: [Google]

418KB, 637x643px

>>31395287
>>31395330
>>31395359

If this were to be like league, Bans, Tiers, and etc. would be judged by Winrates.

Which would be interesting compared to Smogon's playrate system.

>>31401287
NFE should be considered as valid as FE pokemon if we're assigning points to all of them.

>>31390884
Given /vp/'s "Make X OU" threads. I think a fun meta would be one in which we modify pokemon to make everyone viable.

Each month we look at the best/worst pokemon (based on winrates or usage or whatever) and make a thread on /vp/ and ask for changes to make them more/less powerful. We then have a poll for each of the sensible suggestions and whichever wins we implement in the next month's meta.

>>31401532
I like this idea

>>31401729
I think the big question is whether or not we should pick the top/bottom X pokemon each month or if we should say pokemon with over/under X criteria should be modified. (e.g. the top5 & bottom 5 get modified each month, or anything with over 70% win rate and under 30% win rate.)