Tournament AGPL IV - Format Discussion

Status
Not open for further replies.

Seldanna

is a Forum Moderatoris a member of the Battle Simulator Staff
Moderator
Hi everyone! AGPL IV is coming in the near future, and in contrast to last year cromagnet, Nol, omi and I would like to hear input on the structure of the tour and tiers selected.

Currently, we would like to do something similar to last year - 6 teams, and 10 players minimum per team (8 starters + 2 subs) with 8 slots. There will be a 5 week round robin with the top team advancing straight to finals, while the 2nd and 3rd place teams play each other for the other spot.

Tentative Schedule

Manager Signups - May 22nd
Player Signups - May 29th
Auction - June 11th / 12th
Week 1 - June 13th

Tiers
Last year, we did the following:

- Multigen Bo3 (SS / USUM / ORAS)
- SS AG
- SS AG
- SS AG
- USUM AG
- USUM AG**
- ORAS AG
- National Dex AG

The primary issue with said format was giving priority to USUM over the other old / alternate gens for no real reason, and so we'd like to hear your suggestions on what to do with the second USUM slot.

Here are some preliminary options:

1. Leave the slot as is.
2. Replace it with a second National Dex slot - this option has always felt the most logically consistent to me, as National Dex is actually a current gen metagame, and therefore merits some extra emphasis. However, many people have raised grievances with the current state of the metagame, and so I'd need to see considerable support to change to this.
3. Replace it with a fourth SS slot - this works fine, but oversaturates the tournament with SS, which isn't desirable to some.
4. Replace it with a DPP slot - as much as I like DPP, I would be hard-pressed to support this option, as few people are involved in this metagame and it lacks development overall.

Feel free to give input on what you'd like to see with this slot, or AGPL in general!

Finally, AGPL will also award a custom avatar this year!
 

cromagnet

I pledge allegiance to the grind
is a Forum Moderator Alumnusis a Community Contributor Alumnusis a Battle Simulator Staff Alumnus
I definitely agree with keeping 2 SM slots. SM is probably the most well-love version of AG and still has a huge following. A second ND slot would make sense as it is the "current gen", but managing for AGPL and snake showed me that ND players are in short supply. Plus I don't think the PL base we have would prefer more ND. 4th SS slot is definitely way too much and I don't think enough players play DPP to make it anything other than ~2 players dominating the pool vs others who aren't experienced at all.
My other proposal is one of the SS slots being BO3 just to add some variety.
 

Icemaster

Few will truly understand.
is a Contributor to Smogonis a Community Leader Alumnusis a Community Contributor Alumnusis a Tiering Contributor Alumnus
Thanks for putting this thread up. Firstly I think USUM slot 2 is not the first best choice for this tournament. I heavily disagree with the fact that it's the most well loved ag format or most popular, it is pretty stale and very formulaic in terms of building (yes even more so than galar imo) - but that is more a matter of opinion. Instead, you can look at the past AGPL and AG snake and you'll see poor quality games in even USUM slot 1 quite often. With a low playerbase it's relatively difficult to draft for a second slot. That being said it's better than the other choices presented - all of them have a lack of playerbase for it but also secondary problems. 4th SS makes the tour way too cgen oriented, Natdex AG DLC 2 is quite disliked and struggles to have the playerbase for a single slot, and I don't think BW/DPP can be justified without any prior inclusion in the AG circuit - genuinely very few if any people know how to play them and there isn't really an established meta in them so we don't know if they are actually good formats.

We should put Natdex AG DLC 1 in this tour. It is actually genuinely the most loved AG format of all time from what I see, pretty much everyone from that time who played it acknowledges how fun, diverse and fair the format was. Playerbase shouldn't be an issue, I've talked to people about NDAG DLC 1 in AGPL and a lot of people confirmed they would play it or at least take part in building and given they haven't changed their mind that would include: Andyboy, myself, Nevelle, WSun1, Chlo, PDT, Kate, bacon, skooma (lol), and perhaps more I have forgotten making it easily the best pool and most in demand format from those listed. I acknowledge that it's awkward to have a legacy format but in the context of AG I think it makes sense given that it was held as the main format for a year and remains very liked.

