Tournament BDSP Premier League III: Format Discussion

Status
Not open for further replies.
Hello there. For this edition of BDSP Premier League the hosts will be Tuthur and myself. Along with the forum mods we would like to open a discussion about the tournament format.

The format will remain 6 teams and 8 slots, like the previous two iterations of the tournament. The tiers played in this iteration will be as follows:
  • BDSP OU
  • BDSP OU
  • BDSP OU
  • BDSP UBERS
  • BDSP UU (with Raikou legal)
  • BDSP RU
  • BDSP NU
  • BDSP PU
We would like to open the floor for suggestions on the nature of the third OU slot:
  • OU Suspect (and what the suspect slot should entail).
  • OU BO3
  • Regular OU
  • If there are other you would like to see please feel free to share and discuss.
The other subject we expect discussion on is the tournament length. There was much discussion on the nature of 6 team, 5 week PLs here.
So we would like to open the floor to the community to voice how they would like this solved.
  • Belgian Pro League Style (outlined here as Proposal C, and implemented in the previous RBYPL).
  • Scoring by game W/L only (proposed here by Peng). Could be done with either 5 week, or extended season length.
  • Other ways of extending the season( double Round Robin, Conferences etc.)
  • Status Quo
Other subjects that we would appreciate discussion on are:
  • The Nature of retentions in this iteration of BDSP Premier League.
  • Manager Self-Buys and their price.
Please post your thoughts in the thread below, but please keep discussion as civil as possible.

Looking forward to a great tour!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
My thoughts:
  • The Third OU Slot: I do think that having the OU slot be a little different makes the tour the most interesting, since I think the value of an extra plain OU slot is not as noticeable. I'm not very enthusiastic with the idea of an OU suspect (unless it's without Weavile and/or Starmie), but a Bo3 slot is intriguing to me as a way to push more innovation in OU in a team tour setting. I do also think it encourages more discussion about OU within teams since they now have to consider more options when team building.
  • The 6-team PL Format: I don't feel very strongly with the format of the PL one way or another, but I am totally fine with using BDSP PL 3 as a testing ground for various modifications to the PL format, especially since a) BDSP PL isn't the most prestigious team tournament on Smogon, so there wouldn't be a huge pushback to messing withthe tour format, and b) doing so would draw more attention to BDSP PL as a tour that decided to experiment with the format and add to this discussion. I personally favor peng's suggestion to use wins to score points for teams, as this would give each individual tier the opportunity to get games, especially the lower tiers that don't get many opportunities to get played in a year outside of Slam, PL, and Homefield.
  • Manager Self-Buys: One of the things that I noticed in the GSCPL administration thread that was linked in the the 6-team PL thread that was linked in the OP was that manager self-buys were made extremely expensive to punish great players who teamed up to start off with what was perceived to be two "free" wins. I don't think these great players are as entrenched in BDSP; of the two players who have won multiple individual tours (Elfuseon and dunoks), only Elfuseon participated in the Winter Seasonal and went 0-2. Of the players who have two BDSP trophies, we only add Boopi and he was eliminated outside of the top 9. The players who manage BDSP PL are just good players who choose to manage this tour, so I wouldn't really support increasing the price of self-buys to the degree GSCPL did. I would be interested in messing with the number of credits each team has, given that the reasoning behind the change is solid.
 

TyCarter

Tough Scene
is a Forum Moderatoris a Community Contributoris a Tiering Contributor
Moderator
I would like to see the 3rd OU Slot be a suspect slot again, I do personally support a suspect slot with either a Starmie ban or Manaphy retest. I think some of the anti-Weavile sentiments have died down. Bo3 can be ok although I'm not confident many players would be willing to sign up for a Bo3 each week for a team tour like this.

The tour length should be the Belgian format as someone who has been on the team that ended up finishing 1st in both iterations of BDSPPL, it can kill momentum for the team who gets the bye week and in 6 team tour PLs I've seen this sentiment expressed a lot and I can see why. Last year, the playoff teams were basically decided by the final week so it would give a team that may be around that middle of the pack/on the border something to play for with regards to moving onto phase 2. It would also have the benefit of giving the suspect slots a bit more time to actually see more meaningful sample size to work with.

