Figuring out Underused?

MythTrainerInfinity

MythTrainerInfinity

The Suspect testing has really helped spike interest in OU tiering and UU might benefit from similar treatment. I was kind of surprised at the substantial difference between the number of battles between the UU and OU ladders.

September
  • The OU Ladder had 183,396 battles.
  • The UU Ladder had 13,544 battles.
October
  • The OU Ladder had 184,358 battles.
  • The UU Ladder had 12,713 battles.
When I am on the Smogon Shoddy Server I usually see at least a few people showing dismay towards the lack of interest in the UU ladder. I mean who likes waiting 10 minutes for a ladder match? Back in R/S/E I remember there were a significant chunk of players who were (some only) devoted to UU and of course there was the (iirc) "Summer Freedom" tournament for UU in the Summer. There was a lot of love for UU back then, but why not now?

I do not think we should really be waiting until potentially Summer or Fall of next year to figure out what belongs in UU or what does not because by the time that comes around there mgiht be a new game that could make things even more complicated. In the advent of Platinum we had the basis of OU down pretty well at least, so we were able to adjust and things seem to have settled down.

There have been a few suggestions in the Order of Operations thread for taking care of a couple things at once and I do not see why not, unless this would be too much of a hassle to gather all of that data seeing as Doug gives us quite a lot to look at with our current endeavors.

I am kind of confused at what the current plans are for the UU metagame. I have heard about merging the UU and BL tiers and then banning the overcentralizing pokémon back to BL, but it does not seem to be too clear... Are we going to do that or treat it like how we have been treating OU suspects? Or something else?

Edit: See RB Golbat's post below.

I understand many of you have exams right around the corner, but at least a few cents of your thoughts would be great. I certainly don't want to push this too fast because I am sure we want it to be done and done well.
 
Although a lot has already been said about UU, little seems to have been done, and hence having a thread solely for this again is good.

First of all, it's obvious that people will play OU more than UU, so that's something we can't evade.

Secondly, I'd say that one of the reasons why UU is not very popular is that BL is not yet set in stone. Unlike OU which has a rather solid Uber tier and a solid Suspect checking process, UU has neither of these for BL so far.

A process for the solidification of BL was written somewhere I think, but, as far as I know, it hasn't been implemented yet. I'd be glad to start issuing a UU tier as well as an OU tier, to separate UU from NU after the BL tier starts to resemble something concrete.
 
From Inside Scoop

RB Golbat said:
1) For the first step, we will begin the test. This involves an announcement in Stark and a news story on the front page, as well as Doug editing the ban list on shoddy to allow all NFEs, and Current BLs (with the exception of the Appliance Rotoms) in UU.

2) People play the new UU during this test. This test is tentatively scheduled to last 6 weeks. Players will try to meet the 1655/65 mark to vote

2a) In the event that during the first part (only the first part) of this test, there is a pokemon that is centralizing the new UU to the point that it is obviously broken, assuming their are any, then it will be remove as soon as possible.

3) Discuss the current metagame development in the Metagame Analysis Forum. People will discuss which Pokémon are the most problematic, and at the end of the current testing period, the most noted Pokémon will be taken into account.

4) At the end of each suspect period, we have a voting thread for each of the pokemon that have been deemed suspect in Suspect Test Vote (or maybe make a subforum for UU suspect only?).

5) Move the pokemon that were voted BL out of the UU tier. Continue doing steps 3-5 for 4 weeks until we reach a stage where either a) no pokemon are found to be suspect for voting or b)every pokemon is voted to be UU

6) After step 5, test the last 4-5 BL pokemon on the manner that the OU suspects are tested.
Click to expand...

RB Golbat said:
OK, here is how i see it to be possible

During the 6 week test, we choose the suspects within weeks 2-3

We extend the 3 week test to 4 weeks, and decide the suspects during week 2.
Click to expand...

These are the current plans to deal with the UU metagame. They are going to start in January after the new tier list comes out that way any tier list changes don't effect the testing in the middle of the first, and arguably, most important round.
 
Awesome, looks like you have it all figured out and I look forward to seeing what that will yield.

Seeing Gabite and Shaymin in that environment will be really interesting...

I like the subforum for UU test idea as it'd be a more visible thing to see and grab people's attention on the forums.
 
Interesting stuff, I'm glad to see that UU has been given some serious consideration among the senior members.

