Pre-OMPL XII Discussion Thread

OMPL's bo3 slot: BH or MnM?

  • BH

    Votes: 24 33.3%
  • MnM

    Votes: 48 66.7%

  • Total voters
    72
  • Poll closed .
Status
Not open for further replies.

UT

Old habits die SCREAMING
is a Site Content Manageris a Top Team Rateris a Battle Simulator Administratoris a Top Social Media Contributoris a Member of Senior Staffis a Community Contributoris a Smogon Discord Contributoris a Top Contributoris a Top Smogon Media Contributoris a Dedicated Tournament Hostis a Tiering Contributor Alumnus
Appeals + C&C Lead
One more tiebreak proposal: simultaneous strikes.

Both teams submit four strike choices, ranked.

The hosts process both lists at the same time until we end up with three metas (if both of them strike the same meta at some point) or more likely, four unstruck metas. If there are four, the hosts randomly pick three of the four for tiebreaker.

Advantages:
Does not require a higher seed
Does not favor any one meta
In theory should end up with three competitive games

Disadvantages:
Teams may see their best players frozen out by strikes
Likely still requires RNG to go from 4 to 3
 

BoingK

back to the lab again
is a Pre-Contributor
Disadvantages:
Likely still requires RNG to go from 4 to 3
Would like to add on that this "RNG" isn't actually that much of a disadvantage, because theoretically teams are striking their worst tiers out, so the RNG is simply between the tiers that each team both do not mind playing.
If you really hate the RNG, you could give the higher seed an extra strike between the 4 playable metas leftover, but this would not apply to regular season tiebreaks.
 
Teams may see their best players frozen out by strikes
Is this a problem necessarily? I'd much rather see two pretty damn good players playing a tier that's alright for both teams rather than an absolutely cracked player against a mediocre one in a tier picked by one team.

Also most best players on a team will be OMers familiar with multiple OMs and likely to be playing a tiebreaker regardless of the slots or just really strong generic mons players who can do anything if they're given a pokepaste and a dream. I feel like the only top players who will be completely inflexible for slots are a handful of the BH players.
Plus we see the top players plenty anyway, give the rest of us a chance :p
 

Isaiah

Here today, gone tomorrow
is a Site Content Manageris an official Team Rateris a Battle Simulator Administratoris a Top Social Media Contributoris a Member of Senior Staffis a Community Contributoris a Top Tiering Contributoris a Top Contributor
UM/OM Leader
The main points of contention after UT's initial summary post were the bo3 poll and settling on a tiebreak format. There was still a decent amount of discontent with 1) having a fixed tier and 1a) choosing which tier to fix. As such, we'll proceed with the tiebreak format explained by UT above:

One more tiebreak proposal: simultaneous strikes.

Both teams submit four strike choices, ranked.

The hosts process both lists at the same time until we end up with three metas (if both of them strike the same meta at some point) or more likely, four unstruck metas. If there are four, the hosts randomly pick three of the four for tiebreaker.
While there's still an inevitable element of RNG here (i.e. doing a !shuffle to pick three out of four unstruck metas if need be), because it's between metagames that the two teams are at minimum willing to play over the ones they choose to strike, there's significantly less surprise/unfairness factor involved, so it should be functionally sound. There's also no debate over having a fixed metagame involved, so this should make all sides happy.

Next, after the latest poll, OMPL's best-of-three slot will now feature Mix and Mega instead of Balanced Hackmons! So, the three tiers will be SV AAA / SV MnM / SV STABmons. As a reminder on how this will work in each week of the tour:
The first meta of the bo3 slot will be chosen each week by !pick; the loser of the first game will pick the second meta; the final meta will be played third, if necessary.
Players may by mutual agreement start with a different meta than the !pick meta, but only by mutual agreement.


1713746957828.png


Thanks to everyone that participated in this discussion across the sites :]

Here's the rest of the summary on the format changes:

Hello, here is the summary of changes that the forum mods + hosts are planning to enact based on this thread:
  • We will be adding a binding "tiers not played" option to player signups
    • It will not be binding for players drafted for 4k or less
    • It will not be binding during playoffs
    • "tiers played / preferred" will also still be included in signups, but will be non-binding
  • Activity calls will have a few changes:
    • Each team will have a pingable role, and we will be adding an #ompl channel to OMcord specifically for games / activity calls
      • We will require managers join OMcord
      • We will not require players join OMcord to participate, but obviously it will put you at disadvantge for act calls
    • To start the 30 minute timer on an act call, you must ping the other team's role (not just the managers) in the #ompl channel to alert them
    • During an act call, any player on the team may make a substitution if the managers are unavailable
      • If a manager is available, their decision takes precedent
    • "tiers not played" is still binding
  • During the auction, managers may designate one of their drafted players as a third manager
Things we are not changing:
  • Minimum team size (4 subs, 12 total players)
  • Budget (100k) and manager self-buy price (13.5k, both managers may buy themselves)
  • No retains
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 1, Guests: 0)

Top