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.
With UMs becoming a thing again, next year's OM tournament schedule will see the removal of NFE from the circuit and the removal of NFE, 2v2, and AG from OMPL/OMWC. To get ahead of things this time, we are putting out a community survey to help make the decision. While the result of this vote is not final in and of itself, it will be weighed very heavily in the final decision, so please vote carefully and accurately to your preferences!
What happens to the chosen metagame?
Whichever metagame ends up being chosen will:
Be added to the 2024 OM Circuit
Be added to OMPL
Receive a permanent PS ladder
*The survey also has voting for whether or not this will be implemented for 2023 OM World Cup.
It won't be clear how long the survey needs to be open until responses start pouring in + there's a trend in which options are winning, but we'll be sure to keep this thread updated with what's going to happen.
Just a note that if you don't follow instructions properly and actually RANK your write-ins as requested, your entry will get completely ignored (why would you want to create more work/confusion for the people tallying the votes...?)
Thanks to everyone that responded! We got 153 in total :] results are as follows:
Rank the OMs you would like to see get a place in the OM circuit (including permanent PS ladder/team tournaments) in 2024.
Graphical breakdown:
First choice breakdown:
Would you like this change to be implemented for the 2023 OM World Cup?
As you can already see here, Partners in Crime has a clear lead and we have decided to proceed with adding it into team tours! Also, most of you want this change to go into effect asap, so get on that doubles mindset in preparation :]
That being said, we did give the option for people to re-rank metagames if they felt there was something not listed that should be in consideration. Because no other metagames came close to being ranked as a "first choice" as many times as Partners in Crime, there won't be a breakdown on the exact numbers, BUT here is the results spreadsheet for transparency (usernames hidden for obvious reasons): https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet...njmUG18pm--nt4bjSQjOPoZS3hc/edit?usp=drivesdk
There are a few things to vote on:
> 6 vs 8 player slots in OMPL/OMWC
IF 8 slots, then:
> What should the 7th slot be?
> What should the bo3 slot look like?
Once again, while the result of this vote is not final in and of itself, it will be weighed very heavily in the final decision, so please vote carefully and accurately to your preferences!
Rank the OMs you would like to see get a place as the "7th slot" in OMPL/OMWC.
Cool graph, but what does it actually mean...?
As you can see, Inheritance is clearly favored by the majority of people who filled out the survey, even in the head to head matchups. Inheritance also had good support when discussed internally amongst the mod team, so we're going ahead with it as the 7th slot in team tours!
Now onto the less certain stuff... In the event that 8 slot team tours win out, what should the third metagame in the best of three slot be? (AAA / STAB are going to be the first two slots no matter what)
So we thought polling this would show a clear favorite, but it simply didn't. While PIC is clearly not a popular option for the bo3 slot, it's notably...less clear which of BH, GG, and MNM are the best choice. In order to get a final "survey" of some community opinions before we make a final decision, the mod team has decided to host an open discussion thread on the topic, so here are some guidelines:
Moving forward, OMPL/OMWC will have 8 player slots. 7 of those slots are Almost Any Ability, Balanced Hackmons, Godly Gift, Inheritance, Partners in Crime, and STABmons. For the 8th slot, we are considering a best of 3 of three metagames, where 2 of the games are AAA and STAB, and the third is left to be determined.
For this discussion, we are ONLY considering:
1. Between BH, MNM, and GG, what should be the third slot in in the bo3?
2. Should the 8th slot just be doubling on on a slot? So for example, 2 AAA slots.
3. Some other idea...? Post if you have one.
We are not considering expanding to an 8th individual metagame at this time. This would result in 10 OM ladders at any given time (8 permanent + 2 rotational), and we don't want to stretch resources too thin such that there are large activity gaps.
