MPL X - Format Discussion

Status
Not open for further replies.

ken

gm
is a Tournament Directoris a Member of Senior Staffis a Community Contributoris a Tiering Contributoris a Top Contributoris a Top Dedicated Tournament Hostis a Battle Simulator Moderator
Monotype Leader
It's that time of the year again! With MPL X coming up we're re-opening the discussion about the tournament's format. Last year's format consisted of:
  • SV
  • SV
  • SV
  • SV
  • SS
  • SM
  • ORAS
  • BW
This year, we would like to primarily bring up the discussion over the 4th SV slot, particularly focusing on SV4 vs SV Bo3 vs SV NDM. We are leaning towards SV4 but are interested in your thoughts.

Other Discussion Topics:
  • Should we stick with the traditional 130k budget or move more in line with other tiers and use 100k as a base for an 8-slot/2-substitute minimum? If we change to a 100k budget, what are your thoughts on manager pricing?
  • If we bring back retains, what should the cap be on pre-draft purchases between manager selfbuys and retains? We are leaning towards a total of 2-3 between the two.
  • We're interested in the community's thoughts about a 10-slot format but not inclined towards implementation this year.
If you feel strongly about any of the above, now's your chance to give input. Please include an explanation for your responses to the specific slot selection at least. Inclusion of tiers in the MOM subforum is not up for discussion.

As usual, shitposting won't be tolerated in this thread, and if you choose to participate, please don't respond with a one-liner. Once final decisions have been made, we will post the decisions here and the format will not change afterwards.

This thread will stay open until April 28th @ 9PM GMT-4. Manager signups will open after this thread closes.
 

boomp

Never Give Up
is a Site Content Manageris a Forum Moderatoris a Community Contributoris a Top Contributor
Hiiiii, I think NDM should be in that 4th slot for MPL. Reason I feel this way is that NDM shown it can be a great metagame/competitive scene to be in it due to the current NDMPL showcasing it. This also brings more chances of upcoming players who shines in NDM to have a shot of being picked up which can be huge for the community as well. I also feel having a bo3 sv slot will just bring a strain on the players.
We're interested in the community's thoughts about a 10-slot format but not inclined towards implementation this year.
I see this as a win: more games, more players, more opportunities. <3
 
Hey,
everyone I think ndm has a place in MPL. I don’t think that having more SV slots or even having a BO3 slot is really doing anything positive for the tournament. I think that ndm has shown that it’s more than competitive enough to be in the highest level of play for monotype. I know people sometimes have a sore spot for national dex monotype, however it has been included in the most recent mwp and it has its own premier league. It’s very much an adjacent to standard SV mono with just a few differences that make it its own. It has its own community on top of bringing more people to mpl that may not have learned older generations of mono/ ever experienced it for themselves because they had ndm. I think bringing newer players in the national dex community is a net positive. I also think 10 slots would actually be nice addition to mpl as there’s more opportunities for players. I don’t particularly have thoughts on retains but they limited as much as possible imo. I think keeping the budget as is fine as well!
thanks!
 

sasha

what we did in the desert
is a Social Media Contributoris a Community Contributoris a Contributor to Smogon
4th slot should be BO3 or NDM. 4 SV is redundant, and Bo3 is usually the more competitive/intense as Bo3 will house the strongest players which would be the only exciting differentiator between a regular SV slot and Bo3, if the point is for meta development or whatever then Bo3 also just gives more SV games on that front as well.

NDM should be given real consideration in MPL. It has an active playerbase, its own room on PS, and always finds itself in all of National Dex's team tours. I'm going to contradict myself and say I personally don't want it in MPL, but I'm also not going to turn a blind eye to a community that wants inclusion / deserves it frankly. NDM sees more decent/good-level tournament play than our oldgens and it's still considered a bad tier or w.e, though someone who thinks NDM is a bad tier should comment. I just don't think it should be in MPL because to me MPL is a tournament that showcases tiers that were at times, the current generation, not an extension of what could've been if GameFreak finally decided to bring all the mons back.

Don't have any comments @ pricing + retains because Chaitanya and I will be managing the Unban Me Umbreons and we will both be self-buying and going 8-0 so it doesn't matter. Good luck noobs. Seriously though, it's just whether or not you want to punish teams harder for retaining/self-buying or not. So whatever the majority decides on this should just be implemented, or take a discussion up with the actual managers once they are chosen.

