RBTT Random Battles Team Tour X: Pre-Tour Discussion Thread

[Nlsn]

Hosted by Nlsn, A Cake Wearing A Hat and Irpachuza​

It's RBTT season, everyone!​

The reason for this thread is to gather community feedback on our premier team tournament and explore suggestions for improvements in the upcoming edition.

Following the discussions and changes introduced in RBTT IX, we would like to revisit some of the plans previously outlined for RBTT X, as well as gather feedback on team composition, tournament organization and format selection. Needless to say, if you have any other ideas or suggestions that you want to share with us, feel free to do so!​

Team tournament

RBTT is first and foremost a team tournament. The success of each season depends on how well teams are formed, managed, and supported, making this a key area for feedback and improvement.

As outlined in last year's format discussion thread, the proposed structure for RBTT X consists of 10 teams, each with 14 starting players and 4 substitutes, expanding the total playerbase to 180.

We'd like to gather feedback on whether this structure remains the best approach. Here are a few things you can focus your suggestions on:

1. Number of teams (should we proceed with the planned expansion to 10 teams or retain 8?)
2. Number of starting slots (would 14 slots per team be preferable to the 16 used in RBTT IX?)
3. Number of managers per team (should the current maximum of 3 managers, with only 1 playing manager, remain?)
4. Activity wins and self-substitutions (without managerial intervention).

Tournament organization

Beyond team structure, there are a few logistical aspects of RBTT X worth discussing to improve the player and spectator experience. Community feedback on these points will help the staff make informed adjustments before the tournament begins.

As previously announced, RBTT X will be introducing an auction draft in place of the snake draft used in previous editions. We welcome feedback on how best to implement this change, particularly given the introduction of new franchises and player retains.

1. Auction structure and organization (budget, minimum bids, nomination process, etc.)
2. Manager self-buys (should managers have a fixed price in the auction, and if so, what should that price be?)
3. Player retains and new franchises ( how should retain prices be determined, and should the two new franchises receive a bonus to compensate for not having retain options?)

Format discussion

Last Year's Formats

• Gen 9 Random Battle - Best of 5
• Gen 9 Random Battle - Best of 3
• Gen 9 Random Battle - Best of 3
• Gen 8 Random Battle - Best of 3
• Gen 7 Random Battle - Best of 3
• Gen 6 Random Battle - Best of 3
• Gen 5 Random Battle - Best of 3
• Gen 4 Random Battle - Best of 3
• Gen 3 Random Battle - Best of 3
• Gen 2 Random Battle - Best of 3
• Gen 1 Random Battle - Best of 3
• Gen 9 Random Doubles Battle - Best of 3
• Gen 9 Random Doubles Battle - Best of 3
• Gen 9 Battle Stadium Singles Factory - Best of 3
• Gen 9 Hackmons Cup - Best of 3
• Random Roulette - Best of 3

RBTT IX saw several changes to the format lineup, including the addition of a second Random Doubles slot and the introduction of Random Roulette. Following the discussions last year, the tentative plan for RBTT X was to focus on main-generation Random Battles, Doubles, Hackmons Cup and Random Roulette.

With the potential expansion to 10 teams and reduction to 14 starting slots, we would like to revisit the format lineup and gather opinions on what should be represented in RBTT X.

Here are some points your suggestions could be centered around:

• Removal of formats (and slots)
• Substitution of formats
• Introduction of new formats (Champions?)
• The future of formats such as Battle Stadium Singles Factory and Random Roulette
• Modifying the type of series (e.g. Best of 3/5/7)

We encourage everyone to revisit last year's format discussion thread, particularly the concluding discussion and decisions surrounding RBTT IX and X, when proposing changes.

Let the discussions begin!​

Please remember to keep your proposals constructive and respectful. Submissions made in bad faith or intended to troll will not be considered. Final decisions rest at the discretion of the Random Battles staff.

 

[virae]

Making rby bo7 would be cool

 

[BigWes95]

I think that maybe having a 1 off 10 team tour for the 10th one is a good idea as a celebration, but in general it really should revert back to 8 teams after to not dilute the quality. I don't think RBEL was of particularly good quality last year from what I saw so I don't think its a case of two teams worth of rbtt quality players are not making the tour due to limited space.

Regarding the draft I dont really see the need to change it but I'm not really that fussed if it did. For playoffs I think the series should be bo5s to make it less prone to varience with the exception of gen 2 due to time taken. Maybe this could even just be finals only but I would like to see it.

Number of slots should stay the same but I think it should be looked into getting the subs doing more than twiddling their thumbs. Maybe have 2 or 3 sub slots playing each week with rotating formats and the team with the best subs record gets a bonus point or 2. If theres a better suggestion then go for it but imo something along those lines. This would give subs more to do and chances to impress managers into starting positions, whilst also adding a little spice to the race for playoffs.

We've been down this road several times before but I dont believe hackmons has a place in the tour and feels out of place to me. It's far too unbalanced and just doesn't fit in with the rest of the tour in my opinion. Imo chands, battle factory, mystery box or whatever is just a better fit for the tour. It seems to only keep its place due to a few mods playing it rather than actually warranting a place. 100% roulette should stay. It attracted a lot of the best rands players into it and in my opinion was a great addition. Dubs 2 could maybe be switched to vgc dubs or champions dubs

 

[DerpySuX]

I think keeping BSS Factory would be a good idea, and in our own BSSCL tournament players have vastly preferred playing it as a Best-of-5 so if we do decided to keep it that would also be a net positive change. I understand that BSS being in Pokémon Champions right now while BSSF is still played in SV, but the playerbase is very passionate and the format itself has a lot of skill expression, so I would still advocate for its inclusion.

