Tournament PUWC IV - Format Discussion

Status
Not open for further replies.
gum

gum

for the better
is a Site Content Manager Alumnusis a Social Media Contributor Alumnusis a Community Leader Alumnusis a Top Community Contributor Alumnusis a Metagame Resource Contributor Alumnusis a Top Tiering Contributor Alumnusis a Top Contributor Alumnus
this will be hosted by Vertigo and i

Good morning, PUWC is back!! We're mainly looking for feedback from the community about certain things:
  1. How many teams should we have this time around?
  2. What tiers should we include? All SV, or something more similar to PUPL / last year's PUWC?
  3. Should we stick with the weeks format, or try pools?
  4. Whatever you'd like to add

Lastly, we're sticking with PUWC this year as that was part of the initial tournament plan. However, depending on how it performs and how people feel about it, we'll re-evaluate its position in next year's schedule. This thread isn't the right space to suggest another team tournament to take PUWC's place
 
1. I think we should have 12 teams, each pool has 6 teams and there are 5 weeks of play (every team plays each other team in their pool). The top 3 of each pool makes playoffs (2 and 3 play, 1 gets a bye to semis)
So for example, this is a hypothetical playoffs with this seeding in mind

Quarterfinals:
2 (Europe) vs 3 (ROW)
Europe wins 5-4
2 (US East) vs 3 (Canada)
Canada wins 7-2
Semifinals
2 (Europe) vs 1 (US West)
US West wins 6-3
3 (Canada) vs 1 (Mexico)
Canada wins 8-1
Finals:
3 (Canada) vs 1 (US West)
US west wins 5-4, West wins PUWC.

2. I think 3 SV / 1 of each oldgen works fine (3 SV / 1 SS / 1 SM / 1 ORAS / 1 BW / 1 DPP / 1 ADV). I see no issue with it at all. Would give 9 slots making sure no tiebreakers can happen too! Which is nice.

3. See above, im in HUGE favor of the week format over the pools format. Feels more simple overall.

4. I do plan on making a bid to manage US West this year btw. i will avenge last years loss to brazil. :changry:
 
Last edited:
1. I think 12 or 16 teams is an appropriate amount depending on the amount of teams we have access to and the amount of players that sign up. I like Bella's plan for 12, and 16 seems pretty self explanatory.

2. I think we should dew a few current gen slots and then one of each oldgen, OR all SV. Vastly prefer the first option though.

3. Weeks just feels overall easier to manage IMO
 
How many teams should we have this time around?
12 teams seems about right to be honest. PU has a pretty considerable community and I think 16 might be plausible.

What tiers should we include? All SV, or something more similar to PUPL / last year's PUWC?
Regarding the format, I think we can all agree that 8+ SV slots would be overkill even if it is the current gen and needs development. Plus, we can also all agree that not everyone plays SV lol. That being said, I think SV should take up the lion's share of the slots, if not half of them. Something along the lines of what NU did: 4 SV, SS (maybe 2), SM, ORAS. If it were 10 slots, we could do: 4 SV, SS, SM, ORAS, BW, DPP, ADV or 5 SV, SS, SM, ORAS, BW, DPP.

Should we stick with the weeks format, or try pools?
Personally, I'm ok with either. I guess in the end, it depends on how long we want the tour to go right? Pools would be shorter and you'd have a set amount of time, whereas if we resort to weeks, it'd be one game per person per week. Enjoyment of the tour and CG development should be the main focus of the tour imo.

Whatever you'd like to add
Nothing off the top of my head atm


I'm hoping to be apart of the tour this year compared to past years
 
There were a few issues we experienced in last year's format, that I at the time assured we'd fix in the next iteration. But firstly, I'll just give some opinions:

While I am pretty high on ADV and the success it's had in its short stint as a mainstay format, I do think it might be a big ask to include it here. The playerbase is relatively new, and fitting 10 slots per team to accommodate ADV into the tournament will only see the stronger regions with more players excel. Europe has Lily and Medeia, US West has TSR and MrSoup; it's much more blatantly favouring certain stronger regions than other formats and I definitely do think it should probably be left out here. That being said, I do think that ADV is a good format. My personal preference would be a repeated 3 SV, 1 SS, 1 SM, 1 XY, 1 BW, 1 DPP; as I feel like this has been fine in the past.

Weeks has always worked for us and should continue to be used probably, but I don't really think it matters either way it's just what people prefer. If we have an odd number of teams or something, then pools yea, but otherwise either works. No real strong opinion here.