With the next MPL being during Generation 10 (i hope), we would have BW-SV + G10. Meaning we have 6 individual generations. Assuming the tour format follows the same one as this, you would have 4 G10, SV, SS, SM, ORAS, BW, making MPL with 9 slots possible. Obviously there's not going to be a 9 slot tour but the point is we would already be so close to 10. It could finally be viable but I think it would still just depend on the amount of signups MPL gets then (which we wouldn't know until after the format is decided) so...hard to say now but all I can say is that 10 slot would be on paper finally doable and would probably support it but idk.
 
Last edited:

style.css

is an official Team Rateris a Social Media Contributoris an Artistis a Forum Moderatoris a Community Contributor
Moderator
Budget and retains kind of go hand in hand. Larger budget means you can have more retains while a smaller budget requires fewer retains to keep things fair. Personally I'd prefer the larger budget with 3 retains.

As for the 4th SV slot which I think that NDM should take. As someone who does a lot of building for tours I can say that 4 iterations of a single tier can become extremely monotonous. Not that there is any issue with reusing teams, but I have seen an increase in reusing for team tours which shows the strain that a 4th slot can put on building. As a builder I love tours like MPL because this is where you can really get creative and come up with stuff you never would have in an individual tour or for ladder. By having SV at 3 we can still showcase the current gen while not putting strain on players or builders.

Now for why NDM should be the tier to replace SV4.

MPL as the showcase for Monotype
We constantly struggle in the competitive community to be seen as a "real" tier because people think Monotype is just a match up tier (a debate I won't get into here; we all know this is shit). By including NDM, it shows Monotype functioning in even more formats and communities. Showing the variety and versatility of the tier as much as we can only stands to improve the perception of Monotype as a whole.

Isn't National Dex Monotype just an OM?
Technically, yes but it's a little different than it's perceived to be. We have Official Metas, Other Metas (Official Other Metas with their own presences on the forums, etc) then what we in the Monotype community also call other metas that are unofficial and up until recently only lived as a post in a group thread. NDM is an officially recognized Other Meta but that doesn't even matter. In practice NDM should be viewed more as it's own "generation" of sorts. It is a stand alone Monotype themed tier with it's own staff, resources, tours and tour inclusion across both Monotype and National Dex. Because NDM is a culmination of all gens together, it has made tiering extremely efficient to a point that old "default" bans are now being considered to be unbanned. That says a lot about the state of the tiers metagame.

The Past & Future of Monotype
Monotype at one point was not an official meta and it took a lot of fighting for it to finally get that status. Even still we struggle for inclusion at the highest level of Smogon play in SCL which every year we advocate for. If Monotype itself has had all these problems and want people to consider us in high level play then why would we not have that same outlook within our own community?

Growing our community and playerbase
It's very evident that Monotype's community has been dwindling. Older players aren't sticking around and there just aren't as many newer people coming to Showdown as a whole. By embracing NDM within Monotype as a sister tier or an equivalent to it's own gen, both tiers stand to gain more players to their respective communities. We all need to adapt and take any growth opportunities that present themselves. As a leader in NDM I look for every chance to move my tier forward and push the boundaries of what's possible. I want to respect what's been done in the past but I can't hold fast to those ideals if they don't work anymore or hold us back.
 
the format i am supporting is the following:

SV
SV
SV
SS
SM
ORAS
BW
NDM

NDM right now is at the best it's ever been in terms, of, literally everything. the meta does not have any outlying issues and it's council deserves major credit for that. the only other meta i can remotely compare NDM to is SM mono. with the main comparison being that there is a net least amount of auto-loss matchups in the tier. which in turn means it's competitiveness is at an all time high. NDM should be viewed as a sister tier to monotype, and the inclusion of it in MPL will only help it grow and eventually equalize itself to monotype. also +100 to everything style said.

if i were to rank the other remaining options i would have SV bo3 next and SV4 last. if we are going to be banning mons before and during the tour i think a bo3 slot would not only showcase the top players but develop the "new" meta after the ban(s) swiftly.

i'll let the experienced managers fight out the retain and budget thing as that's not really my forte. as for 10 slots, even if it isn't included this year i think it would be an awesome addition in the future because we already have the signups for it and will only be getting more as we have a custom avatar prize going forward. that's all my thoughts for now and i do expect a large movement to attempt to get NDM into the tour.
 
Hey everyone,

I think NDM definitely deserves a slot in MPL. Looking at the current format, I think it can get a bit repetitive. Especially considering there is no mono Ubers, threat, or other “diverse” slot besides older gens, 4 SV seems a bit overkill imo. I think adding NDM is a great way to keep things fresh, increase the number of players that want to participate, and allow for much more diverse team-building/game play. I think this years NDMPL speaks for itself with the great teamwork, diversity, and competition it has displayed. I don’t really see any downside, as anyone who prefers not to play NDM still has plenty of other options to choose from, but for those who do like the format it provides the opportunity. I also think that 10 slots in future tours would be a great idea, for most of the same reasons already listed, adding more players and opportunities!
 