 

[paysa]

thoughts

1. Number of teams

Should remain at 8 for a few reasons
- I don't believe there has been enough of a surge of new players (primarily from RBEL/Circuit) to justify the extra teams
- I don't believe the quality of players was as high in RBEL3 compared to RBEL2/RBEL1
- From observation, some of the last 4-6 members of a team (in terms of draft order) usually end up getting phased out from one RBTT to the next anyway (not including those who choose not to participate or the rarer cases where higher bids end up phased out) which naturally serves as a way to introduce newer players from both the rands and tours scene to RBTT
- Even if the all the points above were false, I think 10 teams sounds a lot more taxing than 8 - the thought of your team being out by the end of Week 6 (give or take) and still having to play 3 more weeks in an environment where there's virtually no prep to do and activity is mostly centred around games sounds unfun. It's also true that in 8 team tours it's usually the case that 6-8 teams have a chance by Week 7 which is part of the fun/keeping interest in a rands tour, but I feel that ratio/interest would be lower in a 10 team tour as we approach the end of regular season.

2. Number of starting slots

Felt neutral about this at first but after typing this up, I think I'd prefer 16 slots.

If 14, then same formats as last year but cutting two of BSSF/Roulette/Hackmons. My reason for this is I think all the formats represented in RBTT should be those in the circuit, since it gives all players (both newer ones and mainstays) a fair chance to prove themselves in a way that can directly translate to increasing their odds of getting drafted. This isn't to say the purpose of our circuit is solely to try and find/produce RBTT players but it's nice that it can directly feed into it.

Mostly down for cutting BSSF because 1) there is no open, 2) there is no ladder, 3) the playerbase feels much more isolated vs. other slots and 4) it's represented in BSS tours so people who enjoy the format can play it there. As for Hackmons, I just don't believe it's as competitive as most other formats but I don't feel that strongly about excluding it. Roulette was fine but I believe it should either be Best of 5 or cut - Roulette attracted some of our strongest players last year so it'd be nicer to see longer games in this slot and also so that we actually get a breadth of formats within a series as opposed to Gen 2 / Gen 2 / Gen 4 or something. I think the doubles community has expanded significantly in the past year to the point it warrants having 2 slots despite the Dubs 2 slot being a little weak last year. Would also lean Roulette if I had to pick one of it and HC as the 14th slot.

14 formats

Gen 9 (Best of 5)
Gen 9
Gen 9
Gen 8
Gen 7
Gen 6
Gen 5
Gen 4
Gen 3
Gen 2
Gen 1 (Best of 5)
Doubles
Doubles
Roulette (Best of 5) OR Hackmons

If 16, I'd still propose removing BSSF and instead adding something like B12P6 (whether it's Shared Power or not) - the B12P6 ladder is currently peaking at just under 1800, making it the 6th most active rands ladder after 9, Doubles, 7, 6 and Champions. I personally know both a lot of rands and tours players that really enjoy this format, I think it has a lower barrier to entry wrt learning it, doesn't require managers to pretty much exclusively draft from a select pool of 8-12 players like with certain formats and generally allows for more lineup versatility. Could be argued that this should be a Champions slot too - wouldn't be my choice but not against it either.

16 formats

Gen 9 (Best of 5)
Gen 9
Gen 9
Gen 8
Gen 7
Gen 6
Gen 5
Gen 4
Gen 3
Gen 2
Gen 1 (Best of 5)
Doubles
Doubles
Roulette (Best of 5)
Hackmons
B12P6 OR Champions

3. Number of managers per team / activity wins / self substitutions

Doesn't matter much, both 2 or 3 is fine since we introduced the RBTT discord and the ability to self substitute, both of which were great changes. 3 somewhat dilutes player pool but also alleviates some of the burden in auction when timezones/availability don't fully align so I think it's probably fine to keep it but again, don't care much either way.

4. Auction structure

I think both auction and snake are both fine, don't feel that strongly about this. In the event we do proceed with auction, I believe the following should be implemented:
- Up to two manager self-buys: 15k for the first, 20k for the second - prices aren't exact but generally speaking, if managers are both willing to self-buy then chances are one of them is probably pre-Round 5 quality in snake terms and the other isn't. Either way a higher price for a second manager buy is standard across tours on Smogon.
- There should be an upper limit on team sizes to disincentivise people drafting a ridiculous number of players, many of which will likely get no playtime - in the event we go with 14 players, we should have 20 players max, and if 16 players then 22 max.
- Retains (if we choose to implement this) for this edition should be based on last years draft order roughly. R1-4 = 20k, R5-8 = 15k, anything beyond is 10k or something along those lines. We can then adopt a more normal pricing structure in the following year in line with other tours on the site.

On franchises... I don't feel that positive towards it currently. Some of the things that give RBTT its identity is the snake draft and the introduction of (some) fresh teams every year, and losing both in the same year just feels kinda unfortunate. I don't anticipate some of last years managers to return so, in the event teams remain at 8, will all prospective managers be forced to pick one of the 8 mascots from last year? Is there any capacity to change this? It's not that I'm inherently against franchises but I haven't really found the arguments compelling yet.