1. Hi, i prefer by far BO3, because of personal preferences and also because i think having a slot where the best overall OMs players fight each other is hype
2. To me, MnM is completely out of the discussion, it's not the most active tier, not the most popular, not the one with the biggest playerbase, not the easiest to play, like, i objectively can't see any good point for MnM to be the 3rd tier over GG or BH, even tho MnM had the most votes on the survey, i think it's the worst tier to add for a BO3 slot in a future OMPL/WC
GG vs BH:
GG is the easiest tier to play & build, which can be a great thing for tourplayers or other players that don't play multiple OMs, so if you want OMs to include as much people as possible, i think GG is the best pick
Although, BH is by far the most active, with a bigger playerbase, and BH is the tier that gives OM players a bigger chance to win against tourplayers, since BH is the hardest tier to learn, especially in building
In terms of building, GG is easier to build, but there's a lot less GG builders than BH, also, from what i've seen, BH builders build A LOT of teams per week, just because they're trying several versions of an idea or different ideas through the week, so the BO3 could just pick a team that the BH player is not gonna use, also most of the teams usually have more than 1 BH builder, while finding 2 GG builders in one team is very rare (actually, i don't even know if 2 GG builders have been in the same team since GG is in OMPL)
Now, it just depends on if people prefer to have a high-level BO3 with tourplayers and then, GG is the best pick, or if people prefer to have a BO3 slot with maybe less high-level but that lets OMs main shine, which would make BH the best pick
I think that would be controversial to think that tourplayers should shine more than OMs main in OMPL, because it's literally the only big tournament where OMs main have the opportunity to shine in (usually) and also when i think of Other Metagames, i instantly think of BH because BH has been one of the biggest OM for like 5 years or something, while GG is a lot more recent
So my preferences are: 1/ BO3 with BH 2/ BO3 with GG
3/ BO3 with MnM
4/ 2 slots of the same tier
I believe that the best meta for the third slot of the Bo3 is easily BH. Coming from a BH one-trick, I will try to explain the reasoning without too much bias.
1. Activity
Metagame activity is an objective way for making this decision, and one that I think is highly important.
Month
BH
MnM
GG
Total BH
2022-12
42624
6139
702
53261
2023-1
38745
5177
698
50937
2023-2
34831
4596
723
53402
2023-3
27407
8636
702
45621
2023-4
22807
5075
1006
40819
2023-5
27854
5533
985
61984
2023-6
14905
5564
2062
37549
2023-7
11337
5845
742
26190
This is a plot of the plays per month each of the 3 metas had this gen. I included the green line representing Total BH because I think it is impossible to disregard that number in future BH plays given the stuff that have happened regarding BH.
As anyone can see, BH has significantly more ladder activity, with at worst double the activity of MnM (4 times for total BH) while GG ladder activity is negligible.
In addition, BH threads are far more active than the other 2, with both the metagame threads having significantly more posts and activity. The respective metagame discord channel in the OM server also has higher activity.
These mean that BH as a meta has more and constant metagame development through plays and discussion, thus creating a more dynamic and shifting meta which I believe to be positive traits for the viewers, builders, and players.
2. Favouring and rewarding OM players
BH is known to be a pretty unique meta, leading players to worry about the barrier of entrance (addressed later). This does, however, creates an advantageous environment for regularly active OM players compared to tours players, in comparison to MnM and GG.
As PandaDoux has already mentioned, I agree think that this is a good thing because as the OM community, we should be focusing on the regular members of the OM community that are a key part of the community and developing the metas between the major tournaments. Adding BH as the 3rd metagame in the Bo3 would make the slot more favourable and rewarding for OM players to compete and achieve results in.
Now to address the most common counterpoint against having BH.
BH is a hard meta for players to get into and thus greatly limit the number of competent players for this slot.
This is definitely a valid concern, as BH does take longer time and more investment to familiarize with the meta and the gameplay of it. However, I don't think this is actually a major issue.
First, as mentioned BH is a very active metagame. There is an active ladder, that once you get past the bottom ladder and start entering the mid ladder you will face against competent/semicompetent players and teams, and this allows players seeking to get into and learn BH to have a reliable source of practice. The BH resources are also regularly maintained/updated, including important teambuilding resources such as the Setpedia/analyses, VR, and Role Compendium. The active discussion also allows any player seeking help or feedback to receive them relatively fast. The activity of BH eases the entrance and learning of the meta.