My main point of contention is the amount of teams we include since last year we had twelve, fairly competitive regions, and a few more that missed out and got reasonably pretty upset. Namely Spain, Latin America, and China. All had a substantial amount of signups, and led to a full on raid of the thread. Eventually leading me to post this: https://www.smogon.com/forums/threads/puwc-iii-commencement-thread.3710413/post-9385527. I do believe we should push for a 4 groups of 4 teams format, and separate one of the stronger teams from previous versions of the tournament. Something along these lines, I think we should aim for inclusion. Whichever solution allows us to include these teams should be used.

I don't know if I'll be participating this iteration, but I hope it's a good time, that goes over with less controversy than last time. I am sure that whatever decisions are made will be good anyway, and these are just my opinions anyway!
 
12 teams is fine but i can see 16 working, don't really like the 4 groups of 4 teams idea mentioned above cause you only end up playing for 3 weeks minimum, or 6 weeks if you wanna do double round robin (bad idea), would prefer a 2 groups of 8 teams with top 2 making it out per group, although that might be too long. all depends on signups really.

4 sv 1 ss 1 sm 1 oras 1 bw 1 dpp 1 adv imo, finding it harder to make a case against adv considering the amount of signups and meta development its gotten lately but wouldn't cry if it was excluded, same format as last year works just fine if adv pushback is big enough

weeks good pools bad

anything more than 4 sv is massively overkill, we have the playerbase for at least up to bw
 
Last edited:
Small post but wanted to voice my support in favour of 6 sv / 1 ss / 1 sm for slots. Think it strikes the perfect balance between competitive gameplay involving oldgens and allowing every region to field good rosters. UUWC in particular followed the same format, and it turned out to be a massive success - there was an influx of new players, and almost every team was in contention which made for a great tour :)
 
Want to put my thoughts, even though I'm probably not going to take part in this due to an abundance of better players in my region.
A lot of good ideas and points have been brought up, and because of this, I think there should be 16 teams in 2 pools of 8(if enough signups happen, and if not then 12 teams like the previous editions would be fine). I also agree with the idea of 4 sv slots, and Chloe's post convinced me that adv might not be possible to do with a newer playerbase. I'm also of the opinion that ties could be avoided with 9 slots, but I also understand that that might not work for balance, as an even number is an established precedent to my understanding. Overall I'll be fine with whatever the format turns out to be, and hope for it to run smoothly.
 
Let's put GSC PU in :)

But yeah ig I should answer the questions above too first xd.

About the number of teams, it would be nice to have 16 teams. But I've seen uuwc ruwc and nuwc which seems some regions/country might not even be able to complete a team. This is just speculation but if I would choose between 12 or 16 teams I would love to see 16 teams.

About weeks or pools, I think we could definitely try pools this year.

And lastly about the tiers....I'm here again to try to push for GSC PU :) 3 SV/ 1 SS/ 1 SM/ 1 ORAS/ 1 BW/ 1 DPP/ 1 ADV/ 1 GSC = thats 10 slots right :)

But now I think about it....let's include rby too so all gens have representation and this is the only tour I could see something like that would happen :) 4 SV then one of each old gens :) that's 12 slots. This would open up the player signing up for each old gen an issue....so I won't deny that that not sounds viable...

If ever most is really against that idea, then I would support 3 SV/ SS/ SM/ ORAS/ BW/ DPP. 8 slots, 16 teams, pools.
 
What tiers should we include? All SV, or something more similar to PUPL / last year's PUWC?

I think 6 sv / ss / sm is the best for puwc for reason spit mentioned and also had a conversation about it in pu cord in which people liked the idea.

Should we stick with the weeks format, or try pools?

Pools. Pools will take less time and creates more hype and is cooler.
 
if anything below SM is included then there's no reason to not include ADV too, it has a solid enough playerbase and the tier is fine. Simply because MrSoup will anchor the US West region to a stellar ADV PU record doesn't mean other regions are suddenly disadvantaged - no way DPP/BW is super diversified across all regions fair and square, that's just how it is. I for one believe MrSoup wouldn't even participate if that was the reason ADV was not included.
 
if ADV isn't included then I don't see why we'd handpick the other oldgens to be in as if they are incredibly diversified across regions. As BigFatMantis said there's always going to be holes within certain teams for these tiers, but ADV is a pretty solid tier that has a lot of popularity recently and has way more players than you probably imagine, many of whom didn't get to play in pupl, including BigFatMantis, which, quite frankly, I can't believe wasn't mentioned alongside the rest of US West in how strong that region would be at the tier. I for one believe BigFatMantis would still participate if that was the reason ADV was not included because he signs up for everything anyways.

