Implemented Keep RBY BO3

[Pearl]

got no eggs in this basket but since this is a thread with a lot of traction id like to use the chance to appeal to people in positions of authority on smogon to fucking put an end to this finchinator-esque trend of spending a million paragraphs per post to say absolutely nothing that isnt common sense/common knowledge. it fucking sucks to read and i bet it feels just as bad to write

also, merry christmas :)

 

[Amity]

It's abundantly clear that we did not adequately communicate our decision-making process. This post is an attempt to rectify that mistake and clarify how we came to the decision we made.

Apart from RBY, every slot across all trophy team tours has always been Bo1. D4 Repertoire's post in the original thread already covers much of the reasoning why we believe Bo1 is the optimal format for team tours. Obviously, there is slightly more variance in any individual match in a Bo3 vs a Bo1, but in the team's opinion, the drawbacks clearly outweigh the benefits. The primary factor in our consideration was the workload increase across the team that comes with more Bo3 slots, which will inevitably exclude some players who can't commit the increased time and cause fatigue in both the players and supporters of each slot over the course of a tour. Additionally, at the end of the day, these are team tours and each week's result is determined by a team-wide Bo8/10/12 series. We don't think these drawbacks are offset by team reusability either, as that inherently diminishes the creativity on display each week.

We also believe that playerbase votes on Bo1 vs Bo3 are flawed in practice, which is why we denied this proposal in the original thread. A vote before auction absolutely does not guarantee it'd match with the preferences of the players that actually end up playing the tier over the course of the season. A vote after the auction, with each team's starter submitting their preference, comes with its own issues. First, the players signing up have no idea if they'll be playing Bo1 or Bo3, and since they have to be prepared for Bo3, this ends up being exclusionary to those dissuaded by the format for the reasons mentioned above. In addition, it means managers will be forced to draft without full knowledge of what exactly they are drafting for and simply have to pray that the player they buy ends up having the same preference as the majority to avoid negative impact.

With the above 2 conclusions, we were convinced that team tours should generally be Bo1 and that playerbase votes are not a practical solution to determine the match format within a tour. This led us to consider the status of the only outlier in trophy team tours: RBY Bo3. RBY Bo3 has been the status quo since SPL 6, where it was created because the TDs, 9 years ago, believed RBY was too luck-based (relevant screenshots: one|two) to be Bo1 and also didn't require prep due to the mechanics of the generation. Both of these things have proven to be untrue over the years, as any RBY player would argue that the tier is indeed competitive, and while the nature of prep may be different from other tiers, it is not minimal. Given the flawed reasoning for the original decision and similar sentiments echoed by players with significant RBY accomplishments in the thread, we believe it's right to reverse that legacy decision. Bo1 treats RBY as an equal to every other tier in trophy tournaments and keeps our tours completely consistent and standardized as they should have been all along.

We understand that this timing is far from ideal; however, we felt it better to resolve this before the upcoming SPL instead of having another year of inaction on this thread only to come to the same conclusions outlined above. We apologize for the initial miscommunication on our end, but hope you can understand our perspective a bit better after this post.

I love a community that gives a middle finger to some of its own players, at this point yall havent doubled down on it, you quadrupled down on it at this point. Your transparency is a blessing so we can have a proper example of how not to run tournaments and how to be incompetent. Viva la RBY.

 

[Gimmicky]

We understand that this timing is far from ideal; however, we felt it better to resolve this before the upcoming SPL instead of having another year of inaction on this thread only to come to the same conclusions outlined above.

I really do find it hard to believe it took nine months to come up with this decision and post it. This timing isn't just "far from ideal", it's actively the worst time this decision could be announced. This is hardly resolving the situation before SPL, this is actively flaring it up right as the tournament is getting into motion. If there was time given to adjust to the decision, do you really think the outrage would be nearly as bad?