One of the bigger ones seem to be that it alleviates the burden on the artist team but given that most teams will not be reusing the same assets as last year and that RBTT runs at the same time as SPL I don't think it helps much? If we want to reduce burden on artists, we should first look at shifting the date of the tour a bit and assigning managers a lot earlier so artists have more time in general. Maybe even add a break week in between auction and start of Week 1 for PRs or other fluff pieces whilst artists get some time to breathe.

These are my current thoughts on the topics proposed - my opinions may change as I see more discussion or new topics are introduced. Looking forward to reading other posts and thanks to hosts for once again listening to the community, appreciate the work you guys do!

 

[Slikkles]

Here are my propositions:
- keep 8 teams.
Most people who advocate for 10 teams I believe aren't the ones who played in officials. From my experience, once your team is probably out/ out or even doing baddly the cord dies down very quickly.
You can be sure that some cords will in general not be active in RBTT because it's rands and there isn't much prep. At best you train and warm up a bit, at worst you just rfn and that's it for the week.10 teams will only make this issue worse.
I also agree with Paysa that the level of RBEL 3 doesn't warrant an increase in the number of total players. RBEL 1 had a lot of new faces, RBEL 2 probably the most competitive and RBEL 3 felt like a major step down (speaking as a manager).

- go down to 14 slots.
I think that this one depends on what you aim to do. In the past, RBTT was a bit of a meme tour in the sens you had random formats who weren't very competitive. However it was fun.
I'm more of a tryhard kinda person so I'm more inclined to a more competitive format where skill is put on an equal or higher value than pure fun. Here is my ideal format:

14 slots, my ideal

Gen 9 (Best of 5)
Gen 9
Gen 8
Gen 7
Gen 6
Gen 5
Gen 4
Gen 3
Gen 2
Gen 1 (Best of 5)
Doubles
Doubles
BSSF
Roulette (Best of 5)

I'm not going to lie, I felt like SV doesn't deserve 3 slots with Roulette added. We saw that a lot of the best swiss knife random players went into roulette. I think that diluded the pool quite a bit for SV with a drop off in quality of starters.
I agree with paysa thar Roulette should be BO5.
In my ideal world, we would remove hackmons for good from RBTT. I know it requires some form of skill and you can creat the elements of suprise with it. However nearly every single pokemon format requires some form of skill. The question is how much of it is skill and the other sheer luck. Random battles in general adds by nature some uncertainty to it and hackmons brings it to a point where you have decently high odds to be screwed turn 1 by team gen. The format isn't very competitive and I would rather keep it as a 'for fun' format in the circuit than in a tour that in my eyes should aim to show the best quality of random battles. I'm sure this isn't a hot take for most people who play in RBTT but I know that some people in the staff are huge Hackmons defender. I ask you to please listen to what this community wants.
I'm a fan of BSSF, I think it's one of the more competitive random formats. For that reason as well as having pretty good quality players last year I would keep it. I can however see why people want it removed and those are fair arguments. If staff doesn't want to remove hackmons I would unfortunately remove BSSF.

- go down to 2 managers.
I don't know why we went up to 3 managers last year. With players being able to substitute themselves in, I don't see a reason for it to come back again. I saw a negative aspect to it which was that some of the 3rd managers had 0 rands experience and were if we're honest just there because they're friends with a guaranteed manager pair. For that reason and for reasons I mention below I would just make it 2 managers.

- both auctions/ snake draft works.
I feel less strongly about auctions that last year. Both work for me. However to prevent broken manager core in both cases I would still only allow one self buying manager.
In the case of an auction, that self buy would be between 15k.
In the case of a snake draft that self buy should be as it is, round 5.

- add retains.
Retains are one of the most fun things. It can foster a history to teams and we should promote good drafting by managers.
If it's auctions, the standard 10k if the player was under 7.5k is good and +3k if it's more than 10k total.
If it's snake I would do imagining 14 starters +4 subs that a retain will be taken at the 10th round if brought round 13 or later last year. If brought earlier than rounds 13 it's +3 rounds earlier (subject to change to adapt it to what can be considered good).

- keep franchises.
Yes, they creat an identity to the tour.

- make manager sign ups go up earlier.
So that artists got more time to work on the custom avatars and are less in a time constraint with SPL going on at the same time. The player sign ups would still be at the same time ie a week break between manager and player sign ups.

- change the prize.

With banners being distributed to basically every tour now, I would ask to differentiate RBTT winners with the red version of the banner. The circuit no longer has it and RBTT is the biggest tour sign up wise of the whole website. The only one who comes close is ADPL as it's a tour for newcomers.
Since RBTT isn't an official but the biggest tournament of the most popular PS format, I would add this to differentiate it.

Thanks for reading!