Secondly, due to the current state of BH, it is a rapidly changing, dynamic meta with high amounts of possible innovation. This volatile meta means that established meta knowledge are less important, reducing the barrier of entry. The possibilities of creative innovation also means anyone can have good input/ideas on teambuilding, and increases the fun factor of the meta, as mentioned before.
Thirdly, a lot of the difficulty of BH is in teambuilding, and actually playing the game isn't as difficult for players to get into, I would say the gameplay itself has many similarities with AAA and STAB (correct me if I'm wrong on this). Building good BH teams is hard, and not even the BH mains are comfortable, especially in the current meta. But with a competent team, as long as the player has understanding of the meta and a basic idea of how the team is built and the main ideas behind the team, piloting the team is relatively straightforward.
Considering that there is a BH slot anyways that requires a BH main already (and BH mains are generally builders), teams will already have a strong BH builder that is capable of greatly assisting the Bo3 player in teambuilding, if not outright building the team. And as PD has mentioned, the number of BH builders is actually not small. A lot of the new and upcoming BH players build good teams and are excellent to bounce ideas off of for both the BH starter and Bo3 starter.
I would say that the only truly non-straightforward aspect of BH that players would be required to pick up is Imposter usage, but again the BH starter is capable of providing assistance, and there are like 3 months until WC anyways.
Fourthly, a lot of non-BH main regular OM players have seen success in BH. Half of the players in BH Open Round 4 are non-BH mains, while the majority of players currently still in SSNL are non-mains. Several of these players are also using their own teams. This simply shows that plenty of players can get into BH if they wanted, and the inclusion of BH in the slot will have players beginning to pick up the tier, adding to the playerbase.
Lastly, there is a high chance that the players being slotted into the Bo3 slot are not BH mains anyways, so they would have similar background and BH level, similar to OMGS where arguably only 2 of the 8 finalists were "BH mains".
------------------------------------------------------
For the Bo3 slot itself, I think its a good idea that incentivizes players to pick up new metas, while also creating a interesting slot to watch. This also can increase the competition for tours like the Grand Slam and the Championship playoffs by having more players adept in multiple metas.
I also don't really like the idea of doubling a slot personally because I think it opens up lineup order things rather than just having the best players play against each other.
I believe that BH should be the final meta of this bo3, mainly because of its ladder activity, forum activity, and more developed resources.
Below, I compare forum and ladder activity.
Posts
Views
Ladder Plays in July
BH
395
128,000
11,337
MnM
152
62,000
5,845
GG
83
43,000
742
GG has the lowest activity by far, and only half as many posts as MnM. MnM is next in activity, with a substatial amount of ladder plays, and forum posts. However, BH is about twice as active as BH. It is clear that in terms of activity BH would be the best choice for this third meta.
Now, lets looks at resource availability
Last VR Update
Last Sample Team Update (number)
Notes
BH*
August 1
Some time in early July - pre full dex
July 31 (0)
BH recently underwent a massive tier change as near full dex was reintroduced, so the last VR update, along with no sample teams can be explained there
MnM
April 18
July 25 (5)
Although sample teams were recently added, the VR was last updated on April 18, a very long time ago.
GG
June 12
???
The VR update is relatively recent, however I was unable to find sample teams.
It's hard to assess BH here, because it recently went through dramatic changes, forcing an immediate VR update, along with the current samples having been eradicated (teams are being actively discussed on the forums currently). MnM recently had sample teams updated, however their VR has not been updated since April 18. GG's recent VR update was on June 12, however no sample teams have currently been added.
For this portion of the discussion, I wanted to compare resources available to see how accessible each meta was to learn - coming from a tour player. However, I don't really feel like I can conclusively make an accurate comparison here, as OMPL recently ended, and each tier has undergone major changes since then. Also, I don't enjoy necessarily comparing council activities as there can be many reasons for such a discrepancy outside each of their own control.
I can't speak much of MnM and GG as I haven't kept, but I will say a few words about the BH council.
