-
Check out the relaunch of our general collection, with classic designs and new ones by our very own Pissog!
-
Welcome to Smogon! Take a moment to read the Introduction to Smogon for a run-down on everything Smogon, and make sure you take some time to read the global rules.
Lower Tiers RBY OU/UU Cutoff Discussion Thread
- Thread starter Lusch
- Start date
- Status
So after discussing with Hipmonlee for clarity on what the council wants, here's how this is working:
- Tier changes are desynchronized by 2 VR Revisions, which gives players a chance to test how the meta will look when they actually come into effect, as well as add scrutiny to any changes considering how incredibly optimized RBY OU is. In this case, RBY UU can test Lapras and Victreebel and choose whether to ban them during this period; this also accounts for RBY often moving like a slug. It also gives RoA a new Tour Night to play with I guess. Perhaps this could be more malleable, we'll see.
- So in practice, Victreebel and Lapras will drop to UU in 2023 if VR Revisions are done annually. If Jolteon drops in 2022, it will create yearly runoff; Vic+Lap 2023, Jolt 2024.
- During the period a Pokemon is being held back, it's given "OU by Technicality" for that period. This isn't too important and doesn't actually change anything, but now you'll be seeing this in your teambuilder. Two other possibilities were brought up but neither fit our situation;
- Keeping them OU doesn't work from an outsider's POV as they do not fit the specification for being in the tier anymore. Otherwise, people will ask why Articuno isn't OU, and suddenly, cue fast explaining man meme.
- Putting them in UUBL implies they dropped to UU and got banned, which isn't what's happening, so that doesn't work either.
To clarify here, it's not really clear who has official ownership over lower tiers in RBY. So what I'm trying to do is just build consensus on these sorts of decisions and that way, whoever actually ends up being "officially" in charge of things isnt really relevant because everyone has already agreed on the way ahead anyway.
So I am not officially speaking for the council at the moment, I'm just following the will of the people as best I can.
So I am not officially speaking for the council at the moment, I'm just following the will of the people as best I can.
While I don't mean to suggest you have to do it the other way, I don't think this is actually consistent with what GSC and ADV have done. It sounded to me like you were suggesting putting mons not dropped to UU and banned into UUBL would be incorrect
https://www.smogon.com/forums/threads/gsc-ou-tiering-changes.3652655/
https://www.smogon.com/forums/threads/adv-ou-tiering-changes.3652636/
Yet here we have exactly that:
https://www.smogon.com/forums/threads/gsc-ou-tiering-changes.3652655/
https://www.smogon.com/forums/threads/adv-ou-tiering-changes.3652636/
I don't disagree with you; as far as I know, the technicality thing came after then, it was in 2020 right? I'd prefer to go with the later precedent, and besides, it looks a lot cleaner this way.
So just a thought experiment to get some clarification on the method of dropping/rising: If say Lapras rises to above the cutoff on the 2022 VR, but then falls back under it in 2023, what happens? Does it still drop to UU in 2023, then rise back up the following year, then drop again the year after that? Does it need to remain below the cutoff on the VR for three straight VRs for it to actually fall? Or was that not considered yet?
If it rises above in 2022, then Lapras would need to go back below again and persist there for two VR revisions, just as stated. Part of the purpose of this system is to prevent inconsistent drops.
So one thing that has come out today, is that there is a lot of confusion about whether desynchronised by 2 vr revisions means that Lapras and Vic will drop next year or in 2023.
Yes, PvK's post was explicit, but I personally thought we were going til next year, and apparently so did a bunch of other people.
Personally I think that three years for a Pokemon to drop just feels like too long. One year is plenty of buffer time, even if something is kinda straddling the border, then after two years on one side of it, I think it deserves a chance to be a part of that tier (except obviously not in the case of Lapras).
If Golem had dropped at the last VR it would be mid 2025 before it could be used in NU. That's 5 and a half years of being out of OU before it finds its way to its home.
Yes, PvK's post was explicit, but I personally thought we were going til next year, and apparently so did a bunch of other people.
Personally I think that three years for a Pokemon to drop just feels like too long. One year is plenty of buffer time, even if something is kinda straddling the border, then after two years on one side of it, I think it deserves a chance to be a part of that tier (except obviously not in the case of Lapras).
If Golem had dropped at the last VR it would be mid 2025 before it could be used in NU. That's 5 and a half years of being out of OU before it finds its way to its home.
For reference this is weird, the current system would be 2 years.
Ex:
Tauros drops to OU by Technicality on October 7th, 3045.
Tauros is still in OU by Technicality on October 7th, 3046 (1st VR revision)
Tauros is still in OU by Technicality on October 7th, 3047 (2nd VR revision) so it is dropped.
This example process took 2 years. The current system does not count the 1st part as a year/revision, which is where the confusion lies. Hip, Eb, and Volk are saying they thought the October 7th, 3045 part for instance would count as 1/2, with the current system counting it at 0/2.
To clarify:
Lapras throughout 2020 was not viable enough to be considered OU hence it was voted to C in the 2021 VR.
Then it is two more years before it will be considered UU. So the pokemon has to be considered C or below for three years before it will drop.
The impact of this can be seen in the time it takes to get from OU to NU, in this case you save 6 months because of the 6 month offset between OU and UU VRs. You cannot get from OU to NU in 4 years, which is what you would expect with a two year cycle.
Lapras throughout 2020 was not viable enough to be considered OU hence it was voted to C in the 2021 VR.
Then it is two more years before it will be considered UU. So the pokemon has to be considered C or below for three years before it will drop.
The impact of this can be seen in the time it takes to get from OU to NU, in this case you save 6 months because of the 6 month offset between OU and UU VRs. You cannot get from OU to NU in 4 years, which is what you would expect with a two year cycle.
- Status