Also, the issue isn't that the TD team "did not adequately communicate their decision-making process", the issue lies entirely in the fact that said decision-making process is completely antithetical to what the players of the tier, and Smogon in general, want. If you wanted to standardize the tournament to be Bo1 for every single tier, you owed it to the community to make that decision clear to players and spectators alike in advance. The decision to not include the community in this process completely failed and betrayed the community that the TD team is supposed to serve.

The transparency of the team now does not begin to account for a lack of transparency in the past several months regarding this decision. This can't happen again if TDs want to retain any amount of community respect. Your decisions are not inherently bad or irrational, but the way the team went about it absolutely is.

 

[Hera]

quick summary for people who don't feel like reading all of that:

-we had some decently reasonable concerns about bo3 vs bo1, but instead of consulting playerbases about this, we decided to unilaterally move ahead with this decision because the top 1% of rby players said playerbase votes were bad
-we are also retroactively reversing years of precedent because we personally disagree with the decision regardless of its popularity

i think if you view this from a perspective of appeasing the top playerbase (i.e the 20ish players that are the only realistic players in spl), then i guess it makes sense, but it only serves to reinforce the perception that tds are too insular and the decisions that they make can reflect that. however as a whole i believe this to be a bad decision that actively harms rby, but i guess that since it's already in place for this year, the only other option is to campaign to make it happen next year.

 

[Heroic Troller]

cut

Sorry but this is a nothing post. I do understand WHY bo1 is choosen. But the point is you guys should not have done it under the table, posted in a deadpan manner one liner without giving the community a chance to have a say at least. I can understand not wanting to hear the same arguments and being adamant you are right, but this is quite literally, your role, quit it if you don't want to exchange words.
Now my proposal is simple, return rby bo3 this one time, and then have a thread whenever about bo1. I too like tds being firm on decisions but when you cross the line firm turns into stubborn and refusal to accept a mistake. The excuse that "it's gonna be hard to do it later" doesn't work at all, you quite literally picked the worst way to go around it and seem pretty decided and not cleaning this mess. What stops you from doing it after spl? If the thread doesn't have much activity THEN that's on the playerbase and you guys will be right. As of now the tds are wrong in the way they did it, objectively. You made a mistake, be reasonable and fix it instead of planting your feet down. Make a thread in the future, allow people the chance to discuss it and you will be right, if they miss it it's on them.

 

[Amaranth]

everyone: "we want the change to be reverted" (1 million upvotes on each post)

TDs: "by all means, have an explanation for why the change is not getting reverted"

please read again:

I do not think any other argument needs to be made other than: EVERY SINGLE RBY TOURNAMENT IS BO3 AND EVERYONE LIKES IT.

I guarantee that the playerbase will not settle for bo1. either something is done, or something very bad will happen this SPL. what that is exactly I don't know, but it will.
I know that at absolute minimum, at least 3 players that I'd consider top 10 (two of them easily top 3) are not going to partake. I don't know that the people who do partake will take this decision sitting down either.

I genuinely do not think the TD team understands the scale of this fuck up. I do not think they understand how farcical SPL XV will be due to this. I do not think they realize how badly they are hurting the community they are supposed to represent and protect.

I don't even think they understand that the timing is only the cherry on top, given that the last post attempts to present the timing as the only problem with this decision, when it clearly is not the core problem, only something that makes it all even worse than it already is.

And I hope my former colleagues appreciate how much anger I am restraining when I worked 5+ years to integrate RBY with Smogon Tournaments and make it a normal part of the circuit, only to see it immediately mistreated literally the first possible chance after I step down. I do not deserve this. My tier does not deserve this. Do your fucking jobs PLEASE

 

[Monai]

It's abundantly clear that we did not adequately communicate our decision-making process. This post is an attempt to rectify that mistake and clarify how we came to the decision we made.