 

[IcyPenguin2]

1. I think we should stick with 8 teams, managing both rbel 2 and 3 i can vouch for the fact that rbel 3 had much lower player quality and i'd expect a lot less of them to make rbtt this year. I think moving to 10 teams would dilute pools and hurt competition.
2. I dont feel very strongly either way, but I do want to advocate for keeping bssf. Bssf is a popular format, so much so that its inclusion in bsscl this year moved up to 2 slots, its a popular and competitive format that a lot of people have fun playing, and i think it should be included. I also think that the dubs 2 pool last year was pretty horrible, dubs community has gotten better this year but i still think that adding a 2nd slot doesn't make a lot of sense. I also believe that roulette was not a good addition to this tour since it diluted a lot of top players from other pools, i think it should be removed for this edition.
3. I dont think anyone realistically even needs 3 managers, but assuming thats not changing i think it makes sense to let 2/3 selfbuy, paysa 's idea of 15k for the first 20k for the 2nd makes a lot of sense imo
4. last year was great, big fan of the combined rbtt server from last year for people to just interact, hang out, and chat about the tour

Not sure if this is up for debate anymore but as an auction supporter from last year i'm against it this year, i think snake draft is an important part of rbtt's charm as a tour and we should keep it that way
On franchising I was another supporter of it last year but i dont think its a good change for the tour, i think part of the rbtt charm again is having those rotating teams every year

Thank you hosts for putting this thread out, excited for another edition of my favorite tour on the site!

 

[mike]

- go down to 2 managers.
I don't know why we went up to 3 managers last year. With players being able to substitute themselves in, I don't see a reason for it to come back again. I saw a negative aspect to it which was that some of the 3rd managers had 0 rands experience and were if we're honest just there because they're friends with a guaranteed manager pair. For that reason and for reasons I mention below I would just make it 2 managers

Click to collapse...

I don't quite understand how this is a negative, sounds like its neutral in most cases with positive upsides. Sounds like your argument is literally "I don't get it and there was mild nepotism, therefore remove." 3rd managers help provide redundancy and bridge potential time zone gaps in manager cores while not seeing tangible downsides last year. Anyways that's not why im here.

Remove Randdubs 2

The quality drop of dubs 2 games last year compared to dubs 1 games was... notable to say the least. It was a good experiment to try out, but unfortunately the talent just isn't there to slot 16 dubs players + 8 subs compared to SV's 24 + 8 (usually more, because there is a much greater overlap between oldgen players and sv than dubs and other rands tiers). I don't feel strongly about Champions or BSS as formats, though I'd advocate for its inclusion in the tour as Smogon seems to be pushing toward official formats with their focus on Champions VGC potentially making it into SPL, and just general vibe shift around the website trending toward Champions. Would love to see their inclusion here. Also hackmons is just... not a real format, therefore I'd propose:

Proposed Format

• Gen 9 Random Battle - Best of 5
• Gen 9 Random Battle - Best of 3
• Gen 8 Random Battle - Best of 3
• Gen 7 Random Battle - Best of 3
• Gen 6 Random Battle - Best of 3
• Gen 5 Random Battle - Best of 3
• Gen 4 Random Battle - Best of 3
• Gen 3 Random Battle - Best of 3
• Gen 2 Random Battle - Best of 3
• Gen 1 Random Battle - Best of 3
• Gen 9 Random Doubles Battle - Best of 3
• Gen 9 Battle Stadium Singles Factory - Best of 3
• Champions Random Battle - Best of 3
• Random Roulette - Best of 3

 

[Click>Think]

The nerds above me have already typed up good explanations so i'm just gonna write my thoughts and state a bit more in areas I differ:

Number of teams: 8. A 9 week regular season sucks and drags on too long

Number of starting slots: 16 is fine, ideally I'd like to boot HC but I understand the Legacy of Our Founding RBTT Fathers argument so sure, keep it. That said, BSSF booted for b12p6 would be good for reasons already stated under Paysa's thoughts above.

16 slots World

Gen 9 Random Battle - Best of 5
Gen 9 Random Battle - Best of 3
Gen 9 Random Battle - Best of 3
Gen 8 Random Battle - Best of 3
Gen 7 Random Battle - Best of 3
Gen 6 Random Battle - Best of 3
Gen 5 Random Battle - Best of 3
Gen 4 Random Battle - Best of 3
Gen 3 Random Battle - Best of 3
Gen 2 Random Battle - Best of 3
Gen 1 Random Battle - Best of 5
Gen 9 Random Doubles Battle - Best of 3
Gen 9 Random Doubles Battle - Best of 3
Gen 9 b12p6 - Best of 3
Gen 9 Hackmons Cup - Best of 3
Random Roulette - Best of 5

If we go to 14 slots (a mistake IMO), then cut BSSF and 1 SV Bo3 slot

14 slot World

Gen 9 Random Battle - Best of 5
Gen 9 Random Battle - Best of 3
Gen 8 Random Battle - Best of 3
Gen 7 Random Battle - Best of 3
Gen 6 Random Battle - Best of 3
Gen 5 Random Battle - Best of 3
Gen 4 Random Battle - Best of 3
Gen 3 Random Battle - Best of 3
Gen 2 Random Battle - Best of 3
Gen 1 Random Battle - Best of 5
Gen 9 Random Doubles Battle - Best of 3
Gen 9 Random Doubles Battle - Best of 3
Gen 9 Hackmons Cup - Best of 3
Random Roulette - Best of 5

For 16 slots, would support a max team size of 21. For 14 slots, max team size of 18

Number of managers per team: 2. Use the 15k for playing manager 1, 20k for playing manager 2 format from other team tours. Works well. The third manager genuinely adds zero value aside from Elite Vibes if they're cool (which ig is worth something but I digress)

Acts and such: keep self-substitutions, great idea. I support the Haunterboy28s Acters of Smogon as time is valuable but also strongly support games being played since that's why we are here I assume + this gives subs their chance to be a Hero so its a win-win all around

Auction structure and organization: I'll edit in a real opinion here after min/max team sizes are confirmed

Player retains and new franchises: nah for franchises. Yes for player retains with a cap at 2. Price structure: Round 1-4 last year = 20k, Round 5-8 = 15k, Round 9 onwards = 10k


Miscellaneous: Make rby rands bo5, BSSF (if kept) bo5, and roulette bo5

Looking forward to HOPEFULLY another great year of RBTT fun.

