Metagame A Modest Proposal

[tcr]

As everyone knows, some of the more basic rules and central tenets of Little Cup have been that Little Cup must feature 1st form unevolved Pokemon, at Level 5 or below. This has stuck true with the metagame since its inception as an official Smogon metagame with its induction/revival from 4th generation back in 2009. Now, scholars are still deciphering the old texts in Closed Forums but the general consensus is that Little Cup is intended to be based upon a cup in Pokemon Stadium 2. In this mode, players may use either newly hatched pokemon or pokemon caught in the wild, but the level cannot exceed 5 and they must be pre-evolved Pokemon.

Now, why is it that "5" seems to be the arbitrary ceiling? The answer lies in early mechanics in breeding. Up until Generation 5, Pokemon's earliest levels would be at lowest level 2 in the wild, and if hatched level 5. So the idea here seems to be baby Pokemon that were just hatched (irrelevantly at level 5). If Little Cup was strictly playing in line with game theme, then past generation 5 the level cap should have been 1, as that is most consistent with the ideas of Little Cup's aesthetic, freshly hatched Pokemon. This has, quite obviously, not been the case. As such one can see that Little Cup's core policies have been subjectively applied to keep the Level 5 rule out of tradition from the previous generation. Thus, the Level 5 rule is arguably meaningless to the core identity of Little Cup, and is simply a practice carried out from tradition. Now, I argue that tradition is by no means a way to run a tier. The whole tiering process defies tradition in favor of change, and the idea of a competitive metagame similarly contradicts the essence of tradition.

If one is going to defend Level 5, one must have reasons for doing so. In a generation where freshly hatched Pokemon come from Level 1, it is as arbitrary to denote the ceiling at level 5 as it is with level 4. Level 5 is no different from having the Pokemon be level 10, as it is level 20, as it is not the baseline for the Pokemon nor is it the maximum, it is simply in between. When one inquires about the reasons, they scarcely exist outside of a abstract perception of how level 5 is integral with the phenomena of Little Cup because it has always been so. I argue that a viewpoint that Level 6 should be the cap would hold just as much weight as a cap at Level 5.

Now, if Level 5 is considered arbitrary in modern Pokemon games, then I say that one should stay consistent. The cons of a Level 5 metagame are that it further complicates movepool illegalities as well as EVing Pokemon to a point where it has the potential to discourage newcomers from truly attempting to involve themselves with the metagame. That is not to say that Little Cup is in any way dying or losing membership, but that the popularity of the metagame could be improved if changed. If one considers Level 5 to be a subjectively based ruling, then these illegalities, odd damage rolls, rarely filled EV spreads, and unnecessary movepool restrictions (rip sludge wave gastly) are self imposed, and for what? The offset that is gained is that the Pokemon are at Level 5, but Level 5 holds no meaning. If Little Cup truly wished to remain "Little,"whatever that entails, then one should aspire to lower the maximum level to level 1, to best represent freshly hatched Pokemon. This still holds the same issues of weird EV spreads, movepool illegalities, and possibly even more exaggerated damage rolls, but at the very least it is not arbitrarily picked and actually reflects ideas presented from cartridge.

Now since lowering the level could be a solution to maintaining a cohesive identity, subsequently raising the level to the maximum should do the same. This is the argument that I would like to make, that the pros of raising the level of Little Cup to level 100 would far outweigh the cons of losing tradition and familiarity. At level 100 the stat distribution would be much more spread out, diversifying different Pokemon from each other. For example, Mienfoo and Archen would no longer speed tie, with very clear differences between Pokemon's speed depending on if they have base 65, base 70, or base 71. EV spreads would finally be much easier to understand, especially for players transitioning from a usage based tier. You longer have to perform mild arithmetic using a Levi formula in order to calculate your spread, or use the Prem method of moving the sliders until it clicks. You can loosely base your spreads on usage based tier sets, while also opening up a ton of niches for Pokemon that don't really see play. Anything from more Stall variations to Choice Banded sets would be viable and lead to more team variation. This in my eyes would expand the playerbase skill, allowing them to deal with a variety of plays that they might otherwise deal with in usage based tiers, allowing an easier transition between tiers for LC players wishing to expand or for newer players looking to enter LC.

One drawback to this is that Little Cup may lose its identity as a "fast paced" hyper offensive tier, but is that necessarily a bad thing? I would not say that the essence of Little Cup is in fast paced battles but that that is simply the nature of battles at lower levels. We've already established that lower levels for Little Cup is but a tradition still held rather than what makes Little Cup iconicly itself.

Now obviously any major changes to a metagame or tier such as this would have to deal with an entire retiering of Pokemon. For example its probable that Misdreavus may not be broken with everything equalized at level 100. As such any proposal would have to really be done at the beginning of a generation. As such this is simply an initial thread, seriously entertain this idea, and question the rules that are currently in place, rather than simply conforming to "because it has always been that way." thank you for your time

- tcr signing off

 

[Merritt]

So, as with all proposals to inherently change the structure of a tier, the question is why do so? You've failed to explain why this is desirable or necessary. Let me break down your post.

