All Gens RoAPL XI - Format Discussion

[violet river]

Beforde deciding which gens and formats should be played in the tour you need to decide fundamentally what this tour is.

If you drop ORAS it can't be called RoAPL, it would be ClassicsPL or something in that regard.
If you are strict with the word RoAPL it would include SM and SS aswell. Not including those, because they are well represented in other tours, including smogtours is a somewhat valid point.
The question of the ORAS representation is a bit difficult, because it is borderline. It being in OUPL, but only with one slot is kind of an weak argument, it being in WCOP a better one. Not having ORAS because its in Masters, when there is Classics as the counterpart is nonsense though.

In my oppinion you can't have it both ways. This being RoAPL and not including at least ORAS.
The fundamental decision that needs to me made is: what is this tour?
Either make it:
1. ClassicsPL - but then make MastersPL aswell
2. Keep it the way it is.
3. Add SM and SS and find a solution to reduce the amount starting spots per team (for e.g. 1 spot per Gen, but add a Classics bo5 or bo3, extra rotating Classics gen each week, Masters bo3, etc.)

It's worth mentioning that Masterspl already exists -> the Masters League was invented this year. That tournament should absolutely be removed of player signup restrictions and have a CA + Banner reward for next year :D

 

[Zcarlett]

It's worth mentioning that Masterspl already exists -> the Masters League was invented this year. That tournament should absolutely be removed of player signup restrictions and have a CA + Banner reward for next year :D

As a sidenote from a host of said tournament, we were approached with the concept of it being a masters farm league and not a proper CA + Banner tour. If MastersPL were to be something that happened, it would likely be an entirely different entity.

Beforde deciding which gens and formats should be played in the tour you need to decide fundamentally what this tour is.

If you drop ORAS it can't be called RoAPL, it would be ClassicsPL or something in that regard.
If you are strict with the word RoAPL it would include SM and SS aswell. Not including those, because they are well represented in other tours, including smogtours is a somewhat valid point.
The question of the ORAS representation is a bit difficult, because it is borderline. It being in OUPL, but only with one slot is kind of an weak argument, it being in WCOP a better one. Not having ORAS because its in Masters, when there is Classics as the counterpart is nonsense though.

In my oppinion you can't have it both ways. This being RoAPL and not including at least ORAS.
The fundamental decision that needs to me made is: what is this tour?
Either make it:
1. ClassicsPL - but then make MastersPL aswell
2. Keep it the way it is.
3. Add SM and SS and find a solution to reduce the amount starting spots per team (for e.g. 1 spot per Gen, but add a Classics bo5 or bo3, extra rotating Classics gen each week, Masters bo3, etc.)

If you want to be as faithful to the name "RoAPL" you'd do 1 of each old gen and 2 multigen slots, but this is quite possibly the worst option because you lose a lot opportunities for lesser known players to break out while making players feel more isolated leading to a worse experience.

ORAS is a gen I personally really enjoy, but I also do not see how adding 1 of the 3 Masters gens suddenly makes it go from "ClassicPL" to "RoAPL". Regardless of what happens in terms of the format, I think changing the name 11 editions in is silly.

I do think ORAS should be kept in some form, as if you want to add 2 classic Bo5 slots with 8 teams that would mean fielding a total of 16 quality classic bo5 starters plus whatever you need for the bench, which sounds like a nightmare from a managerial perspective. If you want to reserve the last slot for 1x ORAS, Masters Bo3, or just axing Classic Bo5s altogether for 2x ORAS is something I have no stake in.

 

[neomon]

Making this gen 1-5 (2bw/2dpp/2adv/2gsc/2rby) and maybe rebranding to something related to classic and keeping the masters league (or even improving on this years format) to me makes the most sense 1) cause the official tours are split that way too 2) so theres less slot overlap 3) theres less slots overall which reduces load on managers too, all while oras would still be involved in an old gen teamtour

I personally think bo3s in teamtours are too much effort but the 1 bo3/ 1bo1 slot idea seems to be the favorite

 

[aubury]

ClassicPL without Classic Bo5 (or Bo3) thinking emoji

edit to clarify: cutting ORAS means 10 slots. I think adding 2 Classic BoX slots seems logical. Each team picking a tier works too.
Personally not a huge fan of 10 teams anyways and I don't think less lots means we should have more teams.

