My Evaluation of the Suspect Process
Hello Kamikaze,
You asked for feedback regarding the changed in the suspect process. These changes brought a more competitive ladder for sure but a competitive ladder is not the main objective of suspecting a Pokemon. I’m proposing a new system that changes the way we determine the voting population.
Let’s take a look at what Singles UU has been doing. A permanent council plus a rotating council decides on whether to ban a pokemon or not. I am in agreement with the logic I see behind this:
1) They ensure only players who are truly invested in the meta-game decide its fate
2) They ensure that only the most highly skilled players are making decisions
3) They are semi-inclusive to people who are active in community and skilled, through the rotating council.
4) They make decisions quickly.
Even with the ladder more competitive it is far from the optimal solution on determining skill and more importantly knowledge of the meta-game at a high level of play. We are more inclusive but the due the time constrains needed increases the competitiveness of the ladder we lost several really valued members of the DOU community. This process didn’t take too long but the time certainly could have been better spent.
I want us to achieve the same objectives that Singles UU does. But let’s not just rip off their strategy; let’s improve upon that. I guess it’s important to point out why I am against using Single UU’s process:
1) Even their council size of 12 people per vote is too small to represent the community. Statistics teach you that the sample size should be at least 30
2) If someone is good enough to vote once why rotate them off for someone else? Why not just have all the qualified people vote? My guess is that its speeds things up. For Doubles OU, speeding the process up is not as big as a concern.
3) The part of the council is not rotating. There is some shakiness in trust between Doubles Council and the Community. Dawg is still on council after and has not posted on smogon in over 5months, and has not participated in tour in even longer. There are great active players who could fill that role and really deserve that recognition. Among other trust issues we can save for another discussion.
So let’s determine our voting population off of tour performance and activity. These are objective metrics and easy to determine. They shouldn’t be too difficult for decent player from an outside tier to meet as long as they put in the effort.
Here it is, simple yet flexible
1) Have won X battles within the last two DOU circuit tours. Circuit tours are accessible to everyone and have a high level of play. Choosing over the past 2 circuit tours mean you can miss a circuit tour and still make reqs. This metric is the most flexible way to increase or decrease the amount of skill you want voters to possess
2) Have participated in at least one Doubles forum tour over the past year. This is really easy and shows that the player is not simply a tournament player but is invested in the meta. This should lead to increasing number of participants in our tours. This includes everything from DTL and DUU tours to DPL.
3) Have posted at least ocne in doubles forum in the past 4 months. Voters should contribute to the community; some people are quiet but this is not much to ask for. Also players cannot rush to post just to make reqs.
This will give us people who are actively involved in doubles and care about whether the mon should be banned or not. Its accessible to everyone on smogon. And its adjustable to the amount of skill you want based on X number of circuit tour wins.
This picture conveys the benefits much better than I can write it. You’ll see players that would have been included in the Jirachi Suspect if my idea was used and players that are excluded. Overall you can see that net-net my idea leads to players who are more proven and more active. And I used the bare minimum requirement of 1 win in either of the last two seasons. Increase that requirement if you want but it may not even be necessary. Yes, it shows some notable players would have been excluded such as Zach who could easily make reqs by participating in DPL or some other forum tour; Pocket would be included in my idea if he wins a seasonal battle. But we gain many other players who missed the suspect because in time was cut short to make the ladder more competitive; we really don’t need these guys to prove they deserve a vote by going through the ladder.
Players on left did not make reqs but would under my idea. players on right made reqs but would not under my idea. players in middle make reqs under both systems