As everyone knows, some of the more basic rules and central tenets of Little Cup have been that Little Cup must feature 1st form unevolved Pokemon, at Level 5 or below. This has stuck true with the metagame since its inception as an official Smogon metagame with its induction/revival from 4th generation back in 2009. Now, scholars are still deciphering the old texts in Closed Forums but the general consensus is that Little Cup is intended to be based upon a cup in Pokemon Stadium 2. In this mode, players may use either newly hatched pokemon or pokemon caught in the wild, but the level cannot exceed 5 and they must be pre-evolved Pokemon.

This is all fairly objective background information, so there's nothing to really digest here. The only thing here is that LC has a basis in a semi-official format, rather than springing from the head of some user.

Now, why is it that "5" seems to be the arbitrary ceiling? The answer lies in early mechanics in breeding. Up until Generation 5, Pokemon's earliest levels would be at lowest level 2 in the wild, and if hatched level 5.

This is false. In gen 4, not 5 the hatching level was changed to 1.

So the idea here seems to be baby Pokemon that were just hatched (irrelevantly at level 5). If Little Cup was strictly playing in line with game theme, then past generation 5 the level cap should have been 1, as that is most consistent with the ideas of Little Cup's aesthetic, freshly hatched Pokemon. This has, quite obviously, not been the case. As such one can see that Little Cup's core policies have been subjectively applied to keep the Level 5 rule out of tradition from the previous generation. Thus, the Level 5 rule is arguably meaningless to the core identity of Little Cup, and is simply a practice carried out from tradition.

Again, from the generation of inception (since LC became a format in Gen 4) "freshly hatched" Pokemon were at level 1. The decision to have LC at level 5 is clearly not based on the current generation's hatching level. As such, yes, the inherent format of LC was not "freshly hatched" Pokemon but "Pokemon at level 5".

Now, I argue that tradition is by no means a way to run a tier. The whole tiering process defies tradition in favor of change, and the idea of a competitive metagame similarly contradicts the essence of tradition.

A competitive metagame contradicts tradition within the metagame. It does not contradict tradition as a concept for determining the format. Tradition is important for maintaining cohesion in the format of a metagame so that one can clearly connect between previous states and current ones.

If one is going to defend Level 5, one must have reasons for doing so. In a generation where freshly hatched Pokemon come from Level 1, it is as arbitrary to denote the ceiling at level 5 as it is with level 4. Level 5 is no different from having the Pokemon be level 10, as it is level 20, as it is not the baseline for the Pokemon nor is it the maximum, it is simply in between. When one inquires about the reasons, they scarcely exist outside of a abstract perception of how level 5 is integral with the phenomena of Little Cup because it has always been so.

Level 5 has, in many ways through the games, been seen as the "starting" level for Pokemon. Along with the previous hatching level, starter Pokemon have also been traditionally at level 5. Is there a strong reason outside tradition and the Game Freak formats that inspire and are roughly the same as LC (both the Stadium 2 format and last generation's Pokemon Global Link "Little Cup" competition) for being at level 5? Not particularly, no. At the same time it's also as arbitrary to move to level 100.

I argue that a viewpoint that Level 6 should be the cap would hold just as much weight as a cap at Level 5.

While level 5 may not have an astoundingly strong base, it's not completely arbitrary for the reasons I just mentioned. Choosing a different level lacks even that grounding, however.

Now, if Level 5 is considered arbitrary in modern Pokemon games, then I say that one should stay consistent. The cons of a Level 5 metagame are that it further complicates movepool illegalities

Movepool illegalities are a concern in every format. In LC as it currently stands, illegalities are largely limited to event incompatibilities - the classic example would be Sludge Wave Gastly being flat out illegal. However incompatibilities would still exist in a shift to higher levels - Sludge Wave Gastly would still be incompatible with moves such as Endure (Gen 4 TM), or Thunder (Virtual Console transfer). This may reduce illegalities, but it certainly doesn't eliminate them, and I disagree with the idea that slightly reducing moveset incompatibilities provides a benefit that makes it desirable to separate from the current tradition.

as well as EVing Pokemon to a point where it has the potential to discourage newcomers from truly attempting to involve themselves with the metagame.

"Potential" is a word that's used when somebody has no hard evidence to support a claim. Is this accurate from your experience? Can you provide anecdotal evidence? Every metagame has EV knowledge that is necessary to understand to excel - while 252/252 spreads may be viable in most formats (and they're technically viable in LC) they're often just not optimal which is definitely the case for LC.

That is not to say that Little Cup is in any way dying or losing membership, but that the popularity of the metagame could be improved if changed.

This has no backing. Personally I disagree - I think that you would instead lose the people who like LC for being level 5 while gaining a lower number of people. Either way, there's no proof for either view.

If one considers Level 5 to be a subjectively based ruling, then these illegalities, odd damage rolls, rarely filled EV spreads, and unnecessary movepool restrictions (rip sludge wave gastly) are self imposed, and for what? The offset that is gained is that the Pokemon are at Level 5, but Level 5 holds no meaning.