However, I can't say I'm convinced that this is the best way to approach matters. I agree with steps 1-3 for the most part in that we should definitely try to take early action with any obvious problem Pokemon, and discussion should always be encouraged, especially whilst the metagame is fresh.

The rest of the plan however I take issue with. My main concern is with this idea of a 'test'. It seems to me that we are treating this as an addition to the current UU when in fact the situation will be more comparable to the start of an entirely new metagame altogether. I think we can all agree that this new tier will be completely different to any other we have constructed thus far, so with that in mind I fail to see how we can seriously expect to gather any meaningful results from this test on a mere six week timescale. This is in no way equivalent to the OU Suspect tests we currently have going on, so treating it as such would be a big mistake IMO. Like any new metagame we need a significant period of time to settle in and adjust (3-4 months tops) before we even comtemplate undertaking a community-wide test.

My argument is based purely on my own interpretation of RB Golbat's post, so if I happened to miss anything important please let me know.

Seeing Gabite and Shaymin in that environment will be really interesting...
Click to expand...

What's so interesting about Gabite? It's garbage, and completely outclassed by Flygon.
 
I think I've been seeing Flygon a bit more in November than October in the OU ladder (we'll have to wait for Doug's statistics to confirm that), so it might have the potential to rise to OU or be possibly overcentralizing the UU test early on. I suppose people might go to testing Gabite for their Dragon/Ground fix then.

I think since we have a lot of things to consider as suspects or things that must be done that'll probably take a least a month each. If something new pops up like a new game that'd potentially more suspects/require more testing of former suspects and it might take us a year to get to a suspect that's been sitting on the list to be done for awhile..
 
Quite frankly, I'd be happy if anything was done about UU. We talked a LOT about it a few months back (before the whole fiascos over garchomp and Platinum went on), but the topic has been pretty much dropped since. :/
 
This is not the thread to be talking about what pokemon might or might not be tierbreaking for the New UU. If you want to talk about who would counter what, then I suggest you make a topic in Stark about it.

The real reason this topic exists now is to talk about the process for deciding what to vote out of UU. I would like to see what alternatives people might have to voting pokemon out. Are you suggesting we lengthen the first part of the test? Do you have any other suggestions, because this plan was what we came up with after a while in Inside Scoop.
 
Wait, we eliminated the BL/UU Tier Discussion Thread because we decided that looking at BLs one at a time was ineffective right? At this point I'd say UU really needs something desparate-- it needs us to go ahead with Obi's plan since we've been saying that we would do it forever.

Quite frankly, recalling back to when a group of Stark Mountain players were trying to organize a NU tier a while back and were [ultimate] smacked down because we said (basically) that such an effort was pointless because we would be promptly be going ahead with BL/UU combination. It's been months since we said that and we have not made even the slightest move towards organizing that effort. I'd say this is both ridiculous and embarassing.
 
RB Golbat said:
The real reason this topic exists now is to talk about the process for deciding what to vote out of UU. I would like to see what alternatives people might have to voting pokemon out. Are you suggesting we lengthen the first part of the test? Do you have any other suggestions, because this plan was what we came up with after a while in Inside Scoop.
Click to expand...

I do not take any issue with the proposed testing process itself (well I do believe the Suspect Test procedure has inherent flaws, but I do not have a better idea myself so I can't complain), I have a problem with this test mentality you guys seem to have for a metagame that hasn't even started yet.

This new metagame is going to include the likes of Staraptor, Abomasnow, Mismagius, Mesprit, Raikou etc as possible top-tier pokes. Nobody knows how this is going to pan out as a fully fleshed out tier, so how are people going to make informed decisions as to what belongs where after mere weeks of playing from scratch?

And as I've said before, this is more akin to the beginning of a new metagame than just an extension of UU. So unless we're prepared to go through this very same process for all new metagames in the future (including 5th gen OU) I don't see how this idea holds any water.

So to summarize I ask you this: What's the rush? What is wrong with allowing the metagame to settle for a few months? I really did not think I had to mention this here. It should be obvious that attempting to make decisions based on a metagame that is still reeling from early hype is going to lead to plenty of bias and flawed interpretations.
 
Lemmiwinks MkII said:
And as I've said before, this is more akin to the beginning of a new metagame than just an extension of UU. So unless we're prepared to go through this very same process for all new metagames in the future (including 5th gen OU) I don't see how this idea holds any water.

