Tiering Contributor for Old Gens with Viability-Based Tiering

phoopes

I did it again
is a Site Content Manager Alumnusis a Senior Staff Member Alumnusis a Community Contributor Alumnusis a Contributor Alumnusis a Battle Simulator Moderator Alumnus
Hey it's me, an RBY main, get your haha reacts ready.

So unless you're an RBY main, you've probably missed the big discussion that we've had (and are continuing to have) on tiering, especially for tiers other than OU. Here's a link to the thread if you want to read up on it. There's lot of stuff being discussed, but one of the points that we've been going over that would need approval from people outside of RBY is this: I (and others) would like the people who contribute to updating the Viability Rankings to earn progress towards Tiering Contributor.

This is because RBY does viability-based tiering, rather than usage based tiering. I'm not sure if we're unique in this aspect, which I was I said "old gens" in the title instead of just "RBY." But basically the gist of it is that in the yearly OU Viability Rankings, anything in the B-ranks and up is OU, and anything in the C ranks and below is UU. From there, UU does the same thing, where everything in the B-ranks and up is UU, and anything in the C ranks and below is NU. This will continue with the first NU Viability Rankings, which are slated to happen shortly after NU Snake Draft is over, where the NU/PU cutoff will occur. So since these Viability Rankings directly affect tiering, I think we should be able to count participation in an official Viability Rankings towards Tiering Contributor.

A valid concern that you might have, however, is how the people that produce these Viability Rankings are determined. It's not just an "anyone can participate" kind of thing, so it's not like any rando can get tiering contributor through this system. For OU, the requirements are pretty steep: it's largely just SPL players and people who have participated the previous year (mostly SPL players). So I don't think anyone will balk at that. For the other tiers, however, we as a community have come up with some pretty good guidelines ourselves, consisting mostly of tournament results. This is especially true for UU, which has seen many high quality tournaments and a lot of growth over the past two years. We were also able to get a decent amount of tournament results for Ubers as well, so I don't see any concern there either. The only one that we kind of had to fudge requirements for was NU to get a decent amount of voters, but I think it's in the best interest of the tier and RBY as a whole going forward to get an official Viability Rankings done to replace the current, out-of-date one. As an added benefit, this gets us started on PU as well, which people have been looking forward to. You can read about the full proposed timeline in this post.

I also want to mention that this is not some "get rich quick" (or get a badge quick I guess) scheme from the RBY community. It is most likely going to take someone multiple years of continued activity to earn a badge in this way, which I think is a good thing. In my opinion anyway, multiple years of active tiering participation should result in a badge. In fact, May compiled a list of people who would have earned tiering contributor "points" (idk what to call them) from the 2019 OU Viability Rankings, 2020 OU Viability Rankings, and 2021 OU Viability Rankings, and I grabbed the list from the 2021 UU Viability Rankings. Here's who's earned points:

  • Sceptross (2019 OU)
  • HML am (2019 OU, 2020 OU)
  • Aliss (2019 OU, 2020 OU, 2021 OU)
  • Amaranth (2019 OU, 2020 OU, 2021 OU)
  • Prinz (2019 OU)
  • Heroic Troller (2019 OU, 2020 OU, 2021 OU)
  • Hipmonlee (2019 OU, 2020 OU, 2021 OU)
  • Enigami (2019 OU, 2020 OU, 2021 OU)
  • Kaz (2019 OU)
  • Maya Chansey (2019 OU)
  • ErPeris (2019 OU, 2020 OU, 2021 OU)
  • Lusch (2019 OU, 2020 OU, 2021 UU)
  • FriendOfMrGolem120 (2019 OU, 2020 OU)
  • teal6 (2020 OU)
  • Ortheore (2020 OU, 2021 OU)
  • Nails (2020 OU, 2021 OU)
  • Caetano93 (2020 OU)
  • shiloh (2020 OU, 2021 OU)
  • SaDiSTiCNarwhal (2020 OU)
  • Mister Tim (2020 OU)
  • McMeghan (2020 OU, 2021 OU)
  • marcoasd (2020 OU, 2021 OU)
  • Kingler (2020 OU)
  • Genesis7 (2020 OU, 2021 OU)
  • MetalGro$$ (2020 OU)
  • SMB (2020 OU, 2021 OU)
  • Alpha Male Psyduck (2020 OU)
  • Hayburner (2021 OU)
  • ziloXX (2021 OU)
  • TC (2021 OU)
  • Louna (2021 OU)
  • Vileman (2021 OU)
  • Serpi (2021 OU)
  • spies (2021 OU)
  • Excal (2021 OU)
  • Holly (2021 UU)
  • iKiQ (2021 UU)
  • LTG (2021 UU)
  • AM (2021 UU)
  • kjdaas (2021 UU)
  • Sevi 7 (2021 UU)
  • phoopes (2021 UU)
  • BT89 (2021 UU)
  • meloyy (2021 UU)
  • Volk (2021 UU)
  • May (2021 UU)
  • pac (2021 UU)