LC has been played at level 5 since the beginning. Like it or not, the past does add value to things.

If Little Cup truly wished to remain "Little,"whatever that entails, then one should aspire to lower the maximum level to level 1, to best represent freshly hatched Pokemon. This still holds the same issues of weird EV spreads, movepool illegalities, and possibly even more exaggerated damage rolls, but at the very least it is not arbitrarily picked and actually reflects ideas presented from cartridge.

You're correct that this is "less arbitrary", less so than level 100 as well, but a level 1 metagame has the issue of overly compressed stats. Here's an example.

12/5/5/7/6/7
11/5/5/8/6/7
12/6/6/7/7/7
12/6/7/7/6/7

These are the stats of, in order, Smoochum, Abra, Misdreavus, and Tangela at level 1 with a 252 SpA / 252 Spe EV spread. Stats become so similar at level 1 that base stats and EVs start becoming meaningless, so movepool, type, and ability become the only particularly important thing. This is undesirable.

While level 5 does have some compression of stats, it still offers enough variance that Pokemon can be different from one another statwise.

Now since lowering the level could be a solution to maintaining a cohesive identity, subsequently raising the level to the maximum should do the same.

Why? You've offered nothing to explain this and proceed to list benefits of level 100 metagames, not how a level 100 metagame provides a cohesive identity to LC.

This is the argument that I would like to make, that the pros of raising the level of Little Cup to level 100 would far outweigh the cons of losing tradition and familiarity. At level 100 the stat distribution would be much more spread out, diversifying different Pokemon from each other. For example, Mienfoo and Archen would no longer speed tie, with very clear differences between Pokemon's speed depending on if they have base 65, base 70, or base 71.

This is true, and not a bad thing. However, I do not believe that this is a significant benefit - the jump in stat diversity from level 1 to level 5 is drastic while the jump from level 5 to 100 is still notable but not exactly outstanding. Particularly considering that the vast, vast majority of LC Pokemon have stat numbers of _0 or _5, which leads to speed ties around these numbers still. And reducing speed ties is the only real, objective in any way benefit here, since increasing Attack or Defense diversity means nothing for competitiveness.

EV spreads would finally be much easier to understand, especially for players transitioning from a usage based tier. You longer have to perform mild arithmetic using a Levi formula in order to calculate your spread, or use the Prem method of moving the sliders until it clicks. You can loosely base your spreads on usage based tier sets, while also opening up a ton of niches for Pokemon that don't really see play.

This shows a lack of knowledge about level 100 tiers and is actually vaguely insulting to them, as it implies that "uncomplicated" EV spreads are the be all end all of level 100 EVing. I encourage you to take a look at level 100 tiers and see how they EV for benchmarks. Otherwise, what I said earlier about "complicated EVs" still holds here.

Anything from more Stall variations to Choice Banded sets would be viable and lead to more team variation. This in my eyes would expand the playerbase skill, allowing them to deal with a variety of plays that they might otherwise deal with in usage based tiers, allowing an easier transition between tiers for LC players wishing to expand or for newer players looking to enter LC.

This is subjective as to desirability and also whether or not you actually increase the number of viable playstyles. While certain playstyles become viable/more viable at higher levels, others become less viable. The second part of this is essentially a statement that LC players who are bored with the state of the meta and non-LC players are who we should cater to. This is the line of logic that encourages companies to offer "new customer" discounts while offering jack shit to current customers. You might have noticed in your life that these policies are rarely a hit.

One drawback to this is that Little Cup may lose its identity as a "fast paced" hyper offensive tier, but is that necessarily a bad thing? I would not say that the essence of Little Cup is in fast paced battles but that that is simply the nature of battles at lower levels. We've already established that lower levels for Little Cup is but a tradition still held rather than what makes Little Cup iconicly itself.

So what "makes LC iconicly itself" to you? It's clearly not the level, which is half of what defines the tier, so is it really solely that LC has certain restrictions on what Pokemon can and can't be used? This, to me, turns LC into a version of the usage based tiers, which also have restrictions on which Pokemon can and cannot be used, but outside the usage system. I believe that rather than helping LC, this would instead take part of what defines it and brutally murder that. Why play LC at that point, when you could play PU or RU and have access to more Pokemon?

Now obviously any major changes to a metagame or tier such as this would have to deal with an entire retiering of Pokemon. For example its probable that Misdreavus may not be broken with everything equalized at level 100. As such any proposal would have to really be done at the beginning of a generation.

This is all 100% true, and if a proposal to actually change LC's level was to move forward this would be necessary. Using similar logic, it would be implausible and undesirable to alter the previous generations of LC.

As such, changing the level of LC would create a large gap between current gen (L100) and previous gen (L5) LC, to the point that it could be argued that they're not the same metagame. While I'm sure that Other Metagames might find a "Level 100 LC" metagame interesting, it'd be an interesting task to argue that it's still LC.

As such this is simply an initial thread, seriously entertain this idea, and question the rules that are currently in place, rather than simply conforming to "because it has always been that way." thank you for your time

You clearly seem interested in this concept, so why not do a trial run and ask Quote to let you host a subforum minitour of level 100 LC? I'm sure people would join, I certainly would, and it would help provide at least a little justification to your claims here.