Retentions: I'm a little uncertain about this one as some teams would have pretty cheap retains (such as Huargensy who finished x-1 only going for 3K at the auction despite being deep into last year's Winter Seasonal at the time of the auction and having some prior history with the tier, or even Xilefi, one of our very own TLs etc.) You could limit this by doing something like 10K + some arbitrary number increase for number of wins the player had the previous season.

Manager self-buys I am personally indifferent to, if you want to limit it to 1 self-buy that's perfectly fine given 1 manager self-buy for most teams have generally worked out pretty well anyway with 3 out of the 4 teams that made finals doing this, and the one team that didn't back in BDSPPL I did a double self-buy.

I'll write more in the coming days but that's my initial thoughts for now.

Edit 04/25: Based on the general sentiments so far, people don't really think retains is ideal which is fine and everyone seems to like the idea of a 1 manager self-buy out of 2. The 3rd OU Slot is probably where no one really can seem to agree on anything atm which I am not too surprised by. Assuming we go forward with the Belgian format, I'd probably have 2 suspects for the first and second half of the tour since it would (mostly) split evenly. I'll probably reexplore some options.
 
Last edited:

igiveuponaname

A face in a cloud no trace in the crowd.
is a Community Contributor
RE: Third OU Slot

Best of 3 would be the format I'd prefer seeing the most in the 3rd OU slot, it would help reduce the effect of matchup/hax during sets and more games is always a nice thing to have. That being said I can also see this not being a feasible option since, let's be real, most of the users signing up and playing in this tour don't play BDSP all that much and asking them to prep for Bo3 for the duration of the tour might not be appealing to most players.

Suspect slot is probably more feasible though I personally don't see much worth suspecting, maybe put up a poll or form asking what to suspect if this is chosen for 3rd slot or just let OU council decide idfk.

Regular OU I only see as a last resort since although there's nothing wrong with 3 regular OU slots it would be nice for the third to have a bit of something to it ya know?

Not going to comment on tour length/format and retentions/self-buys since I don't feel as though I understand the workings of team tours well enough to give a proper opinion on those matters.
 
My thoughts as someone who has been a degenerate for the tier in the past 1.5-2 years.

Third OU Slot: This one is kind of an awkward one. I do not think that at this current time there is much needed in terms of suspect testing. Manaphy has about a 1% chance of coming back to the tier. The recommended suspects so far would also likely not lead to any significant evidence of the mon being unhealthy for the metagame (Weavile maybe, but Starmie is just never getting banned and would be a waste of time). In my opinion, I would be most interest in a Manaphy retest IF suspect was done, but there is a very high, almost certain, chance it is too unhealthy for the metagame.

I think Bo3 could be intriguing, as it could lead to some developments with more higher quality teams being built and can leave some room for innovation. However, others have mentioned how this leaves a massive time constraint of having to build multiple teams a week if you don't want to get scouted to oblivion, so I do understand if this is just a Bo1 slot.

Format: I do think that a format similar to the Belgian Pro League could be helpful to BDSPPL. I think this is especially the case if the tournament does decide to go towards the path of a suspect. A problem I had with the suspect slot for last year was that there were 3 different suspects and each suspect got about 2 weeks. Each suspect got about 6 games, and that doesn't feel like a suffice amount of games to truly determine what is broken and what isn't. A much larger sample size is needed in order to come to a much more rational opinion (unless if we're going to suspect drizzle again). I also think a longer season can help with the development of the lower tier metagames, which are often shunned from the spotlight aside from Grand Slam (which many players will play for 1-2 sets of an open and then never touch for the rest of the year). It does feel rare to see a consistent amount of high level play for lower tiers, and BDSPPL is a great opportunity for that.
 

Xilefi

is a Forum Moderatoris a Community Contributor
Moderator
As promised, here are my thoughts for the BDSPPL III formats.

About the format:
I always like simple things when it comes to organize any kind of event. That said, I really like the Belgian Pro League style as long as most people understand it without too much problem. Otherwise, Peng's proposition checks a lot of requirements.