So the argument should really be between Natdex AG DLC 1 and USUM AG Slot 2, and from the points I listed I think Natdex AG DLC 1 is the better choice. Having 1 of the SS slots being BO3 sounds good to me too. Thanks for reading.
 
Last edited:
Thanks for putting this thread up. Firstly I think USUM slot 2 is not the first best choice for this tournament. I heavily disagree with the fact that it's the most well loved ag format or most popular, it is pretty stale and very formulaic in terms of building (yes even more so than galar imo) - but that is more a matter of opinion. Instead, you can look at the past AGPL and AG snake and you'll see poor quality games in even USUM slot 1 quite often. With a low playerbase it's relatively difficult to draft for a second slot. That being said it's better than the other choices presented - all of them have a lack of playerbase for it. 4th SS makes the tour way too cgen oriented, Natdex AG DLC 2 is quite disliked and struggles to have the playerbase for a single slot, and I don't think BW/DPP can be justified without any prior inclusion in the AG circuit - genuinely very few if any people know how to play them and there isn't really an established meta in them so we don't know if they are actually good formats.

We should put Natdex AG DLC 1 in this tour. It is actually genuinely the most loved AG format of all time from what I see, pretty much everyone from that time who played it acknowledges how fun, diverse and fair the format was. Playerbase shouldn't be an issue, I've talked to people about NDAG DLC 1 in AGPL and a lot of people confirmed they would play it or at least take part in building and given they haven't changed their mind that would include: Andyboy, myself, Nevelle, WSun1, Chlo, PDT, Kate, bacon, skooma (lol), and perhaps more I have forgotten making it easily the best pool and most in demand format from those listed. I acknowledge that it's awkward to have a legacy format but in the context of AG I think it makes sense given that it was held as the main format for a year and remains very liked.

So the argument should really be between Natdex AG DLC 1 and USUM AG Slot 2, and from the points I listed I think Natdex AG DLC 1 is the better choice. Thanks for reading.
i support this
 
Thanks for putting this thread up. Firstly I think USUM slot 2 is not the first best choice for this tournament. I heavily disagree with the fact that it's the most well loved ag format or most popular, it is pretty stale and very formulaic in terms of building (yes even more so than galar imo) - but that is more a matter of opinion. Instead, you can look at the past AGPL and AG snake and you'll see poor quality games in even USUM slot 1 quite often. With a low playerbase it's relatively difficult to draft for a second slot. That being said it's better than the other choices presented - all of them have a lack of playerbase for it. 4th SS makes the tour way too cgen oriented, Natdex AG DLC 2 is quite disliked and struggles to have the playerbase for a single slot, and I don't think BW/DPP can be justified without any prior inclusion in the AG circuit - genuinely very few if any people know how to play them and there isn't really an established meta in them so we don't know if they are actually good formats.

We should put Natdex AG DLC 1 in this tour. It is actually genuinely the most loved AG format of all time from what I see, pretty much everyone from that time who played it acknowledges how fun, diverse and fair the format was. Playerbase shouldn't be an issue, I've talked to people about NDAG DLC 1 in AGPL and a lot of people confirmed they would play it or at least take part in building and given they haven't changed their mind that would include: Andyboy, myself, Nevelle, WSun1, Chlo, PDT, Kate, bacon, skooma (lol), and perhaps more I have forgotten making it easily the best pool and most in demand format from those listed. I acknowledge that it's awkward to have a legacy format but in the context of AG I think it makes sense given that it was held as the main format for a year and remains very liked.

So the argument should really be between Natdex AG DLC 1 and USUM AG Slot 2, and from the points I listed I think Natdex AG DLC 1 is the better choice. Thanks for reading.