 

[tcr]

So, as with all proposals to inherently change the structure of a tier, the question is why do so? You've failed to explain why this is desirable or necessary. Let me break down your post.

Because the reasons for having a level ceiling of 5 have been cemented due to the interpretation of why Pokemon Stadium made level 5 standard, to which in my view was due to breeding mechanics at the time. Outside of citing tradition or a vague shadow of “level 5 is the starting level of pokemon” the reason that Little Cup’s level is arbitrary is because it’s strict adherence to the cartridge was broken from the start in not reflecting breeding mechanics. As such since a Pokemon’s cap is not Level 1 then any level that is from 2-99 is no more or less significant than the next, with the exception of Level 100 because it is the ceiling that reflects the cartridge. My point is not to argue for strictly Level 100 although that happens to be my personal preference, my point is to ask "why Level 5" and to start a conversation about some of the unnecessary quirks of Little Cup. I believe that Level 5 is an arbitrary level based upon tradition and question why that is kept instead of keeping it in line with other Smogon metagames, which are usually featured at Level 100.

This is all fairly objective background information, so there's nothing to really digest here. The only thing here is that LC has a basis in a semi-official format, rather than springing from the head of some user.

n/a

This is false. In gen 4, not 5 the hatching level was changed to 1.

typo

Again, from the generation of inception (since LC became a format in Gen 4) "freshly hatched" Pokemon were at level 1. The decision to have LC at level 5 is clearly not based on the current generation's hatching level. As such, yes, the inherent format of LC was not "freshly hatched" Pokemon but "Pokemon at level 5".

Typo. Yes, and that is the point I am making. "Pokemon at Level 5" is absolutely arbitrary. Why Level 5 and not a different level? What's the basis for it? I argue that as a metagame, it should adhere to either the cartridge ceiling, (which is one of Smogon's goals is to replicate cartridge as accurately as possible, hence inclusion of things like Pomeg Glitch) or it should adhere to precedent set by the original Pokemon Stadium 2 ruleset, which I am interpreting as "level upon which recently hatched pokemon reside."

A competitive metagame contradicts tradition within the metagame. It does not contradict tradition as a concept for determining the format. Tradition is important for maintaining cohesion in the format of a metagame so that one can clearly connect between previous states and current ones.

Level 5 has, in many ways through the games, been seen as the "starting" level for Pokemon. Along with the previous hatching level, starter Pokemon have also been traditionally at level 5. Is there a strong reason outside tradition and the Game Freak formats that inspire and are roughly the same as LC (both the Stadium 2 format and last generation's Pokemon Global Link "Little Cup" competition) for being at level 5? Not particularly, no. At the same time it's also as arbitrary to move to level 100.

Yes, the reason Game Freak made level 5 the "starting" (And i say starting loosely here) level is so that players do not stuck early on with a Level 1 Pokemon. Additionally, in generations 1 and 2 a Pokemon could not actually be Level 1. From Bulbapedia:

"In Generations I and II, Pokémon were not legitimately available at a level below 2. This could be related to the fact that in Generations I and II, Pokémon in the Medium Slow experience group had a negative experience value at level 1, causing them to level up instantly to level 100 if they were to gain less than 54 experience points in battle (a high possibility on the games' early routes). Instead, Pokémon on the games' earliest routes were found level 2 or level 3, and starter Pokémon are given out at level 5. Likewise, Pokémon hatch from Pokémon Eggs at level 5."

It is the exact opposite of arbitrary to move the level to 100. As a Smogon format consistency is important. Making level 100 would put the tier in a more "translatable" state to players who wish to fluidly travel between tiers. How often have you seen people running Leftovers or Choice Band on their Pokemon? How often do you think people may get frustrated at the vast difference between how LC plays versus how other tiers play? There are nuances in every tier but I would say that LC stands alone in its regard, making it hard for players who play LC to learn a usage based tier, or vice versa.

Movepool illegalities are a concern in every format. In LC as it currently stands, illegalities are largely limited to event incompatibilities - the classic example would be Sludge Wave Gastly being flat out illegal. However incompatibilities would still exist in a shift to higher levels - Sludge Wave Gastly would still be incompatible with moves such as Endure (Gen 4 TM), or Thunder (Virtual Console transfer). This may reduce illegalities, but it certainly doesn't eliminate them, and I disagree with the idea that slightly reducing moveset incompatibilities provides a benefit that makes it desirable to separate from the current tradition.

Yes, illegalities would still exist. The idea here is not that Level 100 solves the issues of illegalities but that Level 5 complicates and expands upon illegalities in an unnecessary manner. Pokemon being at level 5 negatively impacts the choices available to an individual in building a team, limiting the player.

"Potential" is a word that's used when somebody has no hard evidence to support a claim. Is this accurate from your experience? Can you provide anecdotal evidence? Every metagame has EV knowledge that is necessary to understand to excel - while 252/252 spreads may be viable in most formats (and they're technically viable in LC) they're often just not optimal which is definitely the case for LC.