If people are even considering all CG (bad), then I really see no issues with 4 sv 1 ss 1 sm 1 oras 1 bw 1 dpp 1 adv, as 4 CG slots would easily be filled. I think there's a pretty large disregard here for the popularity of this tier in pupl (i can attest that ppl got rly into this tier like sleid and skrimps) and the ongoing tour that got 85 signups (pu ssnl got 115).

BigFatMantis said:
I for one believe MrSoup wouldn't even participate if that was the reason ADV was not included.
Click to expand...
Strong message!
 
On ADV: I agree that if we include oldgens below SM, there's no reason to exclude ADV just because some regions have stronger players than others. You could apply that logic to any metagame, really, and ADV PU's surge in popularity as a metagame, especially with this year's PUPL, means that finding a decent playerbase really shouldn't be all that difficult. I literally learned ADV PU on the fly this past year and suddenly was building at tournament level. I promise, the hardest part about learning it is learning ADV mechanics!

My other point in favor of including ADV is that it's currently going through some big changes! Trying to figure out Baton Pass' place in the tier, how we feel about things like Swalot, and more, are all huge topics for this meta that would have much more productive discussions if there were more tournament-level replays to examine. I think including ADV here would only serve to help the format grow.

That said, I do think that the idea presented of doing something similar to NUWC with 4 SV slots + SS/SM/ORAS (Or replace a SV with a BW) is fine, especially depending on how many signups we're realistically expecting and how many teams we end up having.

Also we could do a SS Suspect slot with no Doublade or with Scrafty just saying...
 
As far as what gens should be included - I'm with Tack / LpZ / BFM / MrSoup, etc. here; please include old gens in a 3-4 SV / 1 SS / 1 SM / 1 ORAS / 1 BW / 1 DPP / 1 ADV style format. Adv had a pretty good showing this PUPL, and so I see no reason to axe it after going to the trouble of including it in previous tours for the sake of meta development.
 
DiannieRatson said:
Let's put GSC PU in :)

But yeah ig I should answer the questions above too first xd.

About the number of teams, it would be nice to have 16 teams. But I've seen uuwc ruwc and nuwc which seems some regions/country might not even be able to complete a team. This is just speculation but if I would choose between 12 or 16 teams I would love to see 16 teams.

About weeks or pools, I think we could definitely try pools this year.

And lastly about the tiers....I'm here again to try to push for GSC PU :) 3 SV/ 1 SS/ 1 SM/ 1 ORAS/ 1 BW/ 1 DPP/ 1 ADV/ 1 GSC = thats 10 slots right :)

But now I think about it....let's include rby too so all gens have representation and this is the only tour I could see something like that would happen :) 4 SV then one of each old gens :) that's 12 slots. This would open up the player signing up for each old gen an issue....so I won't deny that that not sounds viable...

If ever most is really against that idea, then I would support 3 SV/ SS/ SM/ ORAS/ BW/ DPP. 8 slots, 16 teams, pools.
Click to expand...

Im supporting GSC Option!, this allow test before use GSC PU in futures pupls so is a good idea like suspect slot for see the pool and the entussiam of the tier, Also VAMOS LA!!.
 
My preference for this tour of the suggested options is 6 SV / SS / SM. Going to bullet my thoughts on this to make it easier for me to formulate it
  • Of all our tours, PUWC is the one which has the furthest reach outside our own established community, as shown by the ridiculous 450+ signups we received last year. Most of these players are only loosely familiar with PU and will be far more interested in playing and building in current gen and I feel this is something we want to encourage.
  • The idea of 16 teams has been floated and I feel like it's something we can realistically reach and should be striving for. More SV slots makes it easier to bring players in and makes forming teams easier as you don't have to worry about covering a load of oldgens with limited players available.
  • It makes it more accessible and fair for smaller nations, which makes the tournament more competitive. As mentioned above, a lot of our oldgens have a pretty small pool of players and most regions bar the bigger ones realistically won't be able to cover them all.
  • PUPL is our big yearly old gens teamtour, we don't exactly need to have two of them and I think it would actually be beneficial to have one that focuses on cg instead. Making this tour PUWC makes sense as you inherently have very little choice as to who your teammates are and everyone is on a level playing field when it comes to cg
  • Why SS and SM and not 8 SV? Honestly I'd actually be somewhat in favour of just going 8 SV, but I think it's good to have at least some degree of variety in the slots and so including the two most recent generation seems a good compromise to me as they're what people are most likely to have played.
In terms of the other formats my next preferences in order would be:
  • 4 SV / SS / SM / ORAS / BW - Keeps it SV based while including all our preview gens, the no-preview gens are harder to get into which is why I excluded them as like I mentioned above I think prioritizing accessibility is best
  • 2 SV / SS / SM / ORAS / BW / DPP / ADV - Includes all the oldgens we're currently supporting in our official circuit - I don't love this option for the reasons outlined above but I wouldn't mind if this is what we ultimately decided on
Some other comments:
  • I'm very against the idea of a suspect slot just as a general concept. It suggests that the tournament isn't very important and is instead being used to test stuff when in reality this is traditionally our biggest tournament participation wise.
  • GSC is not in a position as a metagame to be included in one of our biggest tournaments. It's only recently seen a half-revival and as far as I'm aware it's still pretty dead even after that.
  • I don't think ten slots would be a good idea as it really hurts the smaller regions which is something I'd rather avoid
N.B.
This is just my opinion on the tournament and isn't necessarily what's going to happen. There will be a group of us taking in the received feedback and making a decision on the format based off of that feedback and our own thoughts on the matter.
 