Apart from RBY, every slot across all trophy team tours has always been Bo1. D4 Repertoire's post in the original thread already covers much of the reasoning why we believe Bo1 is the optimal format for team tours. Obviously, there is slightly more variance in any individual match in a Bo3 vs a Bo1, but in the team's opinion, the drawbacks clearly outweigh the benefits. The primary factor in our consideration was the workload increase across the team that comes with more Bo3 slots, which will inevitably exclude some players who can't commit the increased time and cause fatigue in both the players and supporters of each slot over the course of a tour. Additionally, at the end of the day, these are team tours and each week's result is determined by a team-wide Bo8/10/12 series. We don't think these drawbacks are offset by team reusability either, as that inherently diminishes the creativity on display each week.

We also believe that playerbase votes on Bo1 vs Bo3 are flawed in practice, which is why we denied this proposal in the original thread. A vote before auction absolutely does not guarantee it'd match with the preferences of the players that actually end up playing the tier over the course of the season. A vote after the auction, with each team's starter submitting their preference, comes with its own issues. First, the players signing up have no idea if they'll be playing Bo1 or Bo3, and since they have to be prepared for Bo3, this ends up being exclusionary to those dissuaded by the format for the reasons mentioned above. In addition, it means managers will be forced to draft without full knowledge of what exactly they are drafting for and simply have to pray that the player they buy ends up having the same preference as the majority to avoid negative impact.

With the above 2 conclusions, we were convinced that team tours should generally be Bo1 and that playerbase votes are not a practical solution to determine the match format within a tour. This led us to consider the status of the only outlier in trophy team tours: RBY Bo3. RBY Bo3 has been the status quo since SPL 6, where it was created because the TDs, 9 years ago, believed RBY was too luck-based (relevant screenshots: one|two) to be Bo1 and also didn't require prep due to the mechanics of the generation. Both of these things have proven to be untrue over the years, as any RBY player would argue that the tier is indeed competitive, and while the nature of prep may be different from other tiers, it is not minimal. Given the flawed reasoning for the original decision and similar sentiments echoed by players with significant RBY accomplishments in the thread, we believe it's right to reverse that legacy decision. Bo1 treats RBY as an equal to every other tier in trophy tournaments and keeps our tours completely consistent and standardized as they should have been all along.

We understand that this timing is far from ideal; however, we felt it better to resolve this before the upcoming SPL instead of having another year of inaction on this thread only to come to the same conclusions outlined above. We apologize for the initial miscommunication on our end, but hope you can understand our perspective a bit better after this post.

Just because the original reason was flawed, doesn't mean the current reason is flawed. The vast majority of RBY players agree that bo3 is the ideal way to play the format and that should be respected.

 

[ima]

My only experiences with RBY on Smogon was that I had to learn it extensively for a World Cup and winning RBYPL as a manager with Shiloh, so I'm very much an outsider here.

But as an outsider, the birds eye view looks very ugly.

To summarize what I've read, it's as follows: Fellow DPPers opened up a thread to discuss the potential addition of BO3. This lead to a lot of support and backlash, and from what I've seen, the cons were *just* enough to outweigh the pros (longer prep time, opens up a can of worms for future decisions, shit gets complicated. I understand)

Everything makes sense to me. But the way RBY took the fall for this, without any warning or discussion, just looks and feels emotionless - a lack of respect for a community. The whole False post just sounds like a giant middle finger, it just doesn't feel right at all. What happened to The People? Where do they get their voice heard from the people who run these Tournaments? Prior to the response, more than 50 people expressed their thoughts for bo3 to be made available again -- everything all to be lead by a response full of nothing, something you can TLDR as simply "no".

Talk to the people who actually play this generation. Please. Make these decisions with your community in mind, not just because it would be a hassle to deal with later. As a member of OU Council myself I find it very important that the community gets a say in decisions that we make before we make them. Give an eye for an eye.


On another note, Merry XMas Eve, Smogon

 

[BeeOrSomething]

I too enjoy doubling down on this asinine decision and not truthfully addressing any of the concerns. Round of applause.