Throughout my tenure of playing LC i have certainly seen people say that they werent getting into it because EV spreads and stat distribution was complicated. I have tried getting friends into LC and they claim its difference between usage based tierings put them off of it.

This has no backing. Personally I disagree - I think that you would instead lose the people who like LC for being level 5 while gaining a lower number of people. Either way, there's no proof for either view.

as u say neither claim has any backing

LC has been played at level 5 since the beginning. Like it or not, the past does add value to things.

why? another appeal to tradition

You're correct that this is "less arbitrary", less so than level 100 as well, but a level 1 metagame has the issue of overly compressed stats. Here's an example.

12/5/5/7/6/7
11/5/5/8/6/7
12/6/6/7/7/7
12/6/7/7/6/7

These are the stats of, in order, Smoochum, Abra, Misdreavus, and Tangela at level 1 with a 252 SpA / 252 Spe EV spread. Stats become so similar at level 1 that base stats and EVs start becoming meaningless, so movepool, type, and ability become the only particularly important thing. This is undesirable.

i was not arguing for level 1 LC but ty for expanding upon and providing evidence for the implied statement of that paragraph. Strict adherence to the cartridge ideas is not always the superior option. This is the start of my personal preferences and ideas and logic behind that. If you take my original premise of there being two genuine options available, adhering to cartridge or to previous metagame precedent (Pokemon Stadium 2), your options would be to either raise the level ceiling to 100 or to cut back to level 1, reflecting the level upon which Pokemon transform from egg to "little." As level 1 is incredibly unrealistic, I hold the personal preference of Level 100.

While level 5 does have some compression of stats, it still offers enough variance that Pokemon can be different from one another statwise.

As would Level 10. As would level 15, or 20. This is not an argument for why level 5 but more a statement of fact for any level between 1-100 excluding themselves.

Why? You've offered nothing to explain this and proceed to list benefits of level 100 metagames, not how a level 100 metagame provides a cohesive identity to LC.

Again, not my intent to argue Level 100 metagames at this moment but to stimulate a conversation about why the levels are the way they are. I am merely pointing out the fact that Level 5 as it stands is entirely superfluous to the identity of what little cup is by pointing out the casual nature of its selection and the unimportance of its significance.

This is true, and not a bad thing. However, I do not believe that this is a significant benefit - the jump in stat diversity from level 1 to level 5 is drastic while the jump from level 5 to 100 is still notable but not exactly outstanding. Particularly considering that the vast, vast majority of LC Pokemon have stat numbers of _0 or _5, which leads to speed ties around these numbers still. And reducing speed ties is the only real, objective in any way benefit here, since increasing Attack or Defense diversity means nothing for competitiveness.

why do you posit that an even distribution of stats would mean nothing for competitiveness? where am i even postulating that this change would make things more “competitive?” I think that the diversity of stats on Pokemon would certainly start to separate Pokemon from each other, as there are a great deal many of Pokemon that are simply really bad just because they hold a niche that something else just flat out does better. Extrapolating the stats of the Pokemon allows their uniqueness to shine and for certain pokemon to excel in a specific niche. This would not reduce the amount of viable Pokemon but increase it, and I for one and for players' choice and the freedom to be creative.

This shows a lack of knowledge about level 100 tiers and is actually vaguely insulting to them, as it implies that "uncomplicated" EV spreads are the be all end all of level 100 EVing. I encourage you to take a look at level 100 tiers and see how they EV for benchmarks. Otherwise, what I said earlier about "complicated EVs" still holds here.

Please don't pretend to suggest I'm an idiot. EV spreads are uncomplicated because they have a consistent uptick of stats. For every 4 EVs, a stat will go up by one point. It is incredibly simple and efficient to then curate your spread to match specific damage calcs or speed creeping, because the core idea of it is that 4 EVs = 1 stat. Compare that with Little Cup where depending on if the ending number lands on a 1-9 the amount of EVs it takes to increase by 1 is shifting. Don't try and misconstrue my argument to paint me as an idiot, its actually vaguely insulting to me.

This is subjective as to desirability and also whether or not you actually increase the number of viable playstyles. While certain playstyles become viable/more viable at higher levels, others become less viable. The second part of this is essentially a statement that LC players who are bored with the state of the meta and non-LC players are who we should cater to. This is the line of logic that encourages companies to offer "new customer" discounts while offering jack shit to current customers. You might have noticed in your life that these policies are rarely a hit.

Don't understand what your argument is here. Little Cup is not a failing business. Moreover I would appreciate it if you actually read what I wrote rather than assuming and summarizing my argument to fit your slanted interpretation of it. No one is saying "cater" to certain players but to suggest that maybe a more approachable ruleset consistent with other metagames would help to increase both playerbase skill as well as well as tier population (in regards to the small community that is Smogon). For example, it would be far easier for players to play in Slam if they have to deal with Level 100 consistencies, as one Smogon oriented benefit.