You'll see on this list many top players of their respective tiers, some of which don't have Tiering Contributor, and even fewer of which have Top Tiering Contributor. All of these players have proven their worth through tournament play and/or metagame knowledge, and I'd like to see them rewarded for it. As far as I'm aware, there hasn't been a suspect test in RBY OU maybe ever, and the first one for RBY UU occurred last year, so it's not like these players have many opportunities to earn Tiering Contributor through the normal route of suspect testing. So I think that allowing those who vote in Viability Rankings to count is the perfect solution to keep these people contributing to RBY. In addition, the opportunity for VR votes to count towards Tiering Contributor in old gens with viability-based tiering could lead more players to actually check out these generations and their tiers! And I think the growth/interconnectedness of our communities is always a good thing.

Finally, I'd like to give a special shoutout to vapicuno for their work in really shaping the RBY tiering process by rewarding them with Tiering Contributor as well, since they have had "significant influence over the tiering process." (McMeghan too since they helped but they already have Top TC alum lol).

Thanks for reading!
 

Plague von Karma

Banned deucer.
As far as I'm aware, there hasn't been a suspect test in RBY OU maybe ever, and the first one for RBY UU occurred last year, so it's not like these players have many opportunities to earn Tiering Contributor through the normal route of suspect testing. So I think that allowing those who vote in Viability Rankings to count is the perfect solution to keep these people contributing to RBY. In addition, the opportunity for VR votes to count towards Tiering Contributor in old gens with viability-based tiering could lead more players to actually check out these generations and their tiers! And I think the growth/interconnectedness of our communities is always a good thing.
I would like to emphasise the importance of this, as players like Ortheore have had to outright learn other tiers to try and earn Tiering Contributor in the past. I think it's sort of unfair that there isn't a true route for old gen players to get "the easiest badge on the site", given our tiers are among the most "solidified" in Pokemon as a whole. People have had, essentially, no chance at even getting to this point. With RBY working on standardising its viability-based tiering with proper qualifications and the like, it seems fitting for it to lead the charge.

The reason many newer generations have suspect tests is as a result of drops occurring over the course of a generation. These drops happen from usage-based tiering. On our end, we have viability-based tiering for very old tiers, and thus voting on Viability Rankings is a form of tiering action that users engage in, and can be seen as our equivalent of suspect tests to some degree. To me, this is a clear case for making it count under Tiering Contributor, given that there are strict, rigerous requirements to have players even get votes automatically accepted. If the concern of council nepotism or something comes up and you want that oh-so-delicious red tape, then just have the auto-qualifiers count for Tiering Contributor, but to me that's rather silly given our tournament instability at times. Keep in mind, RBY OU was on the verge of being cut from SPL just a few years ago and only started to see any kind of stability on the site last year.