I'm Epic

 

[snorlax142857]

most of what I want to say is covered above already, and I don't have particular input on auction format, so here is what remains

Keep 8 teams. 9 weeks regular season is a bit too much, while 2 pools of 5 teams each could become unbalanced.

Managers idrc 2 or 3. We should have a third manager or self-subs to deal with these larger teams, but I don't have a strong opinion about which one or both.

Formats: I think either 14 or 16 slots is justifiable, it's more about the formats themselves than the total number:
- Roulette: unique, but draws out top players from other slots. Other rands tours (WCoR, Slam) are already main gen heavy (something for every gen 8-1 and extra emphasis on 9) and this just exacerbates it. We could go all the way and make this Bo5 though.
- BSSF: unique, I'd like to keep it (Bo5 ofc) iff there are at least 8 top players. I'm not sure there were in some past years, but things may have changed.
- HC: this is both a skillful format and more luck-based than most others. I know the math shows making it Bo5 will only improve competitiveness a bit, but maybe it just needs that bit?
- Dubs2: it is simultaneously true that a few of the top dubs players are a bit better than the rest, and that there is more than enough demand and quality for a dubs2 slot on par with some forgettable oldgens or SV3. Conflicts of interest aside, I think dubs fully deserves 2 slots (we also deserve swiss instead of a single elim slam open, but that's another story). Judging from RDTT, champions (not fully stabilized) or vgc (too matchupy) aren't great alternatives for just regular dubs. How we solve the "problem" of there being a stronger and a weaker dubs slot is another question though.
- SV3: we should remove this before roulette it if we drop to 14 slots.

 

[rabbit13]

We've been down this road several times before but I dont believe hackmons has a place in the tour and feels out of place to me. It's far too unbalanced and just doesn't fit in with the rest of the tour in my opinion.

Click to collapse...

We've been down this road before, but I believe that Hackmons is statistically the most competitive format, and it is so balanced and fits in perfectly with the rest of the tour in my opinion.

THAT BEING SAID: want to make things more competitively viable/balanced/interesting with Hackmons? Consider making HC roulette style so that it can roll Gen 9/8/7/1/dubs.

 

[jackofspadesman]

Add Champions Doubles #ChubsOutForChubs

 

[PrinceOfAllTacos]

Here are my thoughts on some of the topics

Formats: I would keep hc its been a staple and it's not as bad as people say it is its different but its just as possible to be consistently good at hc as it is any other format just look at fragments platty p&s luchi etc. I would strongly advocate for dropping second dubs the quality of play plummeted in second slot i would replace it with either champions or b12p6.

Managers: i don't particularly care about the number both 2 or 3 would be fine with me but I would push for 2 player managers to be allowed now that it's an auction and you can price it accordingly. I would also push for self subs it just makes everything easier for all involved.

Teams: i think 8 teams is perfect we'll end up adding more players this year just by virtue of swapping to auction with managers have use their full budget inevitably adding more than minimum.

 

[Paycard]

Bring back battle factory

 

[drifttrick]

I think we should keep 8 teams. Avoids hassle with two teams being unable to retain, and I agree with others' points about RBEL.

14 slots would probably be my vote, but I don't mind 16. If we do cut two formats, I think BSSF should be on the chopping block just because it, to my knowledge, isn't played as much as the other formats and is in neither WCoR nor Circuit. I think Gen 9 bo3 #3 should stay if we do stick to 8 teams because the level of play in that slot seems to be reasonably strong from my observations (and it's the most popular by a lot), but I'd be fine to see randdubs #2, HC, or roulette go.

I slightly prefer allowing 3 managers, but I strongly believe multiple playing managers should be allowed. It's quite annoying to have a situation where RBTT players can't manage with each other because they both want to play. I'm fine to cap playing managers at 2 even if 3 managers are allowed to discourage bringing along yet another strong player as a "3rd manager."

Allow self-subs to help managers with tz problems.

 

[soTsoT]

Teams: Keep it at 8. Rands activity has only declined compared to last year, really no reason to increase to 10

Franchises/Retains: I've never been a fan of either, I think not every team starting with the same opportunities in draft is a really stupid concept. Why would the best player of a format not even be available to draft to anyone but one team, just because they drafted them last year? Possibly even with a different managers, so their privilige doesn't even come from their own achievement.

Also, to me one of the best aspects of rbtt is to land in a different teamenvironment every year, and retains actively work against that. I was a Hoopa for my first 2 rbtts, and while I had a good time in both of them, I was very glad to not be a hoopa for a third year in a row. Retains also establish what feels like "inner circles", where everyone already knows each other beforehand, which can be pretty intimidating to newer players.

Slots/Formats: I don't have a strong opinion on 14 vs 16, I think there are arguments for both. What I do really want to avoid though is RBTT turning into WCOR, where every year 1-2 non standard formats get cut until you are only left with gen1-9 singles + 9dubs. I think this makes sense for a regionbased tournament like WCOR, where a lot of regions will struggle to fill out their roster with only rands players, and keeping the tournament limited to the standardformats makes it easier to bring in non-rands players, as those formats tend to be easier to pick up.

