• Smogon Premier League is here and the team collection is now available. Support your team!

Announcement 2v2 Doubles Tournament Policy and Format Discussion Thread

crow crumbs

crow crumbs

UMPL Champion
Approved by Kry

This is a serious thread is for discussing the format, rules and other administrative decisions relating to 2v2 tournaments.

Topics of discussion will be presented by 2v2 leadership and/or council and closed once a conclusion has been reached. Do not discuss topics that are either closed or not presented yet.
 
Last edited:
Hello,

We want to formerly bring back the 2v2 Doubles circuit! :D

Below is a tentative outline for what tours to expect next year.

Non-Circuit Tours:
  • 2v2PL V (Signups up Mid/Late January)

Circuit Tours:
  • Spring Type A (Seasonal)
  • Summer Type B (LT/Swiss/Majors)
  • Fall Type A (Seasonal)
  • Winter Type C (LCQ/Homefield/Other Old Gen Format)
Points of concern:
  • Should the circuit represent all generations or just SV?
  • What formats should the Type B and C tours be held in?
  • What formats should circuit playoffs be held in?
Finally, 2v2 Classic is not immediately on lock to return next year as it would be impossible to run without significant tour overlap. Since it's unclear how big the circuit will be, it seems best to keep our ambitions grounded. This is subject to change if the current iteration is deemed a major success or with enough community interest.

Personal takes:
  • Don't feel very strongly between lt or swiss, gun-to-head would say swiss. Majors is not a good tour format.
  • Should just keep circuit cg only. Any(?) old-gen inclusive tour would require a bo3o5 every week which is just too much gaming/team sourcing to be doing for a small single elim tour. Also not a fan of entirely cg playoffs having non-cg tours contribute to entry.
  • Top 16 bo5 single elim for playoffs sounds appropriate
 
Last edited:
My personal take on this:
- Make Spring tour an Open instead of a Seasonal; i didnt actually check every circuit how it's done but i've always seen an Open as the first tour of the year to, well, open the circuit, idk exactly when is PL gonna end and when the Spring tour is gonna begin but there will likely be an insane overlap between those 2 tours if the indiv is a double elimination format.
- Swiss for the type B is my personal favorite between those options, i like Major too but pool format kinda just suck, not a fan of LT personally but it's still a good option if you're trying to get activity on the ladder ; Objectively probably Swiss >> LT >> Major
- Type C should be LCQ; Homefield or Classic for the last tour of the circuit is kinda out of place since it's not even played in current gen (i assume homefield is the one tour that lets u pick a generation so u play SV G1 then 2 old gens)
- In my opinion adding Classic will benefit the circuit and the community; Type C, takes place towards the middle/end of the year (~July/August) to not get old gens tours of the year in the same period of time (Classic and PL). Reason why i am in favor of adding Classic is because it is always refreshing to play different old gens; this will likely bring more players to play old gens which will make the playerbase of each old gens likely more competitive and more active
- Top 16 seeded playoffs is great

- Open Type B (January)
- 2v2PL (January/February)
- Swiss Type B (April)
- Seasonal Type A (June)
- Classic Type C (August)
- LCQ Type C (October)
- Playoffs Top 16 seeded, single elimination
 
gm
  • LT seems like the strongest format for me, I like swiss but I also prefer ladder interaction a bit more, wouldn't be against swiss though. Pools formats are lwk bad.
  • We should keep almost everything as current gen, yes, old gen tours would drastically lower the amount of players signing in, considering most people expect to play SV 2v2, unless it's something like Classic.
  • 2 ssnls is weird, I personally like the format UMs has going on with 1 open and 1 seasonal for each UM, though I definitely understand why people would prefer other ways.
  • LCQ seems good, most tiers are doing it, I don't know if 2v2 Bo7 is the greatest idea of the world but if it isn't it's not the worst idea to give it a shot either, I could be massively wrong on this point though, if I am wrong, then idk let me know? If you wanna make room for old gens then I think you just do Classic as part of the circuit.
  • Top 16, Bo5, delim seeded for Circuit Playoffs? I'm not against selim I just think you can get lucked kinda easily in a bo5 and, delim, while it would take longer, i think overall feels better, especially it being seeded where it would make the most sense for players with more points to pair up against players with less.
 