If you were to contribute solely to OU under the current requirements for Tiering Contributor - 4 suspect votes, let's have these be VR contributions under our current timeline - you would need to contribute for 4 years. In my opinion, this may as well count for Tiering Contributor alumnus while you're at it, because it's insane and being that consistent in RBY is something only seen in cream of the crop players. Perhaps we could make this more bearable to grind for: 3 to count the current OU qualifiers? 2? I don't know, it's not my turf anyway. There's a lot to play with here. There is a question as to whether Ubers should count given they do not impact lower-tiers by usage or viability, but it seems unfair to hurt Ubers players specifically here, y'know? Like, the GSC Ubers stuff here was great and used clear-cut qualifications.

I do believe that a conversation should be had about strict and consistent tournament requirements, but at the same time, given the variable playerbases for each tier, maybe that's not right and should be left to the councils or forum moderators.

I think it is good and right to allow RBY mains, and GSC/ADV mains by extension, a route to getting this badge. We've made strides in improving badging conditions for old gen players for the past year - Contributor and Community Contributor are now particularly good ways to establish yourself on Smogon - and it seems fitting that this one gets what it deserves.
 
Last edited:

phoopes

I did it again
is a Site Content Manager Alumnusis a Senior Staff Member Alumnusis a Community Contributor Alumnusis a Contributor Alumnusis a Battle Simulator Moderator Alumnus
Hi, me again.

I don't know if this was explicitly clear but I'd like to retroactively count the RBY UU Dragonite Suspect Test towards Tiering Contributor as well as those past Viability Rankings votes mentioned above.

Perhaps more controversially, I'd also like to count votes in the RBY Counter debate towards Tiering Contributor, as I believe this was pretty much a suspect test as well.

Thanks for your consideration!

EDIT: apparently both of these already count. Oopsies!
 
Last edited:

emma

is a Forum Moderatoris a Community Contributoris a Site Content Manager Alumnusis a Social Media Contributor Alumnusis a Community Leader Alumnusis a Smogon Discord Contributor Alumnusis a Top Tiering Contributor Alumnusis a Contributor Alumnusis a Dedicated Tournament Host Alumnusis a Past SPL Championis a Past SCL Champion
DPL Champion
As RoA Leader and RBY Forum Moderator, I am on board with this idea.

Both the viability based tiering and suspect processes follow a similar pattern. First, players interested in the tier qualify to contribute to the development of the tier either through performing well in ladder (suspect tests) or in tournament (viability based tiering). You could even argue that the latter is tougher to find success in. Then, qualified players contribute to the development of the tier either through casting their vote (suspect tests) or posting their viability rankings (viability based tiering). Finally, all the data is collected and a tiering decision is made. Both processes directly impact Smogon tiering and should be (eventually) award the Tiering Contributor badge.

I would guess the biggest notion against this policy change is the fact that RBY UU, RBY NU, and other past generation lower tiers are not official, and thus should not count. While these facts are true, we have already seen votes Other Metagames and other past generation lower tier votes (although official) count toward the Tiering Contributor badge, so this seems like the next logical step.

Speaking solely for RBY Lower Tiers, players have dedicated an extraordinary amounts of time and effort into creating, maintaining, and developing these tiers and deserve to be recognized by having their tiering process official count for Tiering Contributor. phoopes himself has taken initiative helped create and organize an official standard for RBY Lower Tiering (discussion thread found here, also a ton of work being done behind the scenes), since before these unofficial / "made up" tiers were really left with nobody in charge and no official system. The general RBY UU / NU / Ubers community is also extremely passionate -- as seen here RBY UU has over 60 uploaded analyses and RBY NU has over 30 for example. RBY Lower Tiers have also been integrated into the official UU / NU / Ubers tournament, with UU/NU being in UUSD/NUSD this past year, Ubers being in the onoging Ubers Winter Team Tournament and also getting a dedicated Type C individual tournament, and RBY UUs likely joining UU Classic in 2022. These players have been in the same amount (if not clearly more) effort into other official past generation lower tiers, and their tiering should not not count for the Tiering Contributor badge just because the metagame was created after Smogon even existed.

I'm not great at words so sorry if anything wasn't clear -- here's a TL;DR:

Both the viability based tiering and suspect processes are very similar, Other Metagames and official past generation lower tiers suspect votes are already counted towards TC, and (specifically) the RBY UU / NU / Ubers community easily deserve this and should not be punished just because their metagames didn't exist when RBY was the current generation.