For RBTT, this argument is invalid, and frankly I think being closer and closer to the same set of formats is both incredibly boring and also takes away the unqiue identies of each tournament, with WCOR becoming just regional-RBTT. I think Roulette, Hackmons and BSSF should all stay, and frankly I think there is room for another non-standard format like VGC Rands (over Dubs 2) or B12P6 Shared Power (over Singles 3). Singles 3 should be wiped anyway, I think Roulette attracts a lot of the same playerbase as gen9 and after 4 year of SV the novelty of it being the current gen definitely has worn off.

I don't feel like Hackmons needs any serious defending as long as gen1 mainers are out here advocating for bo7 in their tier because its too coinflippy otherwise or something. Make HC bo5 if thats a concern, heck make it bo7 in case gen1 gets their wish. I'm sure most hackmons palyers wouldn't be against that either.

Probably not a consideration for this tournament, but I do think we should atleast consider walking away from gen1-9 singles being 100% fixed slots. I think the amount of people who actually enjoy playing gen2 AND are able to play it at RBTT level can be counted with one hand. We excluded singles formats in the past because we knew they were unpopular, and while the whole thing has definitely become more serious since then, I don't think keeping a format around that hardly anyone actually wants to play helps the overall competetiveness of the tournament. Here's what my ideal formats would look like for 14/16 players respectively.

14 players

Gen 9 Random Battle - Best of 5
Gen 9 Random Battle - Best of 3
Gen 8 Random Battle - Best of 3
Gen 7 Random Battle - Best of 3
Gen 6 Random Battle - Best of 3
Gen 5 Random Battle - Best of 3
Gen 4 Random Battle - Best of 3
Gen 3 Random Battle - Best of 3
Gen 1 Random Battle - Best of 5
Gen 9 Random Doubles Battle - Best of 3
Gen 9 Random Doubles Battle - Best of 3
Gen 9 Hackmons Cup - Best of 5
Random Roulette - Best of 5
BSSF - Best of 5

16 players

Gen 9 Random Battle - Best of 5
Gen 9 Random Battle - Best of 3
Gen 8 Random Battle - Best of 3
Gen 7 Random Battle - Best of 3
Gen 6 Random Battle - Best of 3
Gen 5 Random Battle - Best of 3
Gen 4 Random Battle - Best of 3
Gen 3 Random Battle - Best of 3
Gen 2 Random Battle - Best of 3
Gen 1 Random Battle - Best of 5
Gen 9 Random Doubles Battle - Best of 3
Gen 9 Random Doubles Battle - Best of 3
Gen 9 Hackmons Cup - Best of 5
Random Roulette - Best of 5
BSSF - Best of 5
B12P6 Shared Power - Best of 3

Managers: I think it should always be 2, in my experience manager trios end up being 2 actual managers and one guy whos also there because why not, might aswell use the slot right? With self-substitutes being possible I don't think there really is a good argument for 3 managers.

 

[meamPearl]

Hi nb gonna read this but

• Removal of formats (and slots)
• The formats last year are fine as is and if you really wanted to bring in Champions (champions can go hell imo) then you can axe the third SV rands slot (because why do we have 3 of those again) or maybe the second dubs slot even though the player quality seemed alright for dubs based on last year (and in rbel)
• Substitution of formats
• The only thing I think might be even worth subbing that isn't listened above is BSSF and even then I feel like it's a diverse enough format that if warrants staying in
• Introduction of new formats (Champions?)
• Champions can go hell we all know it's getting added anyway
• The future of formats such as Battle Stadium Singles Factory and Random Roulette
• BSSF is gonna die by the time genuinely 10 rolls around anyway most likely and Random Roulette I think had enough of like an all-around effect vibe to keep it as like the main event of sorts (also meaning we don't need 3 SV rands slots since some of the gen 9 players played roulette last year)
• Modifying the type of series (e.g. Best of 3/5/7)
• #RBYBO5

Also we don't need 10 damn teams idt anyone wants a 9 week regular season if the rands schedule's already filled with like 11 circuit tours and stuff so 16 slots is also perfectly fine imo bc that's 128 ppl - player-managers

Also HC is perfectly fine and has a basis of skill involved with the format, especially if you remove wonder guard so removing HC would highkey be a mistake in terms of letting an actual variety of formats in the tour

 

[Zoyotte]

Vouching for a BSSF slot, it is a well represented tier, and have had been played in two big team tournaments (BSSCL, LER (Spanish's Rands TeamTour), we've seen a mix of emerging new names and players who played RBTT before in those two tournaments, it is a great tier that despite still being in SV, is still loved by a lot of people and became more represented in tournaments despite Champions came this year.

BSSCL had 2 BSS slots (12 players per week), and LER 1 slot (8 players), it aint the "BSS players who want to play rands" tier anymore, but a tier with a real representation and community that can also be boosted by solid SV BSS players. I would be down to cut an SV BO3 tier for this.

It is a COMPETITIVE tier that have gathered a real playerbase along the years, thanks to this tournament and I think this year would be no exception.

 

[blittius]

I just hope everybody can enjoy themselves and have a good time.

 

[R1C3M4N]

If Battle Factory has million fans, then I'm one of them.
If Battle Factory has one fan, then I'm THAT ONE.
If Battle Factory has no fans, that means I'm dead.