shane made a lot of good points n i wanted to support beyond a reaction since after participating in this tour for the past 3 iterations (all) including a finals against the corrupt NE + Canada, i think it should be changed. honestly kinda wanted to see a different tour entirely than puwc this year but it's fair to want another after some teams missing out last year. i managed for uuwc as well for multiple years (also had different variations) and i really think all cg with pools is the most ideal. it has the most excitement to watch the sheet throughout the weeks. with the past weeks system, having mons be mons can punish teams way too harshly with the short timeframe before playoffs. having all cg is great for meta development and should be respected. here is the uu stats/replays sheet for reference. very cool to watch how trends would develop alongside constant shifts in the standings.

i dont haaaaate including ss/sm but they can feel a bit meh to include for the sake of having some old gens. i think there's just more enjoyment to be had having everyone working within the same generation and instead of leaving a couple teammates on the outskirts. at least for uuwc it felt more distant at times. even with how recent those gens are, there's inevitably gonna be people "forced" into them.

if doing oldgens anyway, i dont totally hate the idea of doing a suspect, while there is a lot of participation in puwc it's still a world cup tour where teams aren't all "equal". however, i would keep this extremely limited and just do like, one of freeing scrafty or banning doublade in ss and leave sm untouched. as far as the options for oldgen inclusion goes, i don't think it's worth entertaining more than adding usum. regions can struggle to find enough slots as is. having only 2 SV slots is criminal given the unfamiliarity that's inevitable for some of the newer rosters. arbitrarily squeezing in bw and oras seems like the type of compromise that has nobody satisfied since adv and dpp are p well liked at this point and gives some half baked pupl vibes at best.
 
Grain of salt because I'm not sure if I'll participate, but I figure it's worth talking about anyway.

Even from a biased ADV player there should absolutely not be any less than 4 SV and tbh all current gen is probably better than any other format. WC formats are a tier's best option to breed new players as they're nowhere near as victim to manager bias; for a lot of regions it's very much "take what you can get", and putting new players into those sink or swim situations is a really good way to let them develop - especially because WC formats are generally not as close to Serious Business:tm: as their PL counterparts.

I think the ideal solution is mono-SV, whether that's 8 or 10 or whatever is none of my concern. PU has strong oldgens with strong players in those oldgens but the self-fulfilling prophecy is real and there's a reason the PU pool in like PUPL is always kinda "uhh who even plays CG?". It's hard for new PU talent to develop when considering that there are only two team tournaments, I believe that adding a ton of SV will alleviate this problem a ton. I know there are probably some concerns around "who will we get to play?" but I promise you, people will always show up and it's worth taking the chance.

If not mono SV then I think the 6-1-1 format is /okay/ although I didn't really feel it added a ton to UUWC personally other than interesting tiebreaker potential. The oldgens format is fine but it should include ADV, which has become a very established and well-liked PU metagame which imo had very high quality games in PUPL overall.

Pools are a lot better than weeks to make losses less punishing in the qualifier phase and making the tournament not last 30 years. Subjectively I also find it more fun to prep for pools since I get more time to chip away at it when I want, which is nice for me as a busy person irl.
 
ngl this is a lot of words but please don't cut bw :tymp:

6 cg slots is also way too much to me. even in a weeks format, prepping 6 teams for the same tier is hell in practice. that many cg slots is exhausting in just about any tier. 4cg slots is the the most i support in just about any format.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top