I believe they've done an incredible job of activity updating the VR, samples, and making up to date resources available to players to pick up, such as set compendiums, and pokemon roles. (major shout out to Tea Guzzler here). The new BH meta came out 3 days ago, and there's already a preliminary VR & set compendium which is really commendable. They've put it in a lot of consistent work to give newer players the ability to learn about the meta, and to get an idea of what sets / mons are good.
I can't interpret the resources that MnM and GG has out, because those are not tiers I am familiar with.
The two main arguments I've seen for the third meta have revolved around feasibility for tour players to pick up, feasibility for any OM'er to play all 3 metas to a descent level, and popularity.
GG is the most feasible for a tour player to pick up, as its gameplay is the most intuitive. Additionally, because stabmons and AAA are "more similar" to standard tiers as a result, GG might give the most ample opportunity for someone to play all three at a relatively high level.
However, GG by far has the lowest ladder plays / month & forum activity (~10% of BH's ladder activity, and ~25% of BH's forum activity). There are thus less GG builders, and less opportunities for one to learn / build for the meta individually.
MnM falls somewhere in the middle of GG & BH, being more intuitive for tour players, and containing forum & ladder activity that's somewhere in the middle.
BH has the most activity by far. About 2x more than MnM, 15x more than GG ladder and ~4.5x more than GG forum. However, it is regarded as the least intuitive for newer players to pick up. I will say that of the 12 remaining players in BH ssnl, 7 of them might not be regarded as BH mains, with users such as PandaDoux, Clas, RoFna, and PociekMociek still in the tier. Being an all around OM player, and playing BH at a decently high level is plausible. I understand that tours might not be the best at showing this, but I think it is something to point out - it is possible to play BH at least decently well, if not be quite good at it, such as in the case of PandaDoux, even if you do main other metas. Additionally, if a new user would like to pick up BH, there area a lot of resources being put together right now, and a very active ladder for them to practice and learn on.
I believe that with BH being the most popular meta remaining in this list, and the resources available making it feasible enough for new players to pick up and play it at a high enough level - in relation to AAA & Stabmons, justifies it as the most appropriate, to be the third meta for this bo3.
I dont post often on these types of forums and am pretty distant from these OMs so take it with a grain of salt at times.
On the 8th OMPL / OMWC slot;
Bo3 in Teamtours
Whilst bo3 has never been included in any officials on smogon (bar RBY OU in SPL but thats the same tier in bo3) it has become a household term for many unofficial teamtours on smogon. It has always been regarded as a very prestigious slot where only the best of the best play of the tournament. That introduction being made, I think its fair to say that a bo3 slot would be a great spectator slot and good for tournament exposure in my opinion, as it really gets the hype going.
The only widespread concern is that it incentivices recycling teams. After thinking about this myself as well I think this idea shouldnt undermine the bo3 slot. You should see the bo3 slot as an "extra" slot, you are getting your 8 build variety already in the main AAA, STAB, 3rd slot. Even so, recycling teams is not always a bad thing. It really shows how much confidence there is in this build and how reliable it should be. These are also noteworthy metagame developments. Take the current ongoing WCOP tournament as an example, we saw Team Germany and a lot of others recycle this one team with Great Tusk, Slowking-Galar, Cinderace, Baxcalibur, Enamorus, Kingambit, this just shows what direction the metagame is going and what defines the tier as of now. Otherwise you wouldnt be as confident to re-use this team.
I also think that doubling up on a tier should just not even be in the picture, it looks really bad and I think bo3 is just way better of a slot as it really brings more quality to the table than a "semi farm league" slot.
The 3rd slot
I have often changed my mind on this but these are my current thoughts:
I think the last slot should not be GG, this tier is too new, too inactive and has a small playerbase.
MnM has similar issues with playerbase and tier activity.