 

[Slowpoke Fan]

It's worth mentioning that Masterspl already exists -> the Masters League was invented this year. That tournament should absolutely be removed of player signup restrictions and have a CA + Banner reward for next year :D

ORAS is a gen I personally really enjoy, but I also do not see how adding 1 of the 3 Masters gens suddenly makes it go from "ClassicPL" to "RoAPL". Regardless of what happens in terms of the format, I think changing the name 11 editions in is silly.

As mentioned before, Masters League was created to be a Farm League. We do intend on creating a Premier League version of this, but our issue with RoAPL going 1-5 is that it uses RoA subforum resources - all of the Masters-related tournaments utilise CAs allocated to the ORAS/SM/SS subforums. If people are going to hold the leagues that we create as an RoAPL equivalent for the Masters gens, the RBY/GSC/ADV/DPP/BW subforums should be responsible for hosting and backing RoAPL with the resources they are allocated instead of having RoA do it for them. By extension, a name change would be appropriate with this sort of change, since the tournament would be intended for and organised by the Classic gens rather than RoA.

P.S. It is possible that RoA can allocate an additional CA for a Masters PL, but my conversations with Rage and BeeOrSomething have informed me that RoA has allocated all three of their available CAs to various tournaments. In the case that RoA cannot allocate an additional CA to a Masters PL next year, I feel that delegating this team tournament to the Classic gens is a logical move that would solve any related issues even in the far future when we reach generation 15 and beyond (newer RoA gens can simply pool resources together to form PLs of their own).

 

[neomon]

ClassicPL without Classic Bo5 (or Bo3) thinking emoji

edit to clarify: cutting ORAS means 10 slots. I think adding 2 Classic BoX slots seems logical. Each team picking a tier works too.
Personally not a huge fan of 10 teams anyways and I don't think less lots means we should have more teams.

What would a classic bo3 look like?
The tiers are the ones in the classic cups. The theme would be classic, bo5 slot included or not

10 slots is fine, 10 teams isnt necessary imo

 

[aubury]

What would a classic bo3 look like?

Team 1 bans a tier
Team 2 picks a tier
Team 1 picks a tier
Team 2 bans a tier
Remaining tier is the TB

example
Yanma: we ban BW for this Bo3
Magnetons: picks DPP for game 1
Yanma: picks ADV for game 2
Magnetons: bans RBY, that means GSC is game 3

personally wouldn't run this format unless it's something people are already familiar with and want a classic slot with less prep.

 

[Wesleyy]

• Classic Bo5 and Masters Bo3 slots
  Classic bo5 sounds great, i was doubting there would be enough appreciation for it since its a big investment to play 5 games for 1 series every week but the comments and opinions in this thread haved proved me wrong. i think it would make a cool addition to the tour. Masters bo3 on the other hand i dont think fit this tour. I think oras would be good to stay because it is a very loved generation and is no longer featured in Stour (and has ofcourse been in past seasons of RoAPL)
  
  
• Bo3 option on the table for all tiers
  Having a bo3 and bo1 slot in all tiers might be cool. But would depend on signups and might split the signups too much with people who do and do not want to play bo3.
  
  
• Potential expansion to 10 teams should we go from 12 to 10 slots depending on what format we settle on
  I like this idea alot, also gives you more flexibility with how many tiers you wanna include and would make space for the potential Classic bo5 slot.
  