EDIT: Having 1 SS BO3 slot sounds good to me. I support that too.
My name is Andyboy and I approve this message by The Icemaster
 

cromagnet

I pledge allegiance to the grind
is a Forum Moderator Alumnusis a Community Contributor Alumnusis a Battle Simulator Staff Alumnus
Thanks for putting this thread up. Firstly I think USUM slot 2 is not the first best choice for this tournament. I heavily disagree with the fact that it's the most well loved ag format or most popular, it is pretty stale and very formulaic in terms of building (yes even more so than galar imo) - but that is more a matter of opinion. Instead, you can look at the past AGPL and AG snake and you'll see poor quality games in even USUM slot 1 quite often. With a low playerbase it's relatively difficult to draft for a second slot. That being said it's better than the other choices presented - all of them have a lack of playerbase for it but also secondary problems. 4th SS makes the tour way too cgen oriented, Natdex AG DLC 2 is quite disliked and struggles to have the playerbase for a single slot, and I don't think BW/DPP can be justified without any prior inclusion in the AG circuit - genuinely very few if any people know how to play them and there isn't really an established meta in them so we don't know if they are actually good formats.

We should put Natdex AG DLC 1 in this tour. It is actually genuinely the most loved AG format of all time from what I see, pretty much everyone from that time who played it acknowledges how fun, diverse and fair the format was. Playerbase shouldn't be an issue, I've talked to people about NDAG DLC 1 in AGPL and a lot of people confirmed they would play it or at least take part in building and given they haven't changed their mind that would include: Andyboy, myself, Nevelle, WSun1, Chlo, PDT, Kate, bacon, skooma (lol), and perhaps more I have forgotten making it easily the best pool and most in demand format from those listed. I acknowledge that it's awkward to have a legacy format but in the context of AG I think it makes sense given that it was held as the main format for a year and remains very liked.

So the argument should really be between Natdex AG DLC 1 and USUM AG Slot 2, and from the points I listed I think Natdex AG DLC 1 is the better choice. Having 1 of the SS slots being BO3 sounds good to me too. Thanks for reading.
Alright so that was an opnion right? So I went and did the math. Looking at the signups for AG snake draft (I can't use last year's agpl, since there were 2 sm slots there may be more sm signups so I had to pick one where they were even), 31 people who got drafted signed up willing to play USUM or all, and 21 who got drafted signed up willing to play ND or all. That is 1.5-fold more people who are interested in playing SM than ND, a clear preference.

Maybe that'll change if dlc 1 nd is brought into the picture but the data in this past tour shows SM is more popular. Adding to that, many older players come back for SM (i.e. GRNBLN) whereas it would be expected the NDAG playerbase is still around, thus adding NDAG dlc 1 may attract more players to switch from SS to ND preferences, but a lot of the SM regulars likely wouldn't get a chance to play.

tldr: there were 50% more people who got drafted for ag snake who were willing to play sm than nd, showing a clear preference
 
Last edited:

Icemaster

Few will truly understand.
is a Contributor to Smogonis a Community Leader Alumnusis a Community Contributor Alumnusis a Tiering Contributor Alumnus
Alright so that was in opnion right? So I went and did the math. Looking at the signups for AG snake draft (I can't use last year's agpl, since there were 2 sm slots there may be more sm signups so I had to pick one where they were even), 31 people who got drafted signed up willing to play USUM or all, and 21 who got drafted signed up willing to play ND or all. That is 1.5-fold more people who are interested in playing SM than ND, a clear preference.

Maybe that'll change if dlc 1 nd is brought into the picture but the data in this past tour shows SM is more popular. Adding to that, many older players come back for SM (i.e. GRNBLN) whereas it would be expected the NDAG playerbase is still around, thus adding NDAG dlc 1 may attract more players to switch from SS to ND preferences, but a lot of the SM regulars likely wouldn't get a chance to play.

tldr: there were 50% more people who got drafted for ag snake who were willing to play sm than nd, showing a clear preference
Maths like that isn't very useful here, ND AG DLC 1 has very different opinions on it compared to ND AG DLC 2. It would be far more accurate to compare to the list I supplied which is higher quality than a slot two USUM. More important is that higher raw signup count doesn't solely lead to a quality pool, the quality of the USUM pools these last two AG tours were not good and so we wouldn't miss out on much by condensing it into one slot. Signup numbers are less important than pool quality.
 