I will go against most people's posts and say that NDM should not be in MPL. It is far more sensical to have it featured in MWP and more importantly, in its own premier league (NDMPL) rather than have it featured in Monotype's most important team tournament, and there are only very few select players who are familiar with it in the monotype community. It favors teams searching for NDM-mainers and I don't think find there has been enough "competitive engagement" for it to be featured in MPL, outside of those forementioned tournaments (which have been for the most part dedicated for the National Dex Mono playerbase and not the Monotype community). It also narrows team engagement as only select few players will know this tier and will know what to bring. Surely a "fun tournament" is a valid criteria to go for, but having bo3 as a format is just as fun and it is far more consistent in terms of what our playerbase is engaged with.

That being said, I would be supporting Bo3, as it is more interesting to watch and it should be dedicated to players who are very consistent at SV.
There is this "burnout" argument that players always bring up (in the sense that it makes weeks draining because you have to prep for, potentially, 3 games per week) but ultimately I think the tradeoff of having bo3 in monotype's most important team tournament is positive. It also encourages you to obtain help from your teammates (building, tactics) to prep for this tier which differs from NDM where only a very few select individuals are good at and will probably only rely on themselves to win their games.
 
Last edited:

avarice

greedy for love
is a Tutor Alumnusis a Site Content Manager Alumnusis a Team Rater Alumnusis a Top Social Media Contributor Alumnusis a Forum Moderator Alumnusis a Community Contributor Alumnusis a Top Tiering Contributor Alumnusis a Contributor Alumnusis a Smogon Media Contributor Alumnusis a Past SCL Champion
RoAPL Champion
sv4 >>sv bo3>>> ndm

keep ndm for mwp. arguing om or not is whatever, the point is ndm isn't an oldgen. the difference in sv 4 slot and ndm player wise is rather limited asw. sv bo3 is pretty demanding in the builder so it'd be better to keep to one match. for a more "showcase" slot i think a multi gen bo3 ( sv / ss / sm ) should be considered.
 
Changing budget is basically irrelevant, but for the sake of simplicity I'd say there is no point and then you can keep the manager prices the same as well. Against retains entirely but if we do end up with them surely 2 max.

4th sv is the easiest choice ever imo. V few people that want to play bo3 would actually be slotted into it. Astounding that ndm idea was brought up by OP, it is obviously not a realistic option and surely mods know that.

8 slots lmao please
 
Manager Pricing:
As per usual, this topic is very difficult to actually discuss. The same arguments have been used for many tournaments now with it being better for stronger manager pairs, but no one having a solution for that specific issue. With that being said, i will agree with what Chaitanya said and would prefer to keep the status que, until a better solution has been found.

Retains:
Heavily against it. Basically can give you a strong player ensured or for cheap if they improved alot since last MPL. If retains would come back, i would say max 1 per team.

8 Slot vs 10 Slot:
In my Opinion, Monotype has shown to be able to handle 10 Slot tournaments easily. We have alot of sign ups for every single MPL and MWP. One argument used against it is level of play, but i personally disagree with that thought. If you want to grow the community, you need to give newer players a chance to get into tournaments to learn from other players. And don't go with a "oh but we used to" cause yes, in the past everyone was worse than they are now and the community that developed the Metagame should not take that as a reason to play elite club for a Tournament. In the long run, 10 slots will increase the average level of Monotype by helping players that would not get picked or get to play in a 8 slot event to be drafted or participating actively in the games. While this MPL most likely will be 8 slots, i would like to see monotype growing to take in the large community and helping players participating in these tournaments.

SV 4, Bo3 or NDM:
This is a bit of a unclear one for me. Bo3 has hype but also alot of pressure on the people playing it. In most cases, it's the two best players of the teams facing off against each other, which makes the games fun to watch and the slot be extremely competitive. Sadly, i believe the fact you would force specific players to prep 3 teams per week for an opponent that is considered top tier themselfs which will also prep 3 teams is a huge time restraint for many people. Just imagine having to build like 30 new teams for a single tour just for one slot. So i believe Bo3 should never be the answer. That leaves SV4 vs NDM. Now, i am a huge fan of NDM as a Tier. i played it in MWP and NDMPL, but that is exactly why i am not sure if it should get a MPL slot. NDM has a huge playerbase, enough to even host it's own PL. This is why i personally think, NDM does not require a slot for MPL. I would obviously be very glad if it got into MPL, but i can see the restrain of other people, arguing that MPL is for current gen monotype and oldgens, not for, what is at this point, basically a whole new tier. Now with that said, SV 4 also feels a bit unsatisfying overall, given that half the slot's played would be playing the same tier, so every option has it's reasons against it. I personally am for either SV 4 or NDM, just heavily against Bo3.
 