Seriously though, it's been said a lot I know, but there are legitimately a large handful of SPL caliber RBY players who said they would not sign up, in the RBY discord or elsewhere. This will kill RBY in SPL. To everyone saying RBY will recover and people will move on, I sincerely doubt it. I would not be surprised at all if in a year or two there's a new PR thread talking about removing RBY from SPL and citing low playerbase/lack of interest.

 

[Bella]

It's abundantly clear that we did not adequately communicate our decision-making process. This post is an attempt to rectify that mistake and clarify how we came to the decision we made.

Apart from RBY, every slot across all trophy team tours has always been Bo1. D4 Repertoire's post in the original thread already covers much of the reasoning why we believe Bo1 is the optimal format for team tours. Obviously, there is slightly more variance in any individual match in a Bo3 vs a Bo1, but in the team's opinion, the drawbacks clearly outweigh the benefits. The primary factor in our consideration was the workload increase across the team that comes with more Bo3 slots, which will inevitably exclude some players who can't commit the increased time and cause fatigue in both the players and supporters of each slot over the course of a tour. Additionally, at the end of the day, these are team tours and each week's result is determined by a team-wide Bo8/10/12 series. We don't think these drawbacks are offset by team reusability either, as that inherently diminishes the creativity on display each week.

We also believe that playerbase votes on Bo1 vs Bo3 are flawed in practice, which is why we denied this proposal in the original thread. A vote before auction absolutely does not guarantee it'd match with the preferences of the players that actually end up playing the tier over the course of the season. A vote after the auction, with each team's starter submitting their preference, comes with its own issues. First, the players signing up have no idea if they'll be playing Bo1 or Bo3, and since they have to be prepared for Bo3, this ends up being exclusionary to those dissuaded by the format for the reasons mentioned above. In addition, it means managers will be forced to draft without full knowledge of what exactly they are drafting for and simply have to pray that the player they buy ends up having the same preference as the majority to avoid negative impact.

With the above 2 conclusions, we were convinced that team tours should generally be Bo1 and that playerbase votes are not a practical solution to determine the match format within a tour. This led us to consider the status of the only outlier in trophy team tours: RBY Bo3. RBY Bo3 has been the status quo since SPL 6, where it was created because the TDs, 9 years ago, believed RBY was too luck-based (relevant screenshots: one|two) to be Bo1 and also didn't require prep due to the mechanics of the generation. Both of these things have proven to be untrue over the years, as any RBY player would argue that the tier is indeed competitive, and while the nature of prep may be different from other tiers, it is not minimal. Given the flawed reasoning for the original decision and similar sentiments echoed by players with significant RBY accomplishments in the thread, we believe it's right to reverse that legacy decision. Bo1 treats RBY as an equal to every other tier in trophy tournaments and keeps our tours completely consistent and standardized as they should have been all along.

We understand that this timing is far from ideal; however, we felt it better to resolve this before the upcoming SPL instead of having another year of inaction on this thread only to come to the same conclusions outlined above. We apologize for the initial miscommunication on our end, but hope you can understand our perspective a bit better after this post.

We’ve understood the TD perspective. The problem is TD team has not understood what the players want. This response was frankly awful and addressed no issues the community had with this decision and did not revert the decision at all. And for what? You made the worst decision you could just before SPL and basically fucked over the entire RBY community and others. The missteps the TD team has taken is insane and the fact you have not even tried to compromise or even listen to the community at all is baffling.

This response proved to me TD team needs a complete restructuring and there needs to be serious internal policies changed in how Tournaments are done. Either do your jobs and listen to the community or resign.

 

[cheru]

If this isn’t a slap in the face to what the tours scene is supposed to be I don’t know what is. Doing what is “best” for the tour without counting the players opinion is exactly how you create toxic environments with people in open revolt of authority on the site. If you want to kill RBY just say it without going into this pr bullshit response just to boost your like ratio with hahas and stroke your egos.