I'm open to answer any questions one might have about how this policy change would work. Thanks.

EDIT -- If this policy gets approved and things go well with RBY Lower Tiers, I would love to fully adapt it to GSC / ADV unofficial lower tiers to help stabilize their process. Having the votes count for Tiering Contributor would help a lot.
 

phoopes

I did it again
is a Site Content Manager Alumnusis a Senior Staff Member Alumnusis a Community Contributor Alumnusis a Contributor Alumnusis a Battle Simulator Moderator Alumnus
Hi there! I heard through the grapevine/some people asking me questions that there might be some confusion on a few points so I'm going to do my best to rehash/explain succinctly and provide some helpful links.

---

What does a Viability Rankings update look like?

The 2021 OU Viability Rankings update does a great job at answering this question.

How are Viability Rankings produced?

First, a pool of voters is selected. Then, each voter submits a Viability Ranking. Finally, these rankings are compiled in a system developed by vapicuno, which produces the new official Viability Rankings. How vapicuno's method works is laid out in this thread. If you're not math/stat-minded it might be a little hard to follow, but in short: it's proven to work and we're going to keep using it. It's also why I suggested vapicuno for Tiering Contributor, since they have had a SIGNIFICANT impact on how we tier in RBY.

How do you come up with the pool of voters?

We now have individual councils for every tier that will determine objective requirements for people to meet through tournament placement(s). I came up with a sample list for the upcoming UU and NU Viability Rankings here. (this was just my personal opinion, the councils' requirements could be different) Later on in the thread, May came up with a sample list for Ubers. Ultimately though, it will be up to the respective councils to determine the minimum requirements for whose vote counts.

Whose Tiering Contributor badge status is affected by this proposal?

I made a spreadsheet for this purpose! This spreadsheet lists everyone that's participated in an official Viability Rankings or suspect test in RBY, as well as likely voters in upcoming Viability Rankings/suspect tests. I'll update it every time something happens in order to keep track of everyone's tiering contributions to RBY. Should this proposal go through, I'll tag everyone affected so they can view the spreadsheet and count up their number of votes that have been retroactively added to their Tiering Contributor totals. Hopefully the spreadsheet is easily understandable, it is to me at least lol.

---

Hopefully that clears some things up! If you still have questions/concerns, don't be afraid to post in this thread or find me on Discord and I'll be happy to talk things through with you. Thanks for reading, and for your consideration!
 

shiloh

is a Member of Senior Staffis a Top Tiering Contributoris a Contributor to Smogonis a Top Tutor Alumnusis a Social Media Contributor Alumnusis a Community Contributor Alumnusis a Smogon Media Contributor Alumnusis a Battle Simulator Staff Alumnusis an Administrator Alumnusis a Dedicated Tournament Host Alumnusis a Past WCoP Champion
Tiering Lead
hi sorry for the late reply, but i do not think we are going to go forward with this. while this all does look amazing, and ideally tc is open to more communities, this is not the way to do it.

the biggest issue i see with this proposal is the fact that the people who are voting on these vrs, and therefore "qualifying for tc", are not actually playing the lower tier, or even doing anything different than anyone else making a vr in any tier. while rby does use these vrs for tiering, 1) these lower tiers are not official in the first place 2) the people making the vrs are not making them with the intention of tiering. what i mean by this is the fact that someone that is submitting their VR for RBY OU is doing so as a RBY OU player and how they see the tier. they are not submitting a vr with the the thought of a lower tier on their mind, as that would not be a good way to make a vr. because of this, there is no real difference between someone voting in the RBY OU VR and the SS RU VR, but one would count for tc.

the other issue is that going off of that, someone could qualify for tc by voting in the ou vr 4 years in a row, effectively getting badged for tiering RBY UU, even if they have never played it. the way the current tc works is that you get the qualification towards tc after voting in a test for the tier, by playing the tier. this is a completely different way to qualify, and not just because its vr based, but it would allow players to get tc effectively for a tier that they have never played. this combined with the fact that the players voting on the vr are not actually tiering (since they should not be submitting a vr based for rby ou based on rby uu), are the two biggest reasons that i have to deny this.