FREE BATTLE FACTORY

 

[Shadows4]

3 gen 9 slots feels extreme due to how old gen 9 has gotten. One of the three gen 9 slots could be replaced with a slot for champions to represent new gen better

Ambivalent about 2 gen 9 dubs slots

Keep hc

Prefer 16 slots

Bssf is fun to watch so I don’t mind keeping my it

BO9 gen 2

Edit: Also roulette was fun, and drew a lot of good talent, so keep

Also franchises intuitively feel a little weird, although there was a really good energy last year. Idk if that was cause of franchises or it just happened to be my team or that year though.

 

[hammy3581]

1. Number of teams
8 is for sure the play. RBEL quality seemed too low to warrant an expansion, and 9 weeks of rands feels like a slog for the 3-4 teams that know they aren't making playoffs halfway through the tour.


2. Number of starting slots
Mostly neutral about 14 vs 16 slots, but I would prefer 16. I don't see a reason for us needing to slim down and doing so just feels like we're making people annoyed for no reason. However if it is decided to remove some formats / exchange them for something different, here's my ranking on which would be the best to change:

1. BSSF. I think having a format that has neither a ladder nor a tour in our circuit is just odd. Kind of feels like it gives older established players free spots while there really isn't any way for newer people in the rands community to expand into it.

2. Second Dubs. To preface, I'm not a dubs player so second dubs should 100% be decided based on what the dubs community thinks of it. But I was definitely hearing some gripes about it being lower quality than expected last year, and some posts in this thread seem to second this. Plus, removing it doesn't completely wipe out a player base from rbtt, which is a plus.

3. Roulette. I was a proponent of it last year and was frankly disappointed by how it turned out, both from how hosts decided to implement it and game quality. If hosts want to make 0 changes to it compared to last year, then I think it would be better off getting removed just so it doesn't splinter the gen 9 bo5 playerbase.

Changing Roulette

I dont like how roulette (which I think most people thought would replace bo5 as the premier tier) just boiled down to challenging the roulette format 3x. At the very least if nothing else I say here gets implemented, roulette should be bo5.

However I do think roulette can be implemented better. One possible method could simply be hosts using !roll to get three (or five if bo5 is agreed upon) random formats before each team sends lineups, allowing them to slot in the best person for each weeks tiers instead of leaving it all up to luck. This can hopefully lead to more of people switching around to different tiers week by week, which will hopefully means that subs have better chances to actually play. This also allows for us to add additional formats to roulette outside of the traditional 1-9. I for one think adding doubles to the pool would add an interesting wrinkle of strategy on how to slot each week, since the average singles player may be less well versed in doubles, but if you put a doubles player in they might be a bit weaker in the two other tiers (also if we get rid of dubs two, this could slightly make up for it.) This isn't limited to doubles either, if Champions rands or b12p6 get added to the tour this year, they could be solid additions to roulette as well. And in a similar vein, if a tier is disliked enough (like gen 2) it can easily be removed without much hassle. The format I've described above is probably the simplest way to add some more skill to roulette, just requiring the hosts to spend 30 seconds on a roll every saturday (or just getting all of weeks 1-7 set before week 1 starts.)

My second idea would be captains picking and banning formats before each week, similar to how we do it for circuit playoffs. This would probably work best if roulette is bo5, but I'm sure it could work with a bo3 tier as well. This offers captains even more agency in how roulette looks on a given week, and maximizes the odds of getting great players in tiers they are good at playing. The main downside to this is how pick ban can be very time consuming, and I'm sure by week 4 there will already be an issue with a team being far too slow due to timezone differences and delaying the week.

My last idea is relatively simple. Every week both teams send in 1 or 2 formats while the last format is either neutral gen 9, or randomly rolled. This circumvents the issue of people holding up weeks by sending in formats too late, since both teams have all of saturday and sunday to send, and hosts can set the deadline to be before the week even ends. This would once again give more agency towards the captains of each team, allowing for much better games. I will say that this does kind of go against the idea of roulette so perhaps it should be renamed, or we should go with my first idea to better capture the "spirit" of roulette.

No matter which option is deemed to be best, they all seem to have two distinct advantages compared to the current roulette
1) They allow for greater strategy from captains each week
2) They allow us to diversify the formats however much we want past the standard 1-9 tiers

3. Number of managers per team and self substitutions

2 managers seems fine. It's randbats, idk what we need 3 managers for now that self subs exist (which definitely should stay.) At best a 3rd manager is doing nothing, at worst you're just removing talent from the player pool.

Miscellaneous:
Get rid of franchises imo. The main rational I've heard for it has been letting artists reuse assets to get CAs out quicker, but honestly I don't even see that as an advantage. Having similar looking avatars compared to last year in a quicker amount of time just feels worse compared to new and fresh ideas / looks while just giving the artists enough time to make them. Just add an additional week between manager selection and draft (and maybe even give the artists until the end of w1 of the tour) instead of pushing out less inspired ideas.

 

[R1C3M4N]

My thoughts on roulette

I thought roulette was a great addition and allows for the strongest clickers to showcase their ability, that being said, I agree with hammy that it could’ve been implemented better, but I don’t agree with any of his proposals. All of the pick/ban is too complicated, and adding dubs would just dilute the slot’s quality as teams have to decide whether to slot a better dubs player or singles player (it’d be singles and we’d see some low quality dubs gameplay). I think the two things that could improve the slot to give it more variety are

1. bo5 would increase the tiers that could be showcased in a given set.
2. No repeats allowed. Instead of just challenging the format, roll in pms beforehand and reroll on dupes, then just challenge in the tier that gets rolled. This has the added benefit of allowing calcdex to work.