cromagnet

I pledge allegiance to the grind
is a Forum Moderator Alumnusis a Community Contributor Alumnusis a Battle Simulator Staff Alumnus
Maths like that isn't very useful here, ND AG DLC 1 has very different opinions on it compared to ND AG DLC 2. It would be far more accurate to compare to the list I supplied which is higher quality than a slot two USUM. More important is that higher raw signup count doesn't solely lead to a quality pool, the quality of the USUM pools these last two AG tours were not good and so we wouldn't miss out on much by condensing it into one slot. Signup numbers are less important than pool quality.
That pool already plays nd though. If the ND base is pushing for dlc 1, the more logical thing is just switch the ND slot to dlc 1 instead of the hated dlc 2, not stretch our already fairly shallow ND pool into even more slots.
I had controls for pool quality, the only good metric for pool quality is people who got drafted, everything beyond that is an opinion

EDIT: that is a high quality list tho, and this kind of gets into what I've been trying to say. What happens to the quality of the DLC 2 ND slot then when all the top players of already relatively small pool jump into dlc 1?
 
Last edited:

Icemaster

Few will truly understand.
is a Contributor to Smogonis a Community Leader Alumnusis a Community Contributor Alumnusis a Tiering Contributor Alumnus
That pool already plays nd though. If the ND base is pushing for dlc 1, the more logical thing is just switch the ND slot to dlc 1 instead of the hated dlc 2, not stretch our already fairly shallow ND pool into even more slots.
I had controls for pool quality, the only good metric for pool quality is people who got drafted, everything beyond that is an opinion

EDIT: that is a high quality list tho, and this kind of gets into what I've been trying to say. What happens to the quality of the DLC 2 ND slot then?
The list of names I provided overlaps very little with ND AG DLC 2 (since it's not a particularly liked format). With the exception of say Nevelle and Kate who played dlc 2 in a recent team tour, the rest stem from other slots. ND AG DLC 2 is already a dire slot with or without them, and is clearly not very liked. However removing nd ag dlc 2 entirely is a lot more drastic than removing usum slot 2; removing usum slot 2 lets the better usum players consolidate into 1 slot to improve the level of competition while removing a format entirely potentially leaves people with no ag format they play in the list of formats. (I do think the nd ag dlc 1 playerbase and nd ag dlc 2 playerbase are relatively disjoint)
 

cromagnet

I pledge allegiance to the grind
is a Forum Moderator Alumnusis a Community Contributor Alumnusis a Battle Simulator Staff Alumnus
The list of names I provided overlaps very little with ND AG DLC 2 (since it's not a particularly liked format). With the exception of say Nevelle and Kate who played dlc 2 in a recent team tour, the rest stem from other slots. ND AG DLC 2 is already a dire slot with or without them, and is clearly not very liked. However removing nd ag dlc 2 entirely is a lot more drastic than removing usum slot 2; removing usum slot 2 lets the better usum players consolidate into 1 slot to improve the level of competition while removing a format entirely potentially leaves people with no ag format they play in the list of formats. (I do think the nd ag dlc 1 playerbase and nd ag dlc 2 playerbase are relatively disjoint)
It is more drastic, but if your thing is about high quality games, why not make the drastic move rather than have this weird half-dead DLC 2 slot? Do you anticipate the dlc 2 slot to have higher or lower quality games relative to a 2nd SM slot?
 

Icemaster

Few will truly understand.
is a Contributor to Smogonis a Community Leader Alumnusis a Community Contributor Alumnusis a Tiering Contributor Alumnus
It is more drastic, but if your thing is about high quality games, why not make the drastic move rather than have this weird half-dead DLC 2 slot? Do you anticipate the dlc 2 slot to have higher or lower quality games relative to a 2nd SM slot?
If I'm honest I personally would prefer DLC 1 > DLC 2 as a slot, but I don't know if removing a format would be the better thing to do for the tournament granted maximising quality signups across the board should be a key aim. The 2nd SM slot would probably be similar or slightly better than ND DLC 2, but it is difficult to say. The USUM turnout for AG snake for just a single slot was quite poor while for AGPL 3 it wasn't too bad
 
That pool already plays nd though. If the ND base is pushing for dlc 1, the more logical thing is just switch the ND slot to dlc 1 instead of the hated dlc 2, not stretch our already fairly shallow ND pool into even more slots.
I had controls for pool quality, the only good metric for pool quality is people who got drafted, everything beyond that is an opinion

EDIT: that is a high quality list tho, and this kind of gets into what I've been trying to say. What happens to the quality of the DLC 2 ND slot then when all the top players of already relatively small pool jump into dlc 1?
this is a copy paste from discord arguing with shitmaster but i think it applies here

just an idea but wat if we sack shitty dlc2 altogether and just get dlc1 nd ag over it. assuming zay and cro would agree with that, by using the power of logic and friendship, we can deduce the most likely point of contention between all the esteemed ag players here

usum/dlc1/ usum vs usum/dlc1/ dlc2

argument rn would be quality of second usum slot if we go with dlc1 nd ag over dlc2 vs the quality of dlc2 ndag if we sack one of the usum slot and introduce dlc1 ndag that already takes away from the dlc2 ndag playerbase

i have more faith in getting more quality usum players than a weak dlc2 nd ag slot thats already been weakened by introducing dlc1 nd ag as well

if u disagree with this take ur bad faith and just wrong and a kate, i win good night
 
USUM is by far the most loved format in the ag metagame .
Replacing it with SS would lead the whole tournament to be SS based so my suggestion would be to just keep it as USUM or change it to a nat dex as either works fine
 

Chloe

AAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
is a Community Leaderis a Community Contributoris a Tiering Contributoris a Contributor to Smogonis a member of the Battle Simulator Staffis a Site Content Manager Alumnusis a Battle Simulator Moderator Alumnus
PU Leader
best option is to shorten it to 6 slots, removing the secondary usum slot and natdex slot, and then adding another two teams. it'd expand the tournament in a good healthy way imo and prevents managers from having to draft from the bottom of the barrel to find someone who actually wants to play national dex ag, or having to find a secondary usum slot. the players ice mentions that would play natdex dlc 1 (including me) bar like one or two would all rather slot into other formats anyway, and you'd be stuck again trying to find someone to fill that void.
 
best option is to shorten it to 6 slots, removing the secondary usum slot and natdex slot, and then adding another two teams. it'd expand the tournament in a good healthy way imo and prevents managers from having to draft from the bottom of the barrel to find someone who actually wants to play national dex ag, or having to find a secondary usum slot. the players ice mentions that would play natdex dlc 1 (including me) bar like one or two would all rather slot into other formats anyway, and you'd be stuck again trying to find someone to fill that void.
Yep this is another good way , participation will increase as more people will get drafted
 
Thanks for putting this thread up. Firstly I think USUM slot 2 is not the first best choice for this tournament. I heavily disagree with the fact that it's the most well loved ag format or most popular, it is pretty stale and very formulaic in terms of building (yes even more so than galar imo) - but that is more a matter of opinion. Instead, you can look at the past AGPL and AG snake and you'll see poor quality games in even USUM slot 1 quite often. With a low playerbase it's relatively difficult to draft for a second slot. That being said it's better than the other choices presented - all of them have a lack of playerbase for it but also secondary problems. 4th SS makes the tour way too cgen oriented, Natdex AG DLC 2 is quite disliked and struggles to have the playerbase for a single slot, and I don't think BW/DPP can be justified without any prior inclusion in the AG circuit - genuinely very few if any people know how to play them and there isn't really an established meta in them so we don't know if they are actually good formats.

We should put Natdex AG DLC 1 in this tour. It is actually genuinely the most loved AG format of all time from what I see, pretty much everyone from that time who played it acknowledges how fun, diverse and fair the format was. Playerbase shouldn't be an issue, I've talked to people about NDAG DLC 1 in AGPL and a lot of people confirmed they would play it or at least take part in building and given they haven't changed their mind that would include: Andyboy, myself, Nevelle, WSun1, Chlo, PDT, Kate, bacon, skooma (lol), and perhaps more I have forgotten making it easily the best pool and most in demand format from those listed. I acknowledge that it's awkward to have a legacy format but in the context of AG I think it makes sense given that it was held as the main format for a year and remains very liked.

So the argument should really be between Natdex AG DLC 1 and USUM AG Slot 2, and from the points I listed I think Natdex AG DLC 1 is the better choice. Having 1 of the SS slots being BO3 sounds good to me too. Thanks for reading.
I Never Confirmed Anything But I Approve This Message For Skooma

- pdt
 

Iguana

formerly mc56556
Hi, all. I'm pretty removed from this community these days, but AGPL is one of the few AG tournaments in which I still consistently participate, so I wanted to voice my opinion here.

I strongly urge those making this decision to retain the same format as last year. This is the most competitive and (likely the most) popular option. I understand the intent behind suggesting a Nat Dex AG DLC 1 slot, but there are issues with this proposal. For starters, what kind of a precedent would this set? If we can backtrack to a previous DLC in one slot, what else could we do? Why not revert back to SM AG for one slot (pre-Marsh!)? No disrespect intended, but these sort of edits to formats strike me as approaching Pet Mod territory, which isn't appropriate for AG's most consequential team tour. Also, is it even possible to play Nat Dex AG DLC 1 without tour codes or another maneuver?

Few would disagree that USUM AG is the most competitive, compelling Gen of AG. It seems odd to me that with a still active, talented, and growing playerbase, we're having a discussion about potentially changing one of the two slots featuring it. I don't share the opinion that the metagame has become stagnant; there are always varying teams and strategies with which to approach it.

To me, this issue seems overly complicated. It is of course worth discussing, but two USUM AG slots has worked well in AGPL so far. I'd very much like to see the format remain the same for this year.
 
I hate natdex ag, but I’ll take the fall to be slotted there :eeveehide:. Overall I think the slots are fine at least to me, I’m not one to complain when it comes to that. But absolutely keep the slots at 8>6, it gives opportunities to more players being involved in a team especially if ca will be the prize this year.
 
TL;DR at the bottom

personally the idea of 8 teams > 6 teams is interesting to me. i especially would like a #1 vs #4 / #2 vs #3 playoff instead of
the ol' #1 seed goes straight to finals thing. i just don't know if extending the season an extra 2 weeks for this is desirable to everyone
(I have no problems with it)

6 slots makes sense if you're going to have 8 teams, but it doesn't seem like people want this (me included) from what i've read here and on disc.
Also, I know we all love Nasty Plot Baton Pass Z-Bug Caly-S meta but NDAG shouldn't be axed. not having DLC 2 NDAG as a playable option is a bad look because it's 'current gen'. there's lots of talk in this thread is about making DLC 1 NDAG or x2 USUM the remaining slot. i'll address NDAG first

let's be honest and point out what is not going to happen: having both a DLC 2 NDAG slot and a DLC 1 NDAG slot. the sentiment shared among players who have participated in past AGPLs/AGSDs is that DLC 1 is far more competitive and fun of a meta than DLC 2. imagine having to draft someone who you slot in DLC 2 NDAG when DLC 1 is an option. do this at least 5 more times now for each team and see the reactions. are there more than a few good players that would willingly sign up for DLC 2 when there is an infinitely more attractive (according to like, everyone) option in DLC 1?

before continuing i'll bring up something that would be great if it was implemented regardless of the remaining slot. players will sometimes make agreements not to use certain things before a game, better known as "gentlemen/ing", in order to make the game more competitive or less influenced by RNG. translation: can we ban OHKO moves so that my pokemon doesn't get black holed in one move regardless of its type or stats? can we ban evasion so the games result doesn't depend on how many times I land this move on substitute before you setup and 6-0 me? can we ban this butterfly so that I can build without worrying about having 1 pokemon on my team with less than 304 speed?

I like and support agreements. what I don't like is worrying about agreements being broken. the cool thing is that nobody is obliged to accept an agreement if they don't want to, so I don't see a problem with what i'm about to propose. In AGPL IV I want a rule where if someone breaks an agreement that was made before a game, the match is forfeited and whoever broke the agreement loses/the other person wins. all this does is make agreements official for anyone who wants to utilize them. in my opinion, anyone that breaks an agreement is unsportsmanlike and should be disqualified anyways, this would just make it an actual rule. let's not kid ourselves, people will gentlemen regardless of if this rule is a thing or not so why not make it official? you can even get both teams managers to acknowledge the agreement so that there's no gray area. it's really not about making people lose by forfeit but ensuring that nobody snakes because the rule exists

if agreements were a thing then the people who want to play DLC 1 NDAG would actually be able to. we can have 1 NDAG slot and if there's enough popularity for DLC 1 NDAG then people will agree to play it instead of DLC 2. this would save DLC 1, solve axing DLC 2, and forget about the nightmare of having 2 NDAG slots that we wouldn't get enough happy players for. NDAG is a special case and idt you can compare DLC 1 - > DLC 2 to SM - > USUM considering how damaging the addition of Calyrex-Shadow was. the real difference is that going from DLC 1 NDAG to DLC 2 NDAG is like an oasis turning into a wasteland while for SM transitioning to USUM is not even bad as of today; people love USUM. I think the DLC 1 NDAG > DLC 2 NDAG agreement is completely valid and should be allowed/enforced if both players want to play DLC 1

a second USUM slot sounds pretty boring to me personally but I will agree that it's currently our best option if we had to add another slot. Still, I would even say that a 7 slot tournament with 8 teams where there are no ties but only wins/losses would be more exciting than an 8 slot tournament with 6 teams and x2 usum slots. obviously with 8 teams we will need more players and more managers, both which I don't think will be an issue considering this is AGPL IV with its FIRST TIME CUSTOM AVATAR PRIZE, but hey maybe I don't know what i'm talking about since for whatever reason slots are always evenly numbered in team tours. I'd even push for 8 teams 8 slots to make AGPL as big as possible though

Let me end with another possible last slot I came up with that I feel would be very entertaining, though i'm not sure if people would be up for it.
It could be a (?) random slot. basically, each week the formats rotate. for example...

W1: SS
W2: USM
W3: ORAS
W4: NDAG

and repeat... the order would be random of course, but shown before the week starts so you can decide who to put in this slot (maybe even have a schedule like this^ for what the random slot will be each week). this would force managers to draft more creatively rather than buy 1 player to fill the SS/USM/ORAS/ND slots. we don't necessarily have to include SS if we think 3 slots + random ss is too much as well




TL;DR:

8 teams > 6 teams seems like fun and i feel like we'll have enough managers and sign ups considering this is AGs first CUSTOM AVATAR PRIZE tournament (also AGPL). a 4 team playoffs without having the #1 seed get a bye is also very desirable

NDAG should not get 2 slots

AGPL IV should recognize gentlemening as a legitimate agreement and the rules made before a game need to be
enforced. if a player breaks an agreement then they should lose the match

Only 1 NDAG slot, just gent if you want to play DLC 1 and tough luck if your opponent is crazy and wants to play DLC 2.
i couldn't think of any other compromise unfortunately but i think a good amount of people would rather play DLC 1. I don't think we should entirely exclude a current gen without giving people at least the option of playing it

2nd USUM slot is kinda cringe but it might be the best option

ignore what i said above, let's do the random slot instead please, it'll be fun i promise it's okay if not but i think it's a cool idea


AGPL IV should be a nice experience regardless of the decisions made though :woop:
 
Last edited:

The one and only buck

Banned deucer.
Hi everyone! AGPL IV is coming in the near future, and in contrast to last year cromagnet, Nol, omi and I would like to hear input on the structure of the tour and tiers selected.

Currently, we would like to do something similar to last year - 6 teams, and 10 players minimum per team (8 starters + 2 subs) with 8 slots. There will be a 5 week round robin with the top team advancing straight to finals, while the 2nd and 3rd place teams play each other for the other spot.

Tentative Schedule

Manager Signups - May 22nd
Player Signups - May 29th
Auction - June 11th / 12th
Week 1 - June 13th

Tiers
Last year, we did the following:

- Multigen Bo3 (SS / USUM / ORAS)
- SS AG
- SS AG
- SS AG
- USUM AG
- USUM AG**
- ORAS AG
- National Dex AG

The primary issue with said format was giving priority to USUM over the other old / alternate gens for no real reason, and so we'd like to hear your suggestions on what to do with the second USUM slot.