Also happy holidays smogon

 

[reyscarface]

In about 15 years (god damn im old) of being a part of this community, I have never seen such an immense voice calling for authorities to resign from their position over such a tone deaf decision. And not even just a group of friends making the petition, but users from very heterogenic and different groups with nothing to do with the community being affected.

That is all that has to be said about this, really. You fucked up and you decided to give a middle finger and double down. The only good thing to come out of this is that we are better prepared to expect ridiculous decisions like this in the future.

Well done, pat yourselves on the back.

 

[Vulpix03]

Well I thought people couldn't get any more upset but somehow we got here.

I agree with Troller. Make this spl bo3 RBY and then after it ends start the conversation for bo1. Everyone understood why the tds made their initial decision, we didn't need that word vomit to explain it to us. But what I don't get is why the tds feel the need to make rby bo1 now. Why can't this spl, like the past 8 spls, be bo3? What is the rush??? Also, when the fuck have rby players complained about burn out or fatigue from bo3??? I've participated in 4 spls now and I've never had a teammate complain.

I guess I won't even bother reading tour policy anymore since tds will just do whatever the fuck they want and not care about the community

 

[Celever]

I’m excited to see how the players will protest the decision during the tournament if it isn’t reversed beforehand. Should be good grounds for creativity.

The decision’s terrible for all the reasons in this thread btw it absolutely deserves protest. The reply from TDs framing it as them not getting their optics right is insulting to the entire RBY playerbase who are more than capable of identifying and addressing the issue itself and so therefore haven’t formed an uproar just because the vibes were off.

 

[Arcticblast]

I ask all of the RBY players in SPL to please understand why you were pulled out of SV (because none of the actual RBY players seem to be signing up any more), play a best of 3 set anyway on main with the room private, and post only the final game, letting the rest of the replays disappear into the void forever

 

[Isa]

• workload increase across the team that comes with more Bo3 slots,
• which will inevitably exclude some players who can't commit the increased time and
• cause fatigue in both the players and supporters of each slot over the course of a tour.

Are these issues that you have heard reported on from teams or players that warranted this decision? Is it your earnest belief that the RBY players suffer from higher levels of fatigue than others?

We don't think these drawbacks are offset by team reusability either, as that inherently diminishes the creativity on display each week.

Are you saying that SPL with a Bo3 format would lead to lower creativity displayed each week? I have a firm belief that in a Bo3 scenario it is much easier to take a chance on a more experimental team. I do not believe that RBY being Bo1 would result in more engaging games.

We also believe that playerbase votes on Bo1 vs Bo3 are flawed in practice, which is why we denied this proposal in the original thread. A vote before auction absolutely does not guarantee it'd match with the preferences of the players that actually end up playing the tier over the course of the season.

I would suggest that a playerbase vote would have a higher chance of getting the preferences of the playerbase right moreso than the TD team. Regardless of whether the choice is made by the players or the TDs, there may be a populace that did not get their wish through.

RBY Bo3 has been the status quo since SPL 6, where it was created because the TDs, 9 years ago, believed RBY was too luck-based (relevant screenshots: one|two) to be Bo1 and also didn't require prep due to the mechanics of the generation. Both of these things have proven to be untrue over the years, as any RBY player would argue that the tier is indeed competitive, and while the nature of prep may be different from other tiers, it is not minimal. Given the flawed reasoning for the original decision and similar sentiments echoed by players with significant RBY accomplishments in the thread, we believe it's right to reverse that legacy decision. Bo1 treats RBY as an equal to every other tier in trophy tournaments and keeps our tours completely consistent and standardized as they should have been all along.