Ashbala

You can pretend that it was me, but no, oh ♪
is a Pre-Contributor
Hi. As we plan for this year's Monotype Premier League (MPL), it's essential to consider the format that will best promote competitiveness and diversity within the tournament. With this in mind, the following format has been proposed below. In the following sections, I will delve into the rationale behind these choices, including the importance of Bo3 versus NDM, the decision to exclude SV4 or SV Bo3, budget considerations, and the number of slots.

Formats for this year:

This year, the ideal format would include:
  • SV
  • SV
  • SV
  • Bo3 (preferably Old gens) / NDM
  • SS
  • SM
  • ORAS
  • BW
1. Bo3 vs NDM:

Bo3 is the most preferred format among monotype players for its sheer competitiveness, and it has been tried and tested in previous iterations of MPL as well. Oldgens is preferred in this format, as it offers a more dynamic and varied gameplay experience.

As for NDM, the tier is currently experiencing its best meta yet, with outstanding balance and competitiveness. Comparisons to SM Monotype are apt, as both have few auto-loss matchups, resulting in a highly competitive environment. NDM should be seen as a sister tier to monotype, and its inclusion in MPL will undoubtedly contribute to its growth, bringing it closer to the level of monotype. Major credit goes to the NDM council for maintaining such a healthy meta. Additionally, I fully agree with everything Style said.

Personally, I feel NDM should be given a chance, but Bo3 is much better in terms of sheer competitiveness if the tiers are chosen wisely.

Multigen Bo3 (SV, 2 of SS, SM, ORAS, BW) = NDM >> Oldgens Bo3 >> SV Bo3

2. Why we should not include SV4 or SV Bo3:


The format already has more SV slots, and oldgens tournament representation is less compared to CG. I believe giving oldgens a chance is much better than CG. Additionally, the current SV meta is somewhat redundant, and having three SV slots is sufficient for MPL. If necessary, having a Multigen Bo3 with SV as a mandatory tier would be more suitable, as it would fill the place of both oldgens and SV in the final slot with intention to bring more competitiveness.

Budget, Managing Pricing, and Retains:

This year, I believe the ideal budget should be 100K, in line with other official leagues, with Manager Self-Buy priced at 15K. If both managers decide to self-buy, a budget of 70K would be suitable to fill the eight slots.

The concept of retains should only apply to teams that are returning or have participated in two or three previous iterations of MPL. If retains are available, I think two would be better, considering the 100K budget. If the budget were increased to 130K, then three retains would be the best option.

8 vs 10 Slots:

Change is necessary, but some things should remain consistent. While the idea of having 10 slots is appealing, considering there are no better generations like DPP or ADV available, especially since MPL historically has been the biggest monotype tournament without any OMs included, sticking with 8 slots is a much better option than increasing to 10.
 
I agree with Chait that changing budget doesn't really change anything. Won't give an opinion on retains as I wasn't around back when they were a thing, if ever I would like to suggest capping to 1 managers selfbuys since I don't think nobody loves having situations like attri+trich both buying themselves for the price 1 single one of them would go for, and in general other PL's cap to 1 selfbuy too as it's an abusable system, although it's not necessarily a big deal. I also agree with the idea that NDM should be kept to MWP and overall I think 4th SV fits better than BO3, so I agree with avarice's post
 
There is something obviously problematic with the winning manager pair of last year's mpl signing up to manage together for the sole purpose of price fixing themselves. I understand we likely can't get rid of manager self buys altogether without damaging the quality of managers we would get, but something should clearly be done to nerf it. I think limiting manager self buys to 1 is a good step forward. Of the 8 teams last year, only 3 of them had purchased both their managers. There should be no issues with finding an extra 3 quality managers.
 
Budget, Manager Pricing, & Retains
Though 130k is not standard, it has worked for us and I see no reason to change to 100k. The manager pricing is the bigger issue and I think MPL should move towards something more variable to properly account for strong managers while also not entirely excluding weaker managers from playing in our precious tournament.

The next question is which system to use for variable manager pricing. I don't know hahaha! There's probably a number of tried models out there but I think leaving it up to the hosts (provided they're not playing in the tournament) to come up with a FAIR price for each manager self-buy is the best way to go about it. If the prices are unfair, we can just blame them rather than go on a never-ending quest for the most convoluted formula. Good luck, ken!