So what "makes LC iconicly itself" to you? It's clearly not the level, which is half of what defines the tier, so is it really solely that LC has certain restrictions on what Pokemon can and can't be used? This, to me, turns LC into a version of the usage based tiers, which also have restrictions on which Pokemon can and cannot be used, but outside the usage system. I believe that rather than helping LC, this would instead take part of what defines it and brutally murder that. Why play LC at that point, when you could play PU or RU and have access to more Pokemon?

Makes Little Cup "itself" is the idea of Baby Pokemon having a place to fight among themselves. Why play RU when you can play UU and have access to more Pokemon? Why play UU if you can play Anything Goes and have access to more Pokemon? Your argument makes no sense because you assume that being more alike to a usage system would be a bad thing that would "destroy" Little Cup, and yet never ask the question of why the usage system is not currently imploding. Metagames will always be different but the core concepts behind Pokemon will stay the same.

This is all 100% true, and if a proposal to actually change LC's level was to move forward this would be necessary. Using similar logic, it would be implausible and undesirable to alter the previous generations of LC.

I would say that if such a change hypothetically went through then previous generations would be grandfathered in.

As such, changing the level of LC would create a large gap between current gen (L100) and previous gen (L5) LC, to the point that it could be argued that they're not the same metagame. While I'm sure that Other Metagames might find a "Level 100 LC" metagame interesting, it'd be an interesting task to argue that it's still LC.

Really? you say "can be argued" but don't actually put forth any deductive premises. What makes the level difference so absurd? Why is it important that they be the same metagame? I have already laid out my arguments on the unnecessary inclusion of Level 5 into the identity of Little Cup.

You clearly seem interested in this concept, so why not do a trial run and ask Quote to let you host a subforum minitour of level 100 LC? I'm sure people would join, I certainly would, and it would help provide at least a little justification to your claims here.

i just want to start a conversation a minitour is too much work

also this would provide little justification to any claim, my side or your side (or their side). The impact of Level 100 or Level 1 or level 69 would not be felt in one tournament, as such I think this can only stay in the realms of a hypothetical discussion. feel free to host a tour yourself though[/quote][/quote]

 

[freezai]

For me its a conceptual thing more than anything, little cup is meant to be... well, little. Playing them at level 50+ or even level 30+ isn't really that little anymore and doesn't fit thematically. While "little" is subjective, I don't think anyone pictures level 100 babies running around and fighting. I guess you can say level 5 is arbitrary, but who cares? It's what people logically associate with baby pokemon because that's when you get your starter in game and its also what Pokemon Stadium defined as Little Cup. While we shouldn't stop progress in the name of "tradition", none of the tangible benefits ( you get rid of like 1 or 2 speed ties?) from shifting to another arbitrary level like Level 7 or Level 10 or Level 15 or Level 1 are convincing enough to radically overhaul the system, especially when there would be a lot of subjectivity over which is better.

 

[Finchinator]

Hello. While I am not necessarily an LC mainstay like a number of other posters in this thread, I do have some points to add. While it is technically true that level 5 can be seen as an arbitrary level (specifically in the context of Smogon metagames) for the format to be capped at, I feel that this is not a particularly strong reason to change it moving forward. In fact, I strongly believe that LC should stick with level 5 moving forward. LC staying at level 5 would be for the best seeing as there is a sense of metagame identity on the line, gamefreak confirmed their level 5 LC intentions as recently as 2015, and there are numerous "arbitrary" facets about our tiering system that we cannot work around, but neglect to address continuously, thus making this a nonissue, in my opinion.

Sense of metagame identity

LC has been played at level 5 since it existed on Smogon. This is not me saying change is bad, as it can potentially be beneficial, but that would more likely than not be the case here seeing as you guys have a widespread community with resources, a very well-developed metagame, and continuous modern development all taking place with the metagame being set at level 5. While perhaps someone could argue that a change would be more acceptable at the turn of a generation, the insight of the playerbase and hierarchy (i.e: council/tier leaders) should largely be factored in here seeing as they are the ones that assure the metagame is as active and competitive as it can be to begin with. Upon speaking with people like Quote and reading this thread, I feel like a change would be a clear minority opinion, making it an even less appealing prospect to me. Basically, "don't fix what isn't broken", especially if what you're trying to fix functions like a well-oiled machine as it is a tier that has been going strong for a number of generations with a vast, diverse playerbase that has some official tournament representation and various relevant, highly anticipated unofficial tournaments.

Gamefreak stands with level 5 LC as recently as 2015

Here you can see Gamefreak implementing a level 5 3v3 Battle Spot Little Cup challenge during ORAS. Yea, it is wildly different from modern day LC and I am not by any means trying to draw a comparison between the two formats. What I am trying to prove here is that level 5 is not even only a product of a Pokemon Stadium level set back when most of the LC playerbase was too young to even play this game competitively, but rather something that Gamefreak seems to believe is in the spirit of whatever they envision Little Cup to truly be. Sure, you can argue that if I am trying to use this as an argument for level 5 being the status quo, then I should also argue for all these other silly rules that the tournament had that fit into the Battle Spot 3v3 LC format that this was, but I think we can all agree to draw a reasonable line before that seeing as we have modern OU and singles metagames the way they are without them being particularly similar to VGC rulesets.