  
• Tiebreaker format
  Saw this in a message above but Classicbo5 being the standard tier in a tiebreak format sounds sick and will be enjoyable for spectators and players who are involved with all tiers

 

[Vertigo]

Thank you everyone for voicing your opinions in this thread! To move forward, RoA Tours Staff have decided that ultimately, it is not desirable to add or remove any tiers from the format for the time being; this is a decision that will be revisited down the line once we establish what we want to do regarding representation of our more recent gens. For this edition, the format will remain the same, i.e. 12 slots, 2 slots each for RBY up to ORAS. We would like to hear your opinions about Bo1 vs Bo3 and what you would prefer. The options are:
- 1 slot Bo1 and 1 slot Bo3 for all gens (except RBY)
- Both slots Bo1, both Bo3, or 1 of each, at the discretion of each generation's forum staff

Please let us know what you think is best. The thread will remain open for a few more days, after which we will post the decision here and move forward with manager signups.

 

[lighthouses]

as someone who would signup for oras and dpp i would personally prefer if both slots would be bo3

 

[melancholy0]

Thank you everyone for voicing your opinions in this thread! To move forward, RoA Tours Staff have decided that ultimately, it is not desirable to add or remove any tiers from the format for the time being; this is a decision that will be revisited down the line once we establish what we want to do regarding representation of our more recent gens. For this edition, the format will remain the same, i.e. 12 slots, 2 slots each for RBY up to ORAS. We would like to hear your opinions about Bo1 vs Bo3 and what you would prefer. The options are:
- 1 slot Bo1 and 1 slot Bo3 for all gens (except RBY)
- Both slots Bo1, both Bo3, or 1 of each, at the discretion of each generation's forum staff

Please let us know what you think is best. The thread will remain open for a few more days, after which we will post the decision here and move forward with manager signups.

for GSC I would prefer bo1

Also, is there any change to / decision for the tb format?

 

[Iguana]

I strongly urge at least one slot of Bo3 in each Gen. To avoid controversy and possibly alienating some players, I think one Bo1 slot and one Bo3 slot (with the exception of RBY of course) is ideal for this tour. However, if it comes down to a decision of all Bo1 or all Bo3 slots for this RoAPL, I very much prefer the latter. This is an excellent opportunity to test multiple Bo3 old Gen slots in a team tour setting; let's not squander the opportunity.

 

[aubury]

OU
OU Bo3

repeat for all tiers

 

[SFG]

3d Vulpix03 TPH following up since you said I wouldn't ever remember to discuss tiebreak during the format discussion, glad I can put this beef behind us

The tiebreak format last year was an absolute sham. The higher seed being able to both pick and ban before the lower seed picks is a disproportionate advantage to the high seed.

Pick/Ban should probably look something like this, with 1 being lower seed and 2 being higher seed:

P1P2B2B1B2, with the tiebreak metas being P1, P2, and the remaining tier after the bans.

I do not mind cutting a ban and randomizing the final tier if that's wanted. I do not mind any alternative equitable tiebreak format so long as the high seed does not get to ban the low seed's best tier before they can do anything.

============

Definitely supporting this. Last year's tiebreak format was terrible: Team 1 being able to ban a tier before team 2 chooses theirs is a massive advantage, way too important for a simple "seeding advantage". The format Goldmason suggested is by far the fairest, giving only a slight advantage to the team ranked first.

 

[16bit]

Following up on my previous post in this thread, I think the DPP playerbase would benefit from having both slots be bo3. I think there are more than 8 people who would be interested in playing in a bo3 DPP OU slot in this tour, based on the playerbase interest of the DPPPL BO3 slot and the multitude of people who wanted to expand that from more than one slot (which will be discussed for next year’s edition).

 

[leoperi]

Id like changing atleast 1 bo1 slot on gsc and bw for a bo3 slot imo isnt hard to build teams on those gens , its always more fun watching more games.

 

[Maia]

Hi everyone, thanks so much for your feedback on this year's RoAPL! After much discussion here and on Discord, the tournament format will be as follows:
1x ORAS OU bo3
1x ORAS OU bo1
1x BW OU bo3
1x BW OU bo1
2x DPP OU bo3
1x ADV OU bo3
1x ADV OU bo1
1x GSC OU bo3
1x GSC OU bo1
2x RBY OU bo3

The tiebreaker format will use Classic bo5 as the default tier.

Manager signups will go up shortly, looking forward to a great tour!