As for retains, hard pass. Retain them through the auction.

MPL with 10-slots
MPL 10 with 10-slots! This has been a thing for a decade. I think this is a great time to break the mold in celebration for the tier. This once disregarded community on Smogon has gone through soooo much and I think this would be an awesome time to change things up. We can go back to 8-slots next year but I think, for this year specifically, changing it up just makes so much sense. We have the sign-ups. We can afford it. We can have fun with it... just this once.

Formats
If we stay at 8 slots, I think keeping last year's format is fine, but I think we could also axe either an SV slot or an oldgen for NDM - for funsies.

If we play with 10 slots, then I think NDM should definitely come out. The last slot goes into bo3 (including NDM).

The players will have choose between 6 formats to play from and my proposal for how it's decided is a ban & pick system where the lower priced player first bans a format and the higher priced player then picks a format and bans another. With 2/6 formats banned/invalid and 1 chosen to play, the initiative goes back to the lower priced player where they'll also pick a format from the remaining three and ban another, leaving one more format by default to be played for the last format, and all played in the order the formats were chosen. I think this could add a layer of strategy and personality between each head to head matchup, but this is just me having fun with the idea.

Hope the hosts go along with something fun this year!
 
Last edited:

CaptainDaimyo

500,000 USD for a 0.1 square meter room in Dubai
is a Top Contributor
Lending my thoughts:

This year, we would like to primarily bring up the discussion over the 4th SV slot, particularly focusing on SV4 vs SV Bo3 vs SV NDM. We are leaning towards SV4 but are interested in your thoughts.
Me thinks SV NDM > SV Bo3 > SV4, since NDM's been seeing some great increase in popularity recently, with analyses opening up, and I also feel like NDM grants more variety in metagames compared to adding a second base SV slot (also gives players more adept in NDM a chance to play!)

We're interested in the community's thoughts about a 10-slot format but not inclined towards implementation this year.
Greatly in favor of this. I feel like 8 slots is a bit too restrictive, given the amount of Monotype OMs that can attract popularity thanks to MPL such as Mono Ubers, SV Monothreat, and Mono LC. If we do 10 slots next year, im thinking Mono Ubers and Mono LC are best imo since they have vastly different metagames comopared to regular mono
 

Vodoom

is a Tiering Contributor
MPL Champion
We got MWP for OMs, keep that shit for that,
SV4>BO3, no one enjoys prepping 3 teams per week for one slot, don’t allow managers to play to stop this 50k for trich+att broken ass illegal combination to ever happen again, thank god next gen we won’t have this bs ass format issue
 
FORMAT
As far as the format, I like the current one. SV4 slots displays our tier’s best competitive image. However, I have a strong preference for a Bo3 slot. For me, Bo3 is the most entertaining and thrilling slot to watch as a spectator. As a player, Bo3 gives me more freedom to showcase superior preparation and displaying my level as a strategist against an opponent. I’ve read about the opinions that Bo3 is a stressful and tedious slot to prep for. However, I still see Bo3 as a slot that channels players’ competitive drive and makes players thinker harder to create the strongest teams. Some players may not realize that some of their teams are strong enough that even if the opponent knows about it, what can their opponent do about it? Throwback to ArkenCiel bringing Grass 3 games in a row in Bo3 for a win. As for NDM, I share the opinion with a few others to keep OMs separate from MPL. It’s a great tier and Monotype’s best OM but that’s just it, it’s an OM.

MANAGER PRICING, BUDGET & RETAINS
The budget is fine, changing it won’t cause much variation. Retains should be done away with. Reclaim your favorite players and friends through the auction. As for manager pricing, I think the price should stay the same for all managers. Although, my extreme take would be just let managers draft themselves for free. But that is an idea I stand alone in. So, just keep the manager price the same.

10 SLOTS
I like the idea sasha presented about 10 slots for Gen 10. I think that would be a fun thing to try out. I think it should stay 8 slots outside of that, though.
 
Hi friends, I will just use this post to touch on the manager pricing topic because I personally think it's the most jarring one.

Regardless if the budget is 130k or 100k, I strongly believe that pricing should never ever be the same for all pairs. It's just blatantly unfair from the get-go, I don't think I need to pinpoint the details of why it is like that: we have a pretty clear example last year, when Trich and Attribute were not only on the same price for all the other managers (already jarring to me) but the pricing stablished also allowed them to buy themselves for much cheaper than they would go for in a regular auction. Flat pricing for all pairs is fundamentally unfair and easily exploitable. And we all know that.