This just leaves us with BH. I think BH is a flagship OM, a very deep playerbase, active community and also often has a really strong pool in OMPL. There are always arguments towards BH about the tier being too hard to understand for outsiders, this argument is very shortsided though. Today in the OM discord Fc (OMGS winner and OMPL winning manager/player) said themselves, an alledged STAB player for OMs who doesnt play BH much that there are enough resources for the tier. I think this really shows that BH is actually pretty accessible. Besides that a lot of the top OM players have decent experience in BH to where I wouldnt worry about this too much.
Other idea
The only other recommendation I could give is a striking system. With this striking system all bo3 players will be given the question what tier they want to strike out of BH, MnM, GG as part of the lineup being sent. In the case that both players strike the same tier they will be given the option to also put a second option strike. Whose second strike is chosen would simply just be coinflip. This isnt the most professional way to do it but I dont see any other option to make this more fair. Please give feedback on this idea if you have it.
Disclaimer: I am not advocating for any one solution, but actually thinking through it, I do think it's possible to make the strike system work simply and fairly, while allowing bo3 players to avoid what they consider their worst meta(s).
Option A: AAA and STAB are locked, and we are just picking the third meta
When captains send in their lineup, they also include one (if only doing BH / MnM /GG) or two (if doing all five) tiers to strike from the bo3. If the teams strike entirely different metas, the last one is played. If any of their strikes match, the hosts do !pick from the remaining options.
Option B: No locked tiers, we are picking all three from the pool of (five or seven) metas
When captains send in their lineup, they also include one (if only doing the returning five) or two (if doing all seven) tiers to strike from the bo3. If the teams strike entirely different metas, the three remaining ones are played. If any of their strikes are the same, the hosts do !pick from the remaining options.
In both cases we are able to give the bo3 some flexibility in avoiding their worst matchups while not adding any complexity / delay to the tour beyond an extra line in the lineup submission and potentially the hosts doing !pick; all the information would be available when matchups are posted, and no player / team has an advantage.
Again, this is not to advocate for any position, but if we want to entertain a pick / strike system, I think this system adds the least stress to both players and hosts.
i dont have any 'other ideas' so ill only discuss parts 2 and 1
Firstly, I quickly want to say that doubling up on any tier as the 8th slot is a dogshit decision that shouldn't even be considered. Yes, there are metagames that have more active playerbases, more "viable" starting slots (more on that later btw) and other properties that would make them realistically able to handle twice the amount of players in a tour playing the tier, but putting two slots of the same meta in a tour where every other tier just gets one is so obviously favoritism and frankly i don't think that follows the spirit of OM's. It shouldn't be done unless the entire community fucking hates bo3 and there arent any other viable oms that could be the 8th slot, i think this idea should just be off the table.
To get onto the meat of my post, I believe that MnM should be the third bo3 tier. I don't feel like writing a long post so if anything i say is unclear feel free to ping me in omcord with any questions and ill elaborate
Firstly, while BH is more popular and has developed resources, it is very hard to get into and understand, you cant really pick up a team and play it, never having touched the tier before, and expect to win. There is a reason we see sameish BH lineups every ompl/wc with the same people, because they know the tier and perform well in it. Tier overlap is also an issue, while there are plenty of people who know how to play and build both stab and aaa, i feel like very few players who know BH well enough to start in a BH slot of a team tour are experienced enough with the other two tiers to start in them, i don't mean this as a jab to "one-tricks" (cuz don't rlly exist IMO). Lastly, its the most polarising of BH, GG, and MNM, either you love it or you hate it, and speaking from personal experience, you're not gonna have fun being forced to play a tier you don't like.
This part from chessking's post is fantastic. I do think we need to favour OM players in, well, an om tour. While it might be difficult for someone who doesn't play BH to pick up a BH team, its very easy for someone who doesn't know the GG meta to load up a team if they just know how the tier works. From what i have heard the tier is also somewhat unstable atm and people are heavily discussing how its defined, and with how much GG is tied to ubers tiering it might be difficult to achieve consistency in the builder during a 4-11 week long tour.
MnM would reward om players, as frankly most people who know how to play oms know what mix and mega is. Has good resources, overlap with stab / aaa players, is consistent, stable, and popular too. I think that mnm deserves the third bo3 spot, thank you.