1. I think we should only use Scarlet & Violet, because including all generations would probably decrease the number of players

3. Top 16 Swiss would be the best format since it’s fair, gives more chances to players and you can win even if you get out lucked,probably.( PTSD )
 
Hello again,

This thread is being repurposed as general tournament format and meta discussion for the future. At the moment, there are 2 proposals for the upcoming PL that we would like to discuss:

  • 1: BW or SV or SV Bo7 as the sixth slot in PL.
Past premier leagues have had 2 SV and 1 of each old gen.

Currently, we are considering replacing BW with an additional current gen slot. Mainly due to BW being the least actively developed and to make the tour more accessible for newer players. Another possible consideration would be to make the new slot Bo7 to create a tiered experience for the tour and the most competitive and exciting environment for our flagship meta.

  • 2: Formally recognizing the same 5 minute between-games timer rule that 1v1 currently uses.
For reference: For ALL series, timer will be set to 5 minutes in between games. That means once a challenge is sent, the person will have 5 minutes to respond to it.

This has been the standard in UM tours for the past year as an ad hoc decision. We would merely be formalizing it to remove ambiguity.
 
Last edited:
I want to see bo7 sv given a shot. With all my love to bw I feel like the older a generation is, the more it pulls out from the modern pool of good players filling in that slot to help their team rather than like, its own community identity, but maybe I’m off the mark in 2v2.

Is it a 5 minute timer? I was under the impression it was 7, that’s what umpl adopted at least to my memory
 
whilst i would love to see a bo7 as a newfgen, i think that bw is quite deserving of a slot and an enjoyable and interesting meta, im rather split on which i would prefer but i think if we are to replace bw it should definitely be for a bo7. as for 5 minutre timer and i am entirely in favour of it.
 
My personal takes

1.
I would prefer SV Bo7 the most, but also fine with SV Bo5. I don't think BW is a good meta but that's not really important to my opinion. My stance it would need to be outstandingly good and have an active group of bw-only mainers to justify making cg the minority in our main tour of the year. I strongly believe that it's healthier in the long-run and will allow 2v2 to retain more player interest (potentially even enabling 8 slots in the future, where bw would be on lock to return).

2.
This seems like a no brainer to me. 100% yes.

a fairy said:
Is it a 5 minute timer? I was under the impression it was 7, that’s what umpl adopted at least to my memory
Click to expand...
It was changed recently
lost heros

Other Post in thread '1v1 Tournament Policy Discussion Thread'

alright, let's wrap some things up.


CL manager signups go up Monday. After discussing a lot of stuff mostly on discord, here is what we're going to do.

1. Slots: MGBo3o5 (SV-ADV) / SV7 / SS7 / SM7 / ORAS5 / BW5 / DPP5 / ADV5 / ND7 / UU5.
All of those slots were initially requested by their respective councils and tier leaders, besides DPP who wanted to go DPP7 initially. However, after talking to a large amount of people there does not seem to be a lot of widespread playerbase support for DPP7. MGBo3o5 will include 7 metagames, of which players will first alternate picking...
  • Like
  • Love

I should also say that I think no matter what the timer is, if we are adopting it then we should always use whatever 1v1 is using just to avoid confusion/frustrating edge cases. (They get to decide since they are the bigger community).
 
Last edited:
1. Replace BW with SV bo7 I think we're received a lot of negative feedback for BW from both returning and newer players and while there are definitely some people who enjoy the meta, I don't think its ideal to ship for this PL in its current state. I think PL5 is happening during a surge in interest in 2v2, with our inclusion in UM tours and our upcoming circuit, I think having an additional slot for our flagship format in our premier tour is the way to go. SV bo7 allows for a higher stakes slot for more experienced players while still giving room for newer players to grow. I think that the opportunity for player-base growth and development is better than including the tier that only Yuki and I Burgle Money are consistently good. While I do think that both BW and SV need tiering changes made, I think that SV is in a much better spot than BW. The main feedback I've heard from people playing BW is that every team is functionally the same, and from watching a lot of games during previous PLs/Pools, it seems like an accurate assessment. I think there's more value to be gained from a third SV slot than another tour where 4-5 teams muddle through BW.

2. 5 minute timer is good I think it should be longer so that it disproportionately benefits me but also I'm a normal human being and 5 minute game timer is a perfectly good rule.

Note:
Both SV and BW like hard need to be relooked at the second PL ends if not sooner.
 
After deliberating and receiving feedback, it has been decided that both will take effect:

SV Bo7 will replace BW in this upcoming PL.

The following rule is now taking effect across all 2v2 tournaments: For ALL series, timer will be set to 5 minutes in between games. That means once a challenge is sent, the person will have 5 minutes to respond to it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top