I might be wrong, and hosts can correct me if I am, but the main argument I see for it staying like this is "Since we can't come up with a system that actually makes it more fair while eliminating all bias from the process, it is staying like this", which, in my point of view, is quite literally the worst possible course of action, because it acknowledges the fact that the power level across pairings is not (nearly) the same, but decides to ignore this VITAL piece of information whatsoever.

This is why I think the power level of each individual pair MUST be taken into consideration in some way in order to determine manager pricings. Wether it is by the hosts' subjective criteria or by using past tour results in a mathematical formula, which I agree that will undoubtedly add a certain degree of bias to the process, the result will always be net positive as it will somewhat erase the most glaring issue at hand and make it more fair for everyone involved.

"But Leaf, wouldn't the tour lose credibility with subjective decisions like that?"

Personally, I think it's much easier to answer and explain a "Huh, why is Trich and Attribute more expensive than Mickey Mouse 1 and Mickey Mouse 2?" than the "Why Trich and Attribute are the same prices as MickeyMouse 1 and Mickey Mouse 2?" if system stays as it is right now.

DISCLAIMER: the terms Mickey Mouse 1 and Mickey Mouse 2 were used for the sake of generalization. In no way, the writer of this post believe any of the pair of managers of the Monotype Premier League can be called "Mickey Mouses". Thank you for your understanding.
 
Hi friends, I will just use this post to touch on the manager pricing topic because I personally think it's the most jarring one.

Regardless if the budget is 130k or 100k, I strongly believe that pricing should never ever be the same for all pairs. It's just blatantly unfair from the get-go, I don't think I need to pinpoint the details of why it is like that: we have a pretty clear example last year, when Trich and Attribute were not only on the same price for all the other managers (already jarring to me) but the pricing stablished also allowed them to buy themselves for much cheaper than they would go for in a regular auction. Flat pricing for all pairs is fundamentally unfair and easily exploitable. And we all know that.

I might be wrong, and hosts can correct me if I am, but the main argument I see for it staying like this is "Since we can't come up with a system that actually makes it more fair while eliminating all bias from the process, it is staying like this", which, in my point of view, is quite literally the worst possible course of action, because it acknowledges the fact that the power level across pairings is not (nearly) the same, but decides to ignore this VITAL piece of information whatsoever.

This is why I think the power level of each individual pair MUST be taken into consideration in some way in order to determine manager pricings. Wether it is by the hosts' subjective criteria or by using past tour results in a mathematical formula, which I agree that will undoubtedly add a certain degree of bias to the process, the result will always be net positive as it will somewhat erase the most glaring issue at hand and make it more fair for everyone involved.

"But Leaf, wouldn't the tour lose credibility with subjective decisions like that?"

Personally, I think it's much easier to answer and explain a "Huh, why is Trich and Attribute more expensive than Mickey Mouse 1 and Mickey Mouse 2?" than the "Why Trich and Attribute are the same prices as MickeyMouse 1 and Mickey Mouse 2?" if system stays as it is right now.

DISCLAIMER: the terms Mickey Mouse 1 and Mickey Mouse 2 were used for the sake of generalization. In no way, the writer of this post believe any of the pair of managers of the Monotype Premier League can be called "Mickey Mouses". Thank you for your understanding.
Agreed Leaf
Seeing as the Gengs couldn't make playoffs last MPL, coming 6th overall, I think we can start by suggesting that a Chaitanya and Dahli pairing should be lowered in pricing.

This is also a good example since both players played last MPL. For this I suggest: 15K Chait Selfbuy + 15K Dahli Selfbuy for future Gengars.

Perhaps now we will be able to see Chaitanya and Dahli compete at the top level and bring the Gengars the championship.

Edit: Clarifying I'm not taking a shot at Chait, simply that the manager price adjust is a dumb idea and 15k chait/dahli would be crazy
 
Last edited:

Vid

Our life is what our thoughts make it
is a Site Content Manager Alumnusis a Forum Moderator Alumnusis a Community Contributor Alumnusis a Top Contributor Alumnusis a Smogon Media Contributor Alumnus
I wanted to provide insight into what we did for previous MPLs regarding manager pricing in an earlier MPL. While the system we used was flawed, we had three price ranges for each manager, and the managers each gave a price if the manager wanted to play. Our primary issue was that one person decided to say that every manager should be the highest price out of spite. To remedy this, having an unbiased third party determine the pricing of each manager by taking the "average" pricing of each manager before the draft. In comparison, there are issues with the "average," as one lousy data point could jeopardize the manager's pricing. The hosts could fix the problem by having a large, unbiased third party determine the pricing through a blind vote.

