Hear me out. This is not a troll; I genuinely believe this.
This argument will not be elitist, as I am deeply concerned with providing a positive experience for new monotype players.
As a disclosure of bias for this, my main stall team is currently a Gen 9 sample and I'm Happy with that.
I also want to emphasize that this should only apply in the future, as I do not want to retroactively destroy the work people put into sample threads.
I'll start with my main argument, then I'll do a Q&A where I provide counter arguments to objections I foresee.
Sample teams stunt the growth that happens from building and community engagement.
I think this is clear. The most samples can teach about building is how to slightly adjust sets to deal with threats that you believe the original creator didn't give enough credence to.
The only circumstance in which samples can teach on a deeper level is if a player is already knowledgable at mons but not a monotype mainer. Even still, this is limited by the unique nature of monotype building in which we make teams to cover specific matchups with unique win conditions for each. This exists in all serious formats, but it is much more distinct within monotype.
Instead of having a sample thread page (e.g. one attached to information about a tier and linked via the roomintro), players should create and share teams directly with community resources made for teaching.
Community Resources I encourage:
Contention 1: New players tend to be horrendous at building
Answer: That's true, but the Solution to this is community resources. Some players may be stubborn in their team building initially and ignore community resources, but that type of player is already the type to avoid sample teams. Creating a more thorough culture of learning is worth the extra barrier to entry. If an experienced player really needs a team quickly, they are free to find a share a team thread or ask in chat.
Contention 2: Can't they just ask for teams?
Answer: Yes, but that's a good thing! Providing teams directly allows a healthy community wherein we learn from each other. I know some of the best times I've been taken to the creative zone were a result of inquiring about a team I ran into on ladder.
Of course, Instruction is still possible to accompany sample teams, but this is both not a prolific current practice, nor is it a realistic expectation of submitters. Even if there is sufficient instruction on learning a team, which I sincerely believes learning how to win tricky matchups, the instruction must be updated with meta shifts and bans. For instance, if someone was to do a writeup on beating steel, dragon, ground or flying, they would surely have to update their work once we ban Gliscor and Flutter Mane.
Presently, the only instruction provided in the sample thread requires digging through the thread back to an initial team's. If you want a median solution where we keep sample team threads, we could submit the description of teams within the Pokepaste like this.
Contention 3: Will this make it longer for players to 'get good'?
Answer: I doubt it. To a minimal degree if at all. As I said Previously, most Youngster Timmys are already going to ignore any community building advice, including sample threads. Good players are already going to put effort into learning past merely using sample teams. Without sample teams, their efforts will likely pay off in greater fashion. Once our culture emphasizes other community resources, players will learn to play with what they have grown to understand rather than ethereally bequeathed to them.
Thank you for reading through my post. I look forward to y'alls feedback
for this thought experiment.
View attachment Pokemans_594.webp
This argument will not be elitist, as I am deeply concerned with providing a positive experience for new monotype players.
As a disclosure of bias for this, my main stall team is currently a Gen 9 sample and I'm Happy with that.
I also want to emphasize that this should only apply in the future, as I do not want to retroactively destroy the work people put into sample threads.
I'll start with my main argument, then I'll do a Q&A where I provide counter arguments to objections I foresee.
Sample teams stunt the growth that happens from building and community engagement.
I think this is clear. The most samples can teach about building is how to slightly adjust sets to deal with threats that you believe the original creator didn't give enough credence to.
The only circumstance in which samples can teach on a deeper level is if a player is already knowledgable at mons but not a monotype mainer. Even still, this is limited by the unique nature of monotype building in which we make teams to cover specific matchups with unique win conditions for each. This exists in all serious formats, but it is much more distinct within monotype.
Instead of having a sample thread page (e.g. one attached to information about a tier and linked via the roomintro), players should create and share teams directly with community resources made for teaching.
Community Resources I encourage:
- Sample Sets
- Partner Pokemon Sets
- Team Archetypes
- Share a team threads open to all
- Viability Rankings (With better supervision; I've been proving council has no idea how stall works this whole gen)
- Type Viability Rankings (Jackuzzing suggested I try to discourage these, but I think it's more important to not set new users on a journey of discovery on how to get to 1400 with grass.) It's Good for people to have reasonable goals.
- Live Commentary and Analysis of Smogtour games
For Instance, if someone wanted a fire sun team, they could look in a team archetype thread. Within here, a compilation of resources could teach them what a setter looks like, what a sweeper looks like, how to choose items, what speed control is, what a wall breaker is, and how each of these elements is required to make a weather team. If they need further explanation, they can ask and get community support.
Contention 1: New players tend to be horrendous at building
Answer: That's true, but the Solution to this is community resources. Some players may be stubborn in their team building initially and ignore community resources, but that type of player is already the type to avoid sample teams. Creating a more thorough culture of learning is worth the extra barrier to entry. If an experienced player really needs a team quickly, they are free to find a share a team thread or ask in chat.
Contention 2: Can't they just ask for teams?
Answer: Yes, but that's a good thing! Providing teams directly allows a healthy community wherein we learn from each other. I know some of the best times I've been taken to the creative zone were a result of inquiring about a team I ran into on ladder.
Of course, Instruction is still possible to accompany sample teams, but this is both not a prolific current practice, nor is it a realistic expectation of submitters. Even if there is sufficient instruction on learning a team, which I sincerely believes learning how to win tricky matchups, the instruction must be updated with meta shifts and bans. For instance, if someone was to do a writeup on beating steel, dragon, ground or flying, they would surely have to update their work once we ban Gliscor and Flutter Mane.
Presently, the only instruction provided in the sample thread requires digging through the thread back to an initial team's. If you want a median solution where we keep sample team threads, we could submit the description of teams within the Pokepaste like this.
Contention 3: Will this make it longer for players to 'get good'?
Answer: I doubt it. To a minimal degree if at all. As I said Previously, most Youngster Timmys are already going to ignore any community building advice, including sample threads. Good players are already going to put effort into learning past merely using sample teams. Without sample teams, their efforts will likely pay off in greater fashion. Once our culture emphasizes other community resources, players will learn to play with what they have grown to understand rather than ethereally bequeathed to them.
Thank you for reading through my post. I look forward to y'alls feedback
for this thought experiment.
View attachment Pokemans_594.webp