This is framing that I take issue with. The TDs of the time thought that RBY needed to be Bo3 because of a flawed perception of the metagame, this is correct. However, flawed reasoning can still lead to a correct decision. RBY Bo3 was generally seen as a positive among the players at the time, just as it is done now. As an active RBY player at the time I was actively supporting RBY to be included as a Bo3 slot - not only would I get to play in my favorite metagame in SPL again, I would also do it in a superior format that would allow me to express my skill in a more accurate way. The RBY slot being Bo3 enhanced the tournament for me and my team - it allowed me to use more creative sets, it allowed me to play in more interesting ways, it allowed the metagame to advance further, and it enhanced the competitive nature of the tournament. RBY being Bo3 was a thing worthy of celebration and has indeed been celebrated by the community. You are framing this as if you are treating RBY right by undoing this, when you are very much not.
The consistency and standardization you speak of sounds good on paper, but why is it inherently important that all slots are played as Bo1? Are RBY players harmed by playing a tier with a non-standard number of games required to determine a winner? Of course not.

We understand that this timing is far from ideal; however, we felt it better to resolve this before the upcoming SPL instead of having another year of inaction on this thread only to come to the same conclusions outlined above. We apologize for the initial miscommunication on our end, but hope you can understand our perspective a bit better after this post.

Although it is concerning that you're saying ahead of time that you would not reach a different conclusion even if engaging in conversation for longer time than already spent, I still believe that both you and the community would be better served by waiting to implement this and instead engage in conversation with the players affected. I can guarantee you though that there would be no inaction from the player base on this topic - unless you willfully refrain from engaging in discussion, there is a highly motivated playerbase willing to engage with you on the issues.

I implore you to reconsider your decision.

 

[spidget]

Rby players will play this spl and realize bo1 is better anyway, we wont have this conversation next year. Looking forward to spectating rby bo1 in the near future and seeing how players adapt to this change in the meta. Public outcry can only last for so long, stay strong TD team! Looking forward to your guys' next decision. People will learn to live with their new reality. Happy holidays smogon!

 

[blank]

returning from the dead to point out how such a huge majority of people in the tournaments community are opposed to this decision.

you know you guys messed up when you have this many people all agreeing that it’s a big mistake. please take this as a sign to reconsider the decision.

 

[Nails]

In my first post I was sympathetic. "Oh, they made a silly mistake. Once they realize how bad this decision is, they'll revert it and everything will be hunky dory and we'll have a fun tournament." Doubling down on this decision in the face of this level of community backlash shows a damning level of either disconnect from or disregard for the community, and I'm not sure which one is worse but it doesn't matter. I had assumed throughout the process that the TDs were acting in good faith, but Merritt's post has shown me that I was mistaken. The complete refusal to negotiate, to potentially allow a community say on the matter is insane; it would have been so easy to say "during preseason, we are going to allow the teams to cast one vote each for bo1 or bo3, with TDs breaking a tie" but giving away that level of control was too much.

The primary factor in our consideration was the workload increase across the team that comes with more Bo3 slots, which will inevitably exclude some players who can't commit the increased time and cause fatigue in both the players and supporters of each slot over the course of a tour. Additionally, at the end of the day, these are team tours and each week's result is determined by a team-wide Bo8/10/12 series. We don't think these drawbacks are offset by team reusability either, as that inherently diminishes the creativity on display each week.

The quoted bit is what irks me the most, because I just disagree with every reason given.
- I've played 6 full SPLs in RBY and 6 full team tours in other tiers (5 DOU 1 BW RU) and the amount of time investment needed to prep for bo3 RBY does not compare to other tiers. It is not insignificant; it still does not come close to doing good prep in a current gen format.
- I haven't heard complaints of fatigue from fellow RBYers, maybe I missed them? There isn't much difference for me playing a 40 minute game vs an 80 or 120 minute set, personally.
- The sentence about the result being a team-wide boX is irrelevant so I'm not really sure how to respond to it.
- The point about creativity is obviously wrong. If you have more games to play you have more options to use creative picks. As an example, I think Moltres is the type of mon that one should bring about once every 40 games or so. It's generally a fun pokemon to watch. With bo1, I'd bring it once every ~4 years. With bo3 (~2.5 games per set) it comes to a game most years. I could make more points about how bringing riskier picks is scarier if you do not have the chance to win your other games but I'm not sure if they're valid; I think I've already refuted this point sufficiently anyways.