I do not know the best way to determine, but I would happily talk to hosts and further dive into the issue.

Also, MPL should showcase the current generation of Monotype, as once Gen 10 comes out, SV Monotype will not have as much representation in future iterations of MPL. The only other option I would consider is a Bo3 current generation Monotype. Still, it seems the community understandably does not want to prepare three teams every week because people have other obligations.

Overall, I'm excited to see the format and looking forward to some high-level play.
 

TTK

Webtoon Character
is a Community Contributoris a Tiering Contributor
Speaking on slots for this tournament, my choice would NDM > SV4

What my post here will be going over why I want NDM in MPL and discuss the opposition of NDM's inclusion in this tour, which I have to say hasn't been the most engaging or convincing, especially on Discord. I can use this thread to augment my thoughts and I won't call people out specifically unless I got ss/logs (I cba to go through Discord) of what people said verbatim so in any case like that, I will just paraphrase what I've read on Discord.

Why I would like to NDM in MPL?

MPL is Monotype's biggest and most prestigious tournament, that much is obvious and has been stated by many. We get the highest quality of play our tier has to offer in this tournament. It also allows us to look back at our previous metagames across the years and it is exciting to see if anything new pops up. NDM is pretty popular and anyone that says the contrary is probably disingenuous, it sees more ladder games than Core Metagames like LC and PU (As per the Mar. 24 stats). This implies that the tier has an active playerbase and will have a decent number of players willing to play and prove their skills at the highest level. One other thing I have to note about NDM is its overall better reception as a metagame vs SV Monotype. SV Monotype has stayed controversial for quite a long time due to a number of factors like controversial mons still being in the tier and tiering choices, which has had an impact on people's enjoyment and how competitive they find the meta. NDM on the other hand, has not really had this problem. The last tiering survey before the one that has just finished (October 18 2023), enjoyment was at 8.27 for qualified voters and competitiveness at 7.09 and at around the same time for SV Mono (October 2 2023), enjoyment was at 6.86 and competitive 6.16 for qualified, and these numbers went down the following survey in February 2024 (5.98 enjoyment 5.12 competitiveness). I can say without a doubt when the results of the next NDM survey come up, our numbers will be a lot higher since when we did the survey, Baxcalibur, Ogerpon-H and Ursaluna-BM were not banned. I am aware that SV also had a really recent survey but we are still at below a 6 for competitiveness though enjoyment is at 6.60. Not to mention regardless of skill level, I know many players that play both metas and say NDM is better most of the time. My point here is that NDM is a competitive meta that its best players actually enjoy playing tour after tour and a meta that has such an active community and people running it that want the best for it, it should have its chance in the biggest Monotype tour of the year.

Moving onto some points I would like to have a bit more clarification on since these are being used against NDM's inclusion. What I will say firstly is that if you think SV4 fits more to NDM, that's completely fine. I can see the reasoning for that, outlined in posts made by users like schwipper but there are some other reasonings that don't really hold for me.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"NDM should be left to MWP"

We've had this reasoning here from users like Mada and Vodoom in this thread and others discussing on Discord and I have one really simple question. Why? And someone is going to tell me "NDM is an OM and MWP is for OMs". I am not bothered to argue semantics and it doesn't matter if I believe NDM counts as an OM or not (Monotype at the beginning of its lifespan was an OM and now it counts as the only "Official Metagame") but it's hard to sit here and really compare NDM to like Mono CAP, AAA and so on. It has a much larger scale, has a permanent ladder which sees similar numbers to the lower tiers while the other Mono OMs and even the oldgens are relegated to roomtours most of the time. I also recall someone saying MPL is for CG + oldgens only, which does seem to make sense looking at the past decade of this running, but never has been stated by leadership and NDM getting a mention in the OP anyway would seem to contradict this. Either way, if it's an issue of what MPL should be as a tour and NDM doesn't fit that mold, then fair enough but that mold has never been established, opening the possibility of us getting in, which would be the best case scenario.