About retentions and managers self-buys:
Retentions: I'm a little uncertain about this one as some teams would have pretty cheap retains (such as Huargensy who finished x-1 only going for 3K at the auction despite being deep into last year's Winter Seasonal at the time of the auction and having some prior history with the tier, or even Xilefi, one of our very own TLs etc.) You could limit this by doing something like 10K + some arbitrary number increase for number of wins the player had the previous season.
I agree with what Carter says. Huarguensy and I ended up with the best record/price ratio by far. We could argue that this is lack of scooting but I don't think this should be the most competitive and punishing tour. Especially that this kind of tour drags people that are not always part of the regular playerbase. This can be easily prevented in different ways without being too much a bother.
About self-buys, I like the philosophy of manager being managers and players players but I find the 1 self-buy a good in-between. That said, as long as the price is prohibiting enough that it is a real choice for managers to double self-buys, I'm fine. In both cases, I think self-buys should be aligned with retentions in some ways.

About the third OU slot:
Well honestly, I don't even like having a 3rd OU slot. I talked about the fact I don't enjoy much OU nowadays and OU is already the most played format by a lot while the playerbase is not that high even for this tier. Especially considering that good part of the lower tiers playerbase is also represented in the OU tier. I don't see much face-up value of it bar the sake of having a 3rd OU slot. Even more I think Bo3 makes this worse. PL is supposed to bring uniqueness and you don't prep for Bo1 the same way you do for Bo3, and even more human resources and/or energy are needed for a tour that is already demanding in this respect. So at the very least Id like to make it interesting.

Suspect is a way to make it interesting that the council I'm part of has considered. I am not the most fond about it for multiple reasons. First for the same reason I just mentioned, Bo1 is not Bo3. Even if we make it Bo3, I don't believe the environment would be that suitable because it would become a tour within a tour and not every team might want to put their best players in that slot. All in all, if we can maybe make the size of the sample large enough, I don't think the quality would follow. In the case it is decided to do a suspect slot, I think Starmie is not suitable because it deserves more time. Manaphy fits more because we already have a start of a sample and because of the results of the survey.

That said my personal opinion as a player would be to build during, hopefully, 8 weeks without Weavile. As I said, I don't believe it is broken but I do believe that in the builder it is the mon that takes the most ressources to check/counter. At least Garchomp, that kinda raises the same problems, is checked by overall better good mons than Weavile. I talk about playground and experimentation I think this would be a great way to use this slot and kinda has my preference if we're doing a 3rd slot. A somewhat reversed suspect test.

To sum up:
- Belgian Pro League Format > Peng's Format
- Retentions for proven players
- Limit to 1 self-buy manager or prohibitive price
- Reversed suspect test of Weavile > No 3rd OU > Suspect Manaphy > Regular Bo1 > Bo3.
 
Ok my turn.

Format:

Simply the best suited for our PL would be the Belgian Pro League proposal, I think its nice and easy to work and flow with. Even for me I have been player in PLs but never administrated further than that. Regardless of what the 3rd slot would be. Its a good range of time to get engaged but also not lose that initial engagement. Considering we'll get players that would only participate in BDSPPL and not touch the tier again, as well as recurrent players of the tier.

Retentions and Self-buy managers:

About retentions I basically agree with both Carter and Xilefi, some players with the best record went really low valued in price and the ratio of price and WR is to be considered. I honestly don't know how to exactly handle this but keeping them as the price they were is just giving free members and it would be unfair imo. Regarding Self-Buy Managers, I think one per team is totally plausible, with a price of around 10k sounds good to me. Both managers playing kinda goes against the thing of, well, managing.

3rd slot:

Oh boy, the hottest take would be mine I guess. I heavily disagree with having a suspect slot to begin with, I think it was shown how flawed this whole idea was in the last BDSPPL, at least I never saw the appeal of it. In the first case of releasing a currently Uber Pokemon / Ability: Its a sweked metagame that involves you prepping for said Pokemon and building a biased thought of said Pokemon or playstyle thinking it isn't performing as good as you may think. This is a slot that would be an out of context and meaningless metagame, it will not provide anything to gain from as in praxis, its totally out of what the actual metagame of BDSP OU is. If we for example, for some reason suspect slot Blaziken, I would just load priority HO and now you'll think Blaziken indeed not as broken now, which is factually wrong. Think it at how when they teach you in school something that in the everyday life doesn't perform as what they taught you, and you learn it by experience, the experience is in this case the regular BDSP OU. I think having a suspect slot would be a waste of time, energy, and prepping for something that would lead to nothing of use. I don't have to argue about Manaphy per say because I already mentioned freeing an Uber, especially one that will become another threat in the builder to have in mind, its an awful idea in my opinion. Regarding Starmie and Weavile, I disagree with both being suspected as a slot too. None of them provide merely the enough restrictions in building or battle to think of suspecting them. I want to refer to my post in which I cover Starmie, and how the last Seasonal helped in shaping the builder to deal with Starmie while keeping cohesive teams.