So to summarize I ask you this: What's the rush? What is wrong with allowing the metagame to settle for a few months? I really did not think I had to mention this here. It should be obvious that attempting to make decisions based on a metagame that is still reeling from early hype is going to lead to plenty of bias and flawed interpretations.
Click to expand...

Well, how long do you think the first section of the test should be 3 months? I see what you are saying, at least. While we were thinking up this plan, it was compared to the transition of DP to DPPt, but you have described it much more accurately. I would be willing to increase the length of the first test. How long do you think would be long enough? 3 to 4 months?
 
RB Golbat said:
Well, how long do you think the first section of the test should be 3 months? I see what you are saying, at least. While we were thinking up this plan, it was compared to the transition of DP to DPPt, but you have described it much more accurately. I would be willing to increase the length of the first test. How long do you think would be long enough? 3 to 4 months?
Click to expand...

I'd say 3 months would be ideal as a lower limit. One good reason for this is that we wouldn't even have anything resembling an official UU list (as in the 'OU' of UU) until then, and we should at least have that in place first; the initial UU tier list if you will. Mostly importantly though, we need a significant settling in period before we start testing anything. I know that sounds corny and cliched by now, but it's true.

Of course I'm all for action to be taken in very extreme circumstances, like you have mentioned. If something is found to be obviously way too overpowering in the new environment early on then yes we should definitely do something about it. But ONLY in those very extreme cases. There are bound to be a few debatable Pokemon from the start, but as long as there is uncertainty they should be given a fair trial to see how they fare once the early hype has settled down.

I've been looking forward to this revamp of UU for a very long time, so I really want to see it done properly.
 
Lemmiwinks MkII said:
I'd say 3 months would be ideal as a lower limit. One good reason for this is that we wouldn't even have anything resembling an official UU list (as in the 'OU' of UU) until then, and we should at least have that in place first; the initial UU tier list if you will. Mostly importantly though, we need a significant settling in period before we start testing anything. I know that sounds corny and cliched by now, but it's true.

Of course I'm all for action to be taken in very extreme circumstances, like you have mentioned. If something is found to be obviously way too overpowering in the new environment early on then yes we should definitely do something about it. But ONLY in those very extreme cases. There are bound to be a few debatable Pokemon from the start, but as long as there is uncertainty they should be given a fair trial to see how they fare once the early hype has settled down.

I've been looking forward to this revamp of UU for a very long time, so I really want to see it done properly.
Click to expand...

The only problem I have with this, but there might be no way to avoid it, is that when the April tier list comes out, there is the chance that it could pull one of the UU pokemon out to OU, and we would have a problem with not really dealing with the same metagame. Do you have any suggestions on how to deal with that type of scenario? Because frankly, that is the hardest part about doing this test. We could get them to freeze the OU tier while we do that, but with suspects likely to be added to OU, i don't feel that is the best solution.
 
I don't think one or two pokemon moving from UU to OU (or from OU into BL) is something all the troubling, nor is it something we can help.

For instance, say that Kingdra is OU at the period we begin the BL/UU combination, but at some point in time (say April), falls out of OU. Kindra should then be allowed in UU. If it proves too powerful, we can ban it to BL. Eventually what will happen that we will get a BL list that includes pokemon in OU. What I mean is that if Kingdra gets tested in the new UU and is too powerful, even if in the future it bobs in and out of OU it will be banned from UU regardless. Once the list is extensive enough, pokemon like Alakazam, Gallade, and Spiritomb can bob in and out of OU all they want but their status in UU will remain unchanging.

BL status should be completely separate from OU status.

Example (illustrated arbitrarily, but you get the point I think):

Alakazam:
OU: Yes
BL: Yes

What this would mean is that Alakazam would be OU based on its useage, and BL based on it being too powerful for UU. In other words Alakazam would be banned from UU regardless of how its useage fluctuates in OU.

Tentacruel:
OU: Yes
BL: No

What this would mean is that Tentacruel is OU based on its useage, but it is not BL because it is not too powerful for UU. In this case, Tentacruel being allowed in UU or not would be dependant on its OU status alone. If it fell out of OU, it would be allowed in UU.

Given time, we would compile a comprehensive (and hopefully brief) list of pokemon who are truly BL, and likely this list would end up including pokemon that spend most of their time as low-ranking OU pokemon.

IE. if a pokemon that is OU at the start of testing falls from OU at some point, it's not the end of the world. Just let it come down to UU and see what happens.