I will go against most people's posts and say that NDM should not be in MPL. It is far more sensical to have it featured in MWP and more importantly, in its own premier league (NDMPL) rather than have it featured in Monotype's most important team tournament, and there are only very few select players who are familiar with it in the monotype community. It favors teams searching for NDM-mainers and I don't think find there has been enough "competitive engagement" for it to be featured in MPL, outside of those forementioned tournaments (which have been for the most part dedicated for the National Dex Mono playerbase and not the Monotype community). It also narrows team engagement as only select few players will know this tier and will know what to bring. Surely a "fun tournament" is a valid criteria to go for, but having bo3 as a format is just as fun and it is far more consistent in terms of what our playerbase is engaged with.
This post didn't really make a lot of sense to me as I kept reading it back. "Very few select players who are familiar with it in the monotype community", we've had Azick, Attribute, Trich, Rinda, Maroon, Mada, Leafium, Schwipper and I can continue listing; these are all people who have all played NDM in tours the past year or two and even if they wouldn't play NDM in MPL, they can still support their teammates who are again, most likely people who play Monotype and have dabbled into NDM at least at some point in this gen. Separating the NDM playerbase and the Monotype community also doesn't make much sense, it's all Monotype at the end of the day and a good number of our roomauth are also auth for NDM and council. And "not enough competitive engagement" also doesn't really hold without much backing that statement up. It's a competitive metagame and if you are referring to engagement by "how many good people are playing it", we still have enough people to fill the amount of teams we have.

"You will be pressed to find good enough players to fill the slots"

This is also generally paraphrased from what I saw on Discord and people are worried that there isn't enough good players, which I can say is valid but it's one slot. Are you telling me we're worried about the quality of games for one slot. Again, I could drop a pool of players myself that could or would be the pool that would sign up to play for NDM in MPL and apologies if they aren't all SPL level players at the game, but some are mainers and have good showings for anything NDM so let's not overblow this "the playerpool is bad" issue because it wouldn't be one.


Overall, we'll see what happens but I do hope NDM makes in but if it doesn't, we try again next year I suppose!
 
Last edited:

Elvira

formerly bruised
I will be using my mod privileges and writing an entire thesis today. Enjoy.

Personally I believe that National Dex Monotype deserves to have its placement in MPL and on. National Dex Monotype compared to regular monotype is a balanced metagame with some of the older generation mechanics such as mega evolution and z-crystals. The meta has settled after post Gouging Fire ban and now with the re-addition to Hoopa-Unbound.

Seeing how NDMPL went down, I can certainly say that it does have its place with Monotype Premier League (MPL). Both communities share the same playstyle and it would benefit to Monotype's community as a whole. By adding NDM to MPL can the balance of said tier make it easier to build and seek out certain playstyles/meta aside from monotype.
 
This post didn't really make a lot of sense to me as I kept reading it back. "Very few select players who are familiar with it in the monotype community", we've had Azick, Attribute, Trich, Rinda, Maroon, Mada, Leafium, Schwipper and I can continue listing; these are all people who have all played NDM in tours the past year or two and even if they wouldn't play NDM in MPL, they can still support their teammates who are again, most likely people who play Monotype and have dabbled into NDM at least at some point in this gen. Separating the NDM playerbase and the Monotype community also doesn't make much sense, it's all Monotype at the end of the day and a good number of our roomauth are also auth for NDM and council. And "not enough competitive engagement" also doesn't really hold without much backing that statement up. It's a competitive metagame and if you are referring to engagement by "how many good people are playing it", we still have enough people to fill the amount of teams we have.
I agree several of my points have not been throughoutly explained so I will do my best to elaborate them further:

"Competitive engagement" as in tournaments that are outside the premier leagues it is featured: There is no "NDM Cup" to tell us which players are or not prepared, nor an incentive for players within Monotype community to play this tier at all. Part of the reason is that NDM only exists conceptually and not physically: you cannot play it on cartridge, and thus it will never receive official metagame treatment. Even amongst the players that you have mentioned (some of which are part of NDM council so they technically should not count), there is no guarantee that they are experienced at it just because they are established figures in our community. Playing NDM in some tour a year ago does not necessarily mean you are confident to help your team prep for it now or within a month, nor to play it in its highest level, regardless of how good said players are in current gens or oldgens even. Also when you say "some are mainers" you are essentially just proving my point earlier that select individuals will be favored.

Regardless of separating it from the monotype community or not, you have to agree that players that display an interest in NDM only represent a small part of it, and the vast majority of our tier is not actually committing to it (either because of the opportunities offered or because interest displayed in general). This is the same as saying "splitting mono UU or mono STABmons community doesn't make sense" and actually supporting these tiers for MPL. MPL is a high stakes tournament that should represent the monotype community, not a niche-interest of players within monotype. . I am not going to comment on the "most mono auths are also ndm auths" because that certainly should not be related in whether it is a playable slot or not.

Finally, from a spectator perspective, it requires the understanding of the artificial concept of National Dex, which people may not be familiar with. This may not sound like a great deal at first glance but it affects the integrity of the tournament, it is meant to represent Monotype (a metagame which is not the most well seen amongst the other metas in Smogon). Mixing NDM is taking a step towards making MPL just another side PL tournament, and not its own thing.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 1, Guests: 0)

Top