i understand this is only bc rby players / old gen players in general do not have great access to the tc badge, and will realistically only get it via other tiers, but this is not the way to solve that potential issue. not every badge has to be made obtainable by every community, and for the most part right now tc is for official tiers + current gen unofficial tiers, for the most part. this isnt always the case as anything in blind voting will count for tc, so stuff like rby uu dnite counts as you pointed out. it will probably be impossible for anyone to get tc solely off of rby, but this is something that would happen to people that play most old gens / especially old gen lower tiers. while tests do exist for these, they are fairly uncommon and forces most people to play current gens if they want tc. i am unsure if this is an inherently bad thing, since i do not particularly mind saying tc is a primarily current gen focused badge, but it is how tc in its current state exists.

im sorry that i have to deny this because there is a lot of good work done here, and the intentions are great, but theres no real way to justify changing tc this much. im also not gonna deny the amount of work the tier leaders for these tiers put in, but if the issue is the badge, i think it would just be best to maybe set guidelines for roa cc and have it function in this same way. i.e. if you vote in the rby ou vr 4 times you qualify for the badge, and if you do it x times you can get it alummed. maybe with a few other things mixed in, but i think that is a better way to have this work recognized, rather than changing how tc works.
 

emma

is a Forum Moderatoris a Community Contributoris a Site Content Manager Alumnusis a Social Media Contributor Alumnusis a Community Leader Alumnusis a Smogon Discord Contributor Alumnusis a Top Tiering Contributor Alumnusis a Contributor Alumnusis a Dedicated Tournament Host Alumnusis a Past SPL Championis a Past SCL Champion
DPL Champion
the biggest issue i see with this proposal is the fact that the people who are voting on these vrs, and therefore "qualifying for tc", are not actually playing the lower tier, or even doing anything different than anyone else making a vr in any tier. while rby does use these vrs for tiering, 1) these lower tiers are not official in the first place 2) the people making the vrs are not making them with the intention of tiering. what i mean by this is the fact that someone that is submitting their VR for RBY OU is doing so as a RBY OU player and how they see the tier. they are not submitting a vr with the the thought of a lower tier on their mind, as that would not be a good way to make a vr. because of this, there is no real difference between someone voting in the RBY OU VR and the SS RU VR, but one would count for tc.

the other issue is that going off of that, someone could qualify for tc by voting in the ou vr 4 years in a row, effectively getting badged for tiering RBY UU, even if they have never played it. the way the current tc works is that you get the qualification towards tc after voting in a test for the tier, by playing the tier. this is a completely different way to qualify, and not just because its vr based, but it would allow players to get tc effectively for a tier that they have never played. this combined with the fact that the players voting on the vr are not actually tiering (since they should not be submitting a vr based for rby ou based on rby uu), are the two biggest reasons that i have to deny this.
This makes a lot of sense and I have no real counterpoint to it -- players who qualify for the RBY OU Viability Rankings are tiering RBY UU which is very different from how current TC works.
im sorry that i have to deny this because there is a lot of good work done here, and the intentions are great, but theres no real way to justify changing tc this much. im also not gonna deny the amount of work the tier leaders for these tiers put in, but if the issue is the badge, i think it would just be best to maybe set guidelines for roa cc and have it function in this same way. i.e. if you vote in the rby ou vr 4 times you qualify for the badge, and if you do it x times you can get it alummed. maybe with a few other things mixed in, but i think that is a better way to have this work recognized, rather than changing how tc works.
I think something like this would be a great compromise -- reward people who put time and effort into tiering RBY in a different way. I'm sure people will be happy if their work doesn't count towards Tiering Contributor but can count towards Community Contributor.

Thanks for the response and hopefully we can start to include people's Viability Rankings under Community Contributor as a nice middle ground.
 

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

Top