I’d be in favor of one or both of these proposals to go through as a way to make things more interesting. I’d be ok with repeats if 5 games were played instead of 3.

Thoughts on bssf

I don’t think bssf should be included in this iteration. bssf and dubs are by far the formats that deviate the most from the rest of the formats played, which makes fielding a sub harder too. Most other slots except for dubs you can just put in a generally competent player in and be alright, but bssf is pretty different. Dubs at least has an established playerbase with many viable options for subs, bssf just has the top ~6 players and the quality isn’t there otherwise.

FREE BATTLE FACTORY

while there isn’t much of an established playerbase, many tiers players do have an interest in playing battle factory, and a good clicker will have a much easier time picking up bf compared to bssf or dubs. battle factory is a great way to grow the community with quality players, and that should be one of the main goals of rbtt.

 

[Optidox]

Why dubs 2 is good, actually (my opinions on other things forthcoming)

1. Two slots are inevitable

More than anything else, dubs 2 is an inevitability. Gen 9 Random Doubles is a beloved format, so much so that it has either the second or third most activity of any format on PS at any given time. Gen 10 is on the horizon, and with how popular gen 9 doubles is, it would be upsetting to see it unceremoniously dumped from RBTT next year. Champions Randdubs, the newest randoms format, already has a top slot over 1800, putting it well into the upper half of rands formats in popularity. This is evidence that at least two randdubs formats can be popular at once. Gen 10 randdubs, once available, will get a slot due to convention. Losing gen 9 would make the majority of dubs players pretty unhappy given how the community has flourished under the format. Why should dubs not get to keep its highly designed, highly polished premiere format in RBTT when the gen ticks over when singles gets to keep every single format? Why go back to one slot this year just to likely go back to two slots next year?

2. Dubs 2 did not suck last year, and to whatever degree it did, that had as much to do with drafting choices as the quality of existing players.

A vocal minority of randdubs players (many of whom are more prominent in tiers) tend to play in most randdubs tours but publicly treat the format like an easy, low-skill matchup simulator that very few players are actually half-decent at. Frankly, I find this attitude exhausting. Randdubs is *hard*. The decision space is huge, the macro is tricky, and the tactics can get very niche. Because games are shorter, every mistake seems larger, leading people to misjudge how badly someone actually played. It's not a coincidence that players like ionnss, Marco, and soT consistently have wildly positive tournament winrates. They are exceptionally skilled in a very skill-intensive format. Treating everyone who makes more mistakes than those three in high-pressure games as if they're just bad demeans these skilled players and the format as a whole. The slot with Dinis, Freya, etc. starting most weeks was by no reasonable measure a truly weak slot. To whatever degree it was, well, I can name at least 5 players who didn't play in last RBTT that I'd be happy to field in dubs 2 this year. Also, to the latter point, well, one team literally tried to put a player who didn't want to play dubs in their dubs 1 slot. Room for improvement, perhaps.

3. Slot quality isn't even the right question, and if it were, we're listening to the wrong people to answer that question.

Every strong randdubs player knows that the top slot 1 players are substantially better than the slot 2 players. No top randdubs player actually thinks the slot 2 games were bad as such (discussed in randdubs cord with ions, sot, freya, marco, dinis, etc.). People who hardly play the format should not be opining confidently on game quality. Don't we care more about what something adds to the tournament and to the community? And to that end...

4. The randdubs community is a hugely active, growing, and positively engaged segment of the randoms community.

Most importantly, randdubs is still the second most popular ladder on PS (I cannot overemphasize this). Unlike last year, though, there exists a random doubles server with over 130 members. This year, we ran two forum tours, including a full randdubs team tour with >60 players, plus three in-server non-live tours and three live tours. These had the dual effects of giving lots of players lots of practice and introducing new players to the format, some of whom have become quite strong. Why should one of the only actively growing sections of the rands community be punished with less representation? During this discussion last year, people pointed out that if random doubles is so popular now, why don't we have our own spaces and tournaments? Well, now we have the 2nd biggest ladder and a ton of tour activity. We are constantly trying to get both existing players in other formats and new players we find on the ladder interested in competitive rands. We want to be heavily involved in the continued growth of the rands community, but if now isn't the time to solidify randdubs as a two-slot format to singles' 12-14 slots in the rands community's premier tour, then why should we keep trying?

5. All the additional tour activity should help managers make more informed draft decisions and have a clearer view of who is really involved and who really has the chops to hold their own. This one is self-explanatory.

 

[BigWes95]

I really don't get this "roulette is taking the best players away from other slots" point that people are trying to make as if this is some kind of negative. No slot is really a priority over others so if strong players want to play it then that's a positive and more reason to include it in my opinion. Imagine arguing the opposite as a reason that a format should be included like saying the best players don't want to play hackmons therefore we should definitely keep it because it means higher quality in the other slots. It just sounds completely insane.

Obviously the gen 9 bo5 has generally been seen as the premiere slot but I don't see an issue with the best players wanting to go on another slot instead. It just shows that theres a high level of skill/interest in it which is exactly what you want in a format.

Also as a side note I didn't mention in my original post but I am definitely a fan of 16 slots. There are a lot of formats all with pretty high levels of interest so cutting just seems completely pointless and will just annoy people