Hey, chiming in as someone likely to either play or build the Bo3 slot in any such OMPL in the future because people have been bugging me abt it:
I am strongly against 7 strike 2 each in serious matters. I think this hurts consistancy a lot because you need to be good in 5 different tiers to compete, otherwise I can just strike your 2 best metas and then cruise to a win. I'm not saying that being good in multiple metagames shouldn't be rewarded in OMPL, but frankly it already is. Playing multiple metas makes you much better equipped to assist teammates, better able to apply concepts from one om to another, able to slot in wherever a team is weakest, versatility in tiebreakers, etcetera. And not to mention it would still be a Bo3 system anyway. I don't think realistically speaking there's any set of 3 that someone like stresh or lydia or I wouldn't be able to take a deserved advantage in, so there's no need to add on excessively to that.
Between locked 3 and locked 2 + strike for third, I prefer the former. Probably both are usable, but I think what the latter would do is have most people who just play aaa and stab in the slot and then the third game be a total coinflip after 2 close games between good players or a complete shutout for one user. This isn't the end of the world, but it's not ideal. Comparatively, if you pick 3 from the start, you can say pick someone who is good at 2 of them and just draft extra support for the last slot; our hypothetical AAA+Stab player might end up with 3 BH builders on their team to ensure they + the bh slot are equipped with the best possible teams and have plenty of test games.
As for the third slot, my personal ranking would go MnM > BH > GG. They're all fun metas, but that's how I would sort between them. In terms of competativeness, I think it should track 2 factors: What metagames can get the best building support, and what is the easiest to pick up if you know AAA and stab (or what metagame's mains have the easiest time picking up AAA and stab). I think this rules out GG, but both MnM and BH have valid arguments here. MnM would be easier for AAA and Stabmons players to pick up, while BH has more top level builders and testers to do support. I think either option would be fine, but I think it would be best if we picked 1 and it was just that Bo3 the whole tour.
Personally I'm of the opinion that GG is better than MnM is better than BH.
I'm seeing a lot of people advocating for BH as the third metagame, but there isn't a ton of non-BH mains advocating for it other than ojr who advocates BH by virtue of popularity and flagship status. I do, however, think it's super important to think about who exactly would be playing this slot if it were to be selected. It'd be primarily strong generalists, people who can already pretty much sub into a good amount of metagames, people who made OMGS playoffs, people with a Persona 5 themed profile who chip in on discussions that they probably shouldn't be talking about after retirement..
Don't get me wrong, from a lil bit of laddering I think BH is the most fun it's ever been since Gen 7, and I'd even say this is probably one of my favorite BH metas since there's no Shed. But I can't justify including it in a slot that aims to be taken seriously in a competitive tour. BH is a tier that gets skipped in these larger tours because nobody wants to play long games. Personally, I think those guys are just weak, but they're the people who would sign up and play Bo3, like it or not. It wouldn't be Sevag, it wouldn't be Chessking, it wouldn't be Tea Guzzler.. at most you're maybe getting quojova QT or Ivar who can do all 3, but quojova's best value is in the BH slot where that man can get any win he wants and Ivar and QT can be fine regardless of whether or not BH is chosen. BH is probably the only OM where there's such a drastic skillgap created from someone with a lack of understanding of the tier vs someone who understands it.. and BH in Bo3 is worth 1/3rd of a slot in a week. Very few people are going to want to put the time and effort into learning BH. It'd be a disservice to both the tier and the players of Bo3 and BH if we were to include it in Bo3, it wouldn't lend itself to the competitive games that people think it would, especially if this turns into a feed a really good tour player teams slot.
MnM and GG on the other hand are better picks I think, but GG is by far the most approachable. The mechanic is simple and it's fairly easy to build or get support for. MnM people are few and far in between. If I'm not using a Redflix, QT or Andyboy team, I'd rather eat 10 cinnamon buns in 2 minutes than have to win a game in the tier. I'm definitely leaving some names out of that but I really don't think there's many top level MnM supports. There is the argument that support quality matters less in a bo3 setting, though. That's what puts MnM over BH for me.