I don't believe it is broken but I do believe that in the builder it is the mon that takes the most ressources to check/counter. At least Garchomp, that kinda raises the same problems, is checked by overall better good mons than Weavile
Regarding Weavile per say I actually disagree with this take and would say Garchomp requires more resources to check than Weavile, and the quality of pokemon that do check them is around the same. I would be more lean to suspect Garchomp than Weavile or Starmie.

What I do like for a 3rd Slot is simply having more games, therefore, my prefered would be a Bo3 slot, I think saying its extreming mental and energy resources is honestly an exaggeration, and with the state of the metagame and how teams would build. Yes, you would probably see recycling teams a lot, but that doesn't mean the quality of the games would be hindered. In any case, a Bo3 slot rewards other trends of skill like scouting in battle, counter apporaching, and compensates for simply bad luck that can screw your G1, in this case a Bo1. If not, I would just keep it as a regular 3rd slot.

But... If I really had to, if I had to choose a Pokemon for a suspect that's an Uber. That, as some may know already and have talked with me, would be Deoxys-Defense.

I know this would be for the most part pointless since everytime I bring this topic I've only gotten inmediate negative responses without even considering the fact of giving the idea a thought in their minds. Which is honestly disappointing, as imo I'm not bringing up something utterly inadmissible, Deoxys-Defense is not a Pokemon that would tear apart the whole tier. On the contrary, I think it's a different apporach that hasn't been brought to the table and just has been negated by how the annoyance of this Pokemon could be in praxis, having amazing utility and defensive capabilities. I would like if you just consider it for a moment though.

Contrary of what a Manaphy or other threat coming back, Deo-D slot would not be a metagame centralized on countering this Pokemon, as its role its on the most part defensive, it would be a better portrayal of what the actual metagame is if it had Deoxys-Defense allowed. I hope this make sense.

Deoxys-Defense started in Ubers inmediately when it got released from HOME with the other forms, more because of a historical status than anything else, because in practice this form is far worse in what in offers than the others, those other three would be inadmissible to consider. I don't like to bring other metagames since they don't reflect of course the state of BDSP, but for the record, Deoxys-Defense has only been Ubers in past generations when it had access to Toxic, which was pretty much a mandatory move on it, it wasn't released in SWSH, and in SV is currently RU, meanwhile the other forms are highly tiered. Again, SV doesn't represent in any form the state of BDSP, but it has some applications you can take, since is a closer gen to look at instead of looking back. BDSP is not DPP or any old tier where mechanics were much different, so looking up to SV is much more plausible.

Summing Up
:

- Belgian Pro Format
- Retentions with very specific rulest and price that I cannot come up with a solution.
- 1 Self-buy manager. Price 10k.
- 3rd slot: Bo3 > Regular 3rd OU slot >>> Suspect Garchomp = Suspect Deoxys-Defense >>>>>> Suspect Weavile/Starmie >>>>> Suspect Manaphy
 
Last edited:

TyCarter

Tough Scene
is a Forum Moderatoris a Community Contributoris a Tiering Contributor
Moderator
Based on the feedback we have received from this thread and the community, we have decided that the following will be implemented for BDSPPL III:
  • Managerial Self-Buys will be limited to 1 person per pair. The 15K Self-Purchase Price will remain in place
  • We will not be including Retains much like in BDSPPL II
  • The tournament format will be using the Belgian Pro Format. The TLDR is that the first 5 weeks will be aiming to qualify for phase 2 which is where the top 4 teams out of 6 teams will qualify for another round robin. Points from Phase 1 will carry over to Phase 2 and the Top 2 teams out of the remaining 4 at the end of phase 2 will play each other for finals.
  • The 3rd OU Slot will be regular OU
  • The budget will remain at 100K much like last year
Manager sign-ups will be posted soon
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

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

Top