The tone in that post is so bad that I'm not signing up for SPL out of spite if this decision stands. Before reading it, I got tagged in a server asking if I would still play and I responded "yeah haha I'm not gonna mess around, I'm not going anywhere" but genuinely fuck that post. I'm sitting out if this decision isn't walked back. Enjoy directing the tournament!

 

[1LDK]

Everyone has said this already, but the problem was the way everything was structured that led to this

>No RBY players were asked, meaning they felt isolated and left out
>it got hit my a collateral in a thread that was mainly about DPP
>also decided to make it iligal to gentelman, taking away a right to free will
>the huge post that many pointed out as dishonest and just doubled down on the problem

If you let people choose what they want, even if their option loses, people would still be at least comfortable with because they had voice in the matter
if you let people know this could have repercussions towards them, they will have time to react
if you let people gentleman in the frame ruling of tournament rules, they will play with the rules and not outside the rules
if you go straight to the point, then at least it's less to read

every single thing that could have gone wrong, went wrong, but there is still time to fix this, player sign-ups are being stalled, there is time to talk this out

and if for some reason, the RBY community decides to still play in SPL and still abide the rules and not complaining, shame of them
but if they boycott, no one plays and the tds kick RBY out of SPL for "lack of players" you guys can fill the rest

 

[Zacpz]

From old gen tiering to tour direction, smogon is on an absolute roll trying to bite off it's nose to spite it' face. Playerbases being ignored has become synonymous with policy. What a time to be paying an amazing game with such terrible leadership.

 

[seth]

I think as a representative of the community, I speak for everyone when I say we stand with the TDs. They are doing thankless work only to be met with this hatred and cruelty. Also, this work is absolutely free, they have no obligation to appease your complaints so I’d suggest we let the appointed pros do their job. Keep BO1. Happy Holidays.

 

[Texas Cloverleaf]

I've been here consistently for fifteen years and there has not been one issue, one thread, one argument, that has ever received this degree of unanimous opposition. There is not a single post of support for this change. On smogon, of all places, the paramount of pedantic bullshit arguments.

There is no justification strong enough to support the actions the TD team have taken in lieu of this degree of opposition.

 

[BigFatMantis]

The problem is more about the fundamental role of the TD position and how it needs to be better defined, because this decision clearly shows how it’s not working anymore. If you don’t feel that people should get to vote on their tier being Bo3 or not, that’s fine, no problem. But when you actually make a significant change to a tier that is already standard as a Bo3, and do not consult ANY of the playerbase, then use your own logic that you yourselves came up with, and try to improperly reinforce it with some posts made in a thread that had nothing to do with RBY, it’s a complete fail.

You have to undo the decision and make RBY Bo3 because that was the status quo and you changed it without consulting anyone just because you felt like it. Thats wrong from a policy standpoint, as well as from a moral standpoint. You are not morally sound and just acting like stubborn fools on some sort of power trip. And this isn’t just a TD problem, I see it happen from time to time on Smogon where higher ups are so absolutely fucking terrified of going back on decisions that they’ll try any sort of excuse to stay firm even when it’s clear you are going against the community.

If you don’t undo this and let everyone have a proper discussion on Bo3 before making an actual change, then you have taken all power away from the people. We are now at the mercy of whatever whims the upper echelon of Smogon decision making wants, even if it’s not at all what 97% of the community wants. Basically an archaic ancient feudal system of power.

 

[Hipmonlee]

I like bo1 rby because I am old and get worn out by the end of long sets. The idea that preping a bo3 rby set is too onerous seems to be verging on the threshold of no longer even being subjective, but just being outright incorrect.

I mean, I know I am not a heavy prepper by rby standards, but, this really seems wild.