GG to me is one of my least liked metagames because of the amount of possibility it has, but it's also the easiest to get into, simple to find support for and the amount of possibilities is pretty good because it means it's really hard to objectively go wrong with a build. If I had to put a tier in by strict personal preference, BH wins hands down, but GG definitely has more approachability and freedom than bith of the other options.
I feel like it's really important to create a bo3 setting where people will want to play the third metagame if it gives them a strategic advantage. I've seen way too many people skip BH because they just don't wanna play it - playing to win in all 3 games is super important, and I do think GG probably makes this slot the most competitive out of the three options we're given (even if I personally want it the least).
e: I also think the concept that we need to favor or reward OM players by giving BH or MnM the spot is needlessly gatekeepy. If someone wants to be interested in a Bo3 slot, we shouldn't try and dissuade them from it by heightening the barrier to entry. That's horrible and should literally not be something we consider at all when making this decision. If it ends up being a higher barrier to entry because we pursued competitiveness and tournament health and that came as a byproduct, fine, but saying what's basically "let's gatekeep" is so unnecessary.
e: I also think the concept that we need to favor or reward OM players by giving BH or MnM the spot is needlessly gatekeepy. If someone wants to be interested in a Bo3 slot, we shouldn't try and dissuade them from it by heightening the barrier to entry. That's horrible and should literally not be something we consider at all when making this decision. If it ends up being a higher barrier to entry because we pursued competitiveness and tournament health and that came as a byproduct, fine, but saying what's basically "let's gatekeep" is so unnecessary.
actually this sort of made me mad so I'm gonna make an entirely separate post on it (sorry mods but I think it's an entirely different issue). pannuChessking345 targeting a specific demographic doesn't work. People quit. Playerbases change. Approachability is 100% the priority over exclusivity. We aren't part of some club that deserves a more exclusive slot. GG, MnM and BH are all OMs and any one of them deserves to be given due process as much as the other two options. By bringing up this argument ever, you're saying that OM players should be the only people who get to access this slot. People like FlamingVictini, TPP, Lily, clean, and crying entering our tournaments is very much a good thing because it forces mainers and nonmainers to maintain a skill level so that they can keep the tournament competitive by being draftworthy as a starter as opposed to just support. These (and many others) are really fucking good players and it's absolutely amazing that they, being non OM players, wanted to join a tour and play and have fun with it. Inclusivity is great. Why we're aiming to argue otherwise is beyond me.
If BH or MnM make it in on their own grounds, that's fine, I'm glad for them and I'm literally not against any of these OMs making it in or going with pannu's idea of spotlighting less played OMs (but that creates another issue of which ones, but it's still a good idea to consider.) Putting forth your suggestion on the grounds of "this makes the slot less friendly towards non OM players" is so damaging. GG and MnM could be the least played tiers by standards players while BH could be the most in like 2 years. We don't know. Maybe all the BH players quit at some point, who knows. We shouldn't be targeting a specific demographic, ever, and aiming to exclude another demographic ever even by wording things like you're rewarding the antonym of that demographic sends a message that shouldn't ever be sent.
I'm seeing a lot of people advocating for BH as the third metagame, but there isn't a ton of non-BH mains advocating for it other than ojr who advocates BH by virtue of popularity and flagship status.
By bringing up this argument ever, you're saying that OM players should be the only people who get to access this slot. People like FlamingVictini, TPP, Lily, clean, and crying entering our tournaments is very much a good thing because it forces mainers and nonmainers to maintain a skill level so that they can keep the tournament competitive by being draftworthy as a starter as opposed to just support.
TPP, Lily, & clean i'm pretty sure have been building their own teams in their respective tiers during the whole tournament, they're not just tourplayers, they're part of the community, people like crying & fade are tourplayers that are not part of the community, because they're not interested in building the tier and are not involved in the community at all, i think what we all meant with BH rewarding OM people is that: anyone that is interested in OMs and interested in playