PL's aren't known for this but I think it would be awesome to have more Bo3 slots. I believe that a Bo3 in any gen would be superior to Bo1 for a few reasons
The winner of a Bo1 "set" is highly determined by matchup. While this can also be true with Bo3, there are often chances to win a Bo3 even after having a bad g1 where say, you get swept by a calm mind refresh Dragonceus because nothing on your team was capable of stopping this unviable abomination. You still lost with no chance to fight back, purely cause of mu. MU simply is a more critical factor when the sample size is one game. It is way more unlikely for someone to get horrible matchup throughout an entire set of 3 games than for 1 game. Flip a coin once and you land on one side 100% of the time, the other side 0% of the time. 0% gets set on fire, 100% wins easily. Flip the coin 3 times and both players will have better odds of fighting a fair battle. 66% vs 33% may not be completely fair, but it's better than 100% to 0%
Prep is closely related to matchup, but different. You can bring a team that logically makes sense, and randomly your opponent won't have a good option to check some mon on your team, therefore, in a world where you both played perfectly you win because of MU. Prep on the other hand is deliberately trying to screw over your opponent before the set starts by making a team around things that they typically do not bid well against. Prep isn't wrong, but it is a very ugly thing to see when you only play 1 game which is heavily influenced by this. I've been in several team tournaments and know how people look through their opponents replays and try to find every little detail about them. What mons do they tend to use, what is their building style, what set do they often run on certain mons, what are they typically weak to, will their teammates possibly pass them a team, and so on. In the end, they concoct this semi-unviable cteam with 2 pogres and a cm arceus-electric (idk if anyone's actually done this but lol you get the point) which would not be optimal in most situations, but could very possibly work well on their opponent. Maybe the player who has gotten "prepped for" knows about their opponents plans, and then decides to use something out of their comfort zone, something random that the prepper could never have expect. What happens then? Who knows, sometimes it may end up in absolute disaster where the person who tried to cteam their opponent gets demolished because running 2 pogres and an arc-electric isn't actually the smart play. Maybe the cteam works out just as planned, what an exciting and totally skill based game indeed! Yeah yeah, this is just a wild example that wouldn't normally go this far when people take the game seriously, but these type of things are more likely to take place when it's only 1 game. Literally take gen 7 viv, anyone remember what happened last agpl? Having teams weak to viv is not a crime, it is a crime to bring viv in a bo1 where you instantly win if your opponent has no check. It may be the players job to have a team that can handle just about everything (not possible), but you can't argue that a single game where someone wins instantly by sweeping with a mon the opponent can't stop is NOT FUN FOR ANYONE.
Getting haxed is something that happens to all of us. I don't need to elaborate on this very much, but you are 100% fucked if you lose your single game you get to play because of rng. When you have a larger sample size, you have a chance to still win if you are the better player. I've played series where I got haxed to death but still won because it was a Bo3. Hax is less likely to happen in 3 games one-sidedly than it is in 1 game
The reason I favor Bo3 so much is because it is MORE competitive, it is MORE skill based, it is MORE exciting to watch, it is MORE.. well, it is more games actually... This understandably won't happen ever, but I'd want every single slot to be bo3 if it was possible
Assuming we can only do 6 slots, these would be my desirable slots while still being realistic and knowing people won't want all Bo3s lol
NatDex Bo3, NatDex Bo1, NatDex Bo1/Multigen, USUM Bo3, USUM Bo1, ORAS Bo1
I honestly would like an ORAS Bo3 but I understand many people are upset with the uncompetitive nature of the format. I personally
feel that ORAS is unexplored and that it takes more than running 3 ekillers a rai and 2 fillers to be a good ORAS player, it is simply easy to settle and play like this when all people say is "rai is broken ORAS sux Xd" without exploring the possible checks. No I'm not a genius ORAS player who knows everything but you have stalk and uturn and klefki and phazing and lum and other things that can stop this, people need to figure it out and build legitimate teams with actual checks to these big threats instead of complaining about losing ekiller speed ties ._.
BTW I don't believe AG has really any player base for Galar right now. Would it not just be just like.. pre dmax-ban Uber players dominating? Just my opinion I guess. I personally don't know how to play Galar even after learning all of the big threats and standard sets, probably because it's very hard to get the necessary games in to truly learn it without a ladder
I like the idea of Multigen and would be down to be a person who plays in that slot. Not much more I can comment, I think it's worth considering and I support it
S/o MDB for hating on NatDex. I would also rather have a Multigen > another NatDex Bo1 btw. Lets be real though, Pichus vs Ktut Bo1 or Bo3? Pretty obvious answer imo, the game quality improves when the level of play is at its highest. Bo3 should be all HL matches
But yeah, I'd like to discuss this Bo3 thing with anyone who disagrees for whatever reason. I mostly just think Bo3 is better competitively and from a hype/spectator standpoint. I don't know all of the arguments on why Bo1 is used over Bo3 (I don't particularly agree with the ones that I do know) and would like to talk about it. So, anyone, give me your thoughts I guess