Here are some preliminary options:

1. Leave the slot as is.
2. Replace it with a second National Dex slot - this option has always felt the most logically consistent to me, as National Dex is actually a current gen metagame, and therefore merits some extra emphasis. However, many people have raised grievances with the current state of the metagame, and so I'd need to see considerable support to change to this.
3. Replace it with a fourth SS slot - this works fine, but oversaturates the tournament with SS, which isn't desirable to some.
4. Replace it with a DPP slot - as much as I like DPP, I would be hard-pressed to support this option, as few people are involved in this metagame and it lacks development overall.

Feel free to give input on what you'd like to see with this slot, or AGPL in general!

Finally, AGPL will also award a custom avatar this year!
2! National dex deserves that!
 

Maczeus

Banned deucer.
Hi everyone! AGPL IV is coming in the near future, and in contrast to last year cromagnet, Nol, omi and I would like to hear input on the structure of the tour and tiers selected.

Currently, we would like to do something similar to last year - 6 teams, and 10 players minimum per team (8 starters + 2 subs) with 8 slots. There will be a 5 week round robin with the top team advancing straight to finals, while the 2nd and 3rd place teams play each other for the other spot.

Tentative Schedule

Manager Signups - May 22nd
Player Signups - May 29th
Auction - June 11th / 12th
Week 1 - June 13th

Tiers
Last year, we did the following:

- Multigen Bo3 (SS / USUM / ORAS)
- SS AG
- SS AG
- SS AG
- USUM AG
- USUM AG**
- ORAS AG
- National Dex AG

The primary issue with said format was giving priority to USUM over the other old / alternate gens for no real reason, and so we'd like to hear your suggestions on what to do with the second USUM slot.

Here are some preliminary options:

1. Leave the slot as is.
2. Replace it with a second National Dex slot - this option has always felt the most logically consistent to me, as National Dex is actually a current gen metagame, and therefore merits some extra emphasis. However, many people have raised grievances with the current state of the metagame, and so I'd need to see considerable support to change to this.
3. Replace it with a fourth SS slot - this works fine, but oversaturates the tournament with SS, which isn't desirable to some.
4. Replace it with a DPP slot - as much as I like DPP, I would be hard-pressed to support this option, as few people are involved in this metagame and it lacks development overall.

Feel free to give input on what you'd like to see with this slot, or AGPL in general!

Finally, AGPL will also award a custom avatar this year!
2
 
best option is to shorten it to 6 slots, removing the secondary usum slot and natdex slot, and then adding another two teams. it'd expand the tournament in a good healthy way imo and prevents managers from having to draft from the bottom of the barrel to find someone who actually wants to play national dex ag, or having to find a secondary usum slot. the players ice mentions that would play natdex dlc 1 (including me) bar like one or two would all rather slot into other formats anyway, and you'd be stuck again trying to find someone to fill that void.
Hard agree with this. The options listed in the original post all seem mediocre due to rather shallow player pools for USM/Natdex and not having enough high quality SS players to fill four slots. I think going to 6 slots and removing the secondary USM slot would allow for a higher quality AGPL overall.
The only question would be what other slot to cut. I do feel NDAG should get some representation considering its comparatively big popularity on ladder. I personally could see us cutting ORAS or the third SS slot.
Icemaster's suggestion sucks btw this is AGPL not AGFL
 

64 Squares

Every night fucks every day up
8 slots 6 teams > 6 slots 8 teams. less teams = more good people per team. with how thin the top end of the ag community is, we want these people to work together and not just all be on seperate teams. this leads to better metagame development and teambuilding. less weeks is also good since 7 week regular season can get long, especially for these top players who often have to provide a lot of team support.

2nd usm > nat dex dlc 1 (or any other slot). usm is the slot that attracts people outside of the ag community the most, giving the tour the most room for growth. for example i imagine more ubers players (skysolo, rabbit, situm, myself, etc.), would much rather play the usm meta they're familiar with than some meta they are inexperienced with. we've even seen players in the past like vivalospirde, luthier, temp, who dont really play ag or ubers sign up to play usm.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

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

Top