I don't think we can handle this as strictly and orderly as the suspect test for OU. Since UU is a lot more exposed to the fluctuations of OU, it should be justifiable for us to make swift actions without a community-wide concensus (for instance how we quickly removed the rotom forms from the UU ladder).
 
I think that given the large amount of new entries to the metagame the new UU will have, it should be treated similarly to how decisions in the old UU were made, though I disagree with the widespread unbanning of things without a general consensus like what happened with the last round of UU changes (Aerodactyl and Articuno, anyone?). Once obviously harmful elements of the metagame are removed, we can progress to a Suspect Test-esque metagame stabilization.

I really like Chou's idea, as it helps streamline testing of new Pokemon for UU and makes sure that OU fluctuations don't shaft the testing agenda needlessly.

EDIT: First PR post, woo.
 
Seven Deadly Sins said:
I think that given the large amount of new entries to the metagame the new UU will have, it should be treated similarly to how decisions in the old UU were made, though I disagree with the widespread unbanning of things without a general consensus like what happened with the last round of UU changes (Aerodactyl and Articuno, anyone?). Once obviously harmful elements of the metagame are removed, we can progress to a Suspect Test-esque metagame stabilization.
Click to expand...

It should be noted though that this should not be thought of as a mass unbanning of BLs but rather a complete restart of the entire system. With implementation of the new UU we should strive to wipe all memory of the old UU in order to avoid irrelevant bias. The old method resulted in a mess because we were introducing Pokemon several at a time in a completely arbitrary and subjective way in order to try and improve an inherently flawed system from the start.

Seven Deadly Sins said:
I really like Chou's idea, as it helps streamline testing of new Pokemon for UU and makes sure that OU fluctuations don't shaft the testing agenda needlessly.
Click to expand...

I also agree with what Chou said. With the boundaries so fine between OU and UU it is obvious that we will need to apply some degree of common sense with regards to handling certain Pokemon. The Alakazam / Gallade / Spiritomb trio is actually a very good example. If it is found that Alakazam and/or Gallade are only manageable in UU whilst Spiritomb is also UU then we should make the assertion that said Pokemon are inherently BL, even if Spiritomb by itself is deemed OU/UU depending on usage. Not saying that this is in any way likely, I'm just using it as an example.
 
I entirely understand that, just that I disagree with widespread and unnecessary metagame changes like throwing a bajillion Pokemon in at the same time and then not dealing with whether or not they're broken.
 
Seven Deadly Sins said:
I entirely understand that, just that I disagree with widespread and unnecessary metagame changes like throwing a bajillion Pokemon in at the same time and then not dealing with whether or not they're broken.
Click to expand...

1) The Current UU list is mostly based off the ADV UU list with a few small changes. It does not resemble what it is supposed to be, the ban list for UU. This test will make it exactly that.

2) Did you not read the process that is outlined in the third post? We are going to be dealing with them.
 
RB, you're misunderstanding me. Reading it, the post really was unclear.

First let me state this: I fully support the crafting of a new UU list through the merging of the current BL and UU. The current UU list is indeed heavily flawed, and I believe that this is the best way to fix it.

Second, my intent was to make sure that the process isn't undermined by introducing or excluding too many Pokemon at a time from UU (outside of the initial merge, that is). It's part of what was wrong with UU this time, and while it will be tedious, measured analysis of metagame shifts is what is required rather than what we've been doing this whole time.

Sorry for the confusion...
 
OK, so the UU test starts in less than 2 weeks and I would like to see if anyone who is reading this has a major problem with the process that has been outlined so far? I want to make sure we do this right, so we don't have to do this test more than once. IF you can post here please reply with any comments or concerns you have. If you can't and you have a legit concern, PM me and I will try to reply to it.
 
I just want to say once more a really obvious thing that we all know but is still worth repeating:

It's inherent, by the nature at UU, that it will always be at the chance mercy of what happens in OU. Let's do the best we can to make a good 4th gen UU without worrying about it being perfectly neat and orderly.

It's inevitable that pokemon will bounce up and down between OU and UU or whatever, and we'll just deal with it as it happens.
 
I'd prefer that the UU test starts as soon as the new January OU list is issued, which should happen as soon as Doug releases December's stats. I'm saying this since Doug's stats might not be released on January 1st.
 
X-Act said:
I'd prefer that the UU test starts as soon as the new January OU list is issued, which should happen as soon as Doug releases December's stats. I'm saying this since Doug's stats might not be released on January 1st.
Click to expand...
My thoughts exactly.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top