PS: Look how badass teams are in this format lmao

Our tiering system as a whole is full of "arbitrary" factors

Sure, level 100 being the level for all mainstream singles metagames aside from LC is something that is very much not arbitrary seeing as it is the maximum level in the games themselves and I personally believe that this should always be the level that these metagames use (throwback btw), but there are a number of other arbitrary things about the way we do tiering, so I feel like questioning any of these factors that are already strongly ingrained within the culture of our tiering/metagames, especially when these changes would largely impact a playerbase who does not wish for any change to occur, would simply be "correcting" things for the sake of some sense of "correctness" that should not necessarily be applied to our tiering system or at least in this context. For those wondering for an example of an arbitrary factor, how we determine usage statistics is a prime example. The % cutoff we use, the amount of time elapsed between changes, etc. -- Smogon has a ton of unprecedented practices in place and while people have historically taken issue with them, not many non-radical positions have challenged this practice as a whole and they will remain in place moving forward despite being inherently arbitrary. The same should be the case for LC's cap level of 5.

Overall, I believe that level 5 is 100% what LC should stick with for the reasons stated above.

 

[Heysup]

Because the reasons for having a level ceiling of 5 have been cemented due to the interpretation of why Pokemon Stadium made level 5 standard, to which in my view was due to breeding mechanics at the time. Outside of citing tradition or a vague shadow of “level 5 is the starting level of pokemon” the reason that Little Cup’s level is arbitrary is because it’s strict adherence to the cartridge was broken from the start in not reflecting breeding mechanics. As such since a Pokemon’s cap is not Level 1 then any level that is from 2-99 is no more or less significant than the next, with the exception of Level 100 because it is the ceiling that reflects the cartridge. My point is not to argue for strictly Level 100 although that happens to be my personal preference, my point is to ask "why Level 5" and to start a conversation about some of the unnecessary quirks of Little Cup. I believe that Level 5 is an arbitrary level based upon tradition and question why that is kept instead of keeping it in line with other Smogon metagames, which are usually featured at Level 100.

I don't necessarily have the time to read everything in the threads these days. However I read your post, and the first sentence of Merritt's post and even with this response you have still not explained why a change would be beneficial but more so just reiterated your arguments that there is no reason not to make a change. To clarify further, arguing that there are no negatives to doing something is not the same thing as arguing that there exists positives.

 

[tcr]

"My point is not to argue for strictly Level 100 although that happens to be my personal preference, my point is to ask "why Level 5" and to start a conversation about some of the unnecessary quirks of Little Cup "

I could have made it a bit clearer I suppose, but my position is that the ideas of the current ethos of Little Cup are unnecessarily restrictive. The identity of Level 5 is not enough to outweigh the negatives that it brings to a metagame, with the negatives including, but limited to, inefficient EV spreads, relative (to usage based tiers) inability to customize an EV spread, further limitations on movesets, a more limited pool of choices for teambuilding (both pokemon and items), as well as the, in my opinion, better usage of damage rolls in usage based versus Level 5.

You can think of the argument as Little Cup being detrimental to its own state by limiting the Level simply to 5, all for an extremely small aesthetic that brings very little positives. That the tradition of Little Cup negatively impacts itself. I don't understand how you got from argument that I was listing no negatives. Listing the "benefits" of Level 100 naturally implies that those benefits become negatives (or less beneficial, however you want to interpret it) as you go in lower level. Saying "At level 100 ev spreads are more intuitive and user friendly" is functionally the exact same thing as "At level 5 ev spreads are less intuitive and less user friendly compared to Level 100." For any decision the gains should outweigh the costs, otherwise what is the point of said activity, no? The question is, is the gain that is produced by level 5 enough to warrant the costs of keeping the metagame at Level 5?

Hello. While I am not necessarily an LC mainstay like a number of other posters in this thread, I do have some points to add. While it is technically true that level 5 can be seen as an arbitrary level (specifically in the context of Smogon metagames) for the format to be capped at, I feel that this is not a particularly strong reason to change it moving forward. In fact, I strongly believe that LC should stick with level 5 moving forward. LC staying at level 5 would be for the best seeing as there is a sense of metagame identity on the line, gamefreak confirmed their level 5 LC intentions as recently as 2015, and there are numerous "arbitrary" facets about our tiering system that we cannot work around, but neglect to address continuously, thus making this a nonissue, in my opinion.

Sense of metagame identity

LC has been played at level 5 since it existed on Smogon. This is not me saying change is bad, as it can potentially be beneficial, but that would more likely than not be the case here seeing as you guys have a widespread community with resources, a very well-developed metagame, and continuous modern development all taking place with the metagame being set at level 5. While perhaps someone could argue that a change would be more acceptable at the turn of a generation, the insight of the playerbase and hierarchy (i.e: council/tier leaders) should largely be factored in here seeing as they are the ones that assure the metagame is as active and competitive as it can be to begin with. Upon speaking with people like Quote and reading this thread, I feel like a change would be a clear minority opinion, making it an even less appealing prospect to me. Basically, "don't fix what isn't broken", especially if what you're trying to fix functions like a well-oiled machine as it is a tier that has been going strong for a number of generations with a vast, diverse playerbase that has some official tournament representation and various relevant, highly anticipated unofficial tournaments.

This premise presupposes that changing the level away from 5 would somehow "break" Little Cup, yet you give no reasons why other than this is a minority opinion. Little Cup would still remain Little Cup no matter what level it settled at. Just because the metagame is at an optimal spot right now does not exclude it from improving with changes.

Gamefreak stands with level 5 LC as recently as 2015

Here you can see Gamefreak implementing a level 5 3v3 Battle Spot Little Cup challenge during ORAS. Yea, it is wildly different from modern day LC and I am not by any means trying to draw a comparison between the two formats. What I am trying to prove here is that level 5 is not even only a product of a Pokemon Stadium level set back when most of the LC playerbase was too young to even play this game competitively, but rather something that Gamefreak seems to believe is in the spirit of whatever they envision Little Cup to truly be. Sure, you can argue that if I am trying to use this as an argument for level 5 being the status quo, then I should also argue for all these other silly rules that the tournament had that fit into the Battle Spot 3v3 LC format that this was, but I think we can all agree to draw a reasonable line before that seeing as we have modern OU and singles metagames the way they are without them being particularly similar to VGC rulesets.

While Gamefreak has indeed spnosored a single Little Cup Battle Spot challenge, one could interpret their decision to use Level 5 so as to reflect Smogon's metagame. I see no reason to draw any specific distinction. 3v3 is a different meta by far from a 6v6 singles meta, so if you were to take inspiration from Gamefreak on this then I think you should use the whole. There is no reason to draw the line distinctively at Level 5 other than it fits your argument.

Sure, level 100 being the level for all mainstream singles metagames aside from LC is something that is very much not arbitrary seeing as it is the maximum level in the games themselves and I personally believe that this should always be the level that these metagames use (throwback btw), but there are a number of other arbitrary things about the way we do tiering, so I feel like questioning any of these factors that are already strongly ingrained within the culture of our tiering/metagames, especially when these changes would largely impact a playerbase who does not wish for any change to occur, would simply be "correcting" things for the sake of some sense of "correctness" that should not necessarily be applied to our tiering system or at least in this context. For those wondering for an example of an arbitrary factor, how we determine usage statistics is a prime example. The % cutoff we use, the amount of time elapsed between changes, etc. -- Smogon has a ton of unprecedented practices in place and while people have historically taken issue with them, not many non-radical positions have challenged this practice as a whole and they will remain in place moving forward despite being inherently arbitrary. The same should be the case for LC's cap level of 5.

Overall, I believe that level 5 is 100% what LC should stick with for the reasons stated above.

This is just restating your first premise of "don't fix what isn't broken." You simply claim here that there are numerous arbitrary practices within tiering and say you think this particular arbitrary thing should stay because there are others like it. You give no reasons as to how this would actually impact a playerbase negatively. In sum your main arguments are that Gamefreak had a one off Battle Spot 3v3 LC game mode (which for some reason you do not attribute to them almost certainly being aware of and modeling an already decently large following of someone's identity of "Little Cup" and quickly drew up similarities to that) and that change is change and people would have to adapt. Some people would adapt and some would not, but my argument is that in the long run such a change would positively impact the tier.

Once again, I am not attempting to change your minds into accepting Level 100 specifically. That is my personal preference for reasons I have already listed but the main point of the post it highlight the absurdity to adher to the Level 5 tradition and to point out the negatives that it brings upon the tier; it is up to yourselves to determine if what makes Little Cup is strictly the level or the aesthetic that differs from usage based tiers. Don't kid yourselves into thinking that if you take away Level 5 then Little Cup just becomes a gimmick singles tier, because it is already a gimmick singles tier (looking at u quote)

 

[Heysup]

For any decision the gains should outweigh the costs, otherwise what is the point of said activity, no? The question is, is the gain that is produced by level 5 enough to warrant the costs of keeping the metagame at Level 5?

Thats the question you are supposed to be answering.

Saying that you prefer the mechanics at lvl 100 vs. lvl 5 is not persuasive. I could just say "actually I like the damage rolls because they are more static and less random than lvl 100 rolls. The EV limitations require more creativity and also speed creeping is bullshit." That took two sentences. It comes down to weight.

Back to my original point. Why is this worth talking about and why is it worth changing at this stage of the metagame?

 

[TheFenderStory]

If nothing else, it seems like it would be a fun thing to play around with. While I don't necessarily feel like scrapping our current format is the play at this time, I do think trying out lvl 100 LC as an OM or something would be a good time. Let's try it sometime and see how it feels, maybe some play-testing could reveal whether or not it's actually worth exploring further.

 

[1_TrickPhony]

Amazing how many people are taking this seriously with a title like this, lol.

 

[Senpai D.M]

What ever happened to the lv15 idea? 100 deff feels like overkill Idk

 

[TheFenderStory]

Amazing how many people are taking this seriously with a title like this, lol.

Shhh if you start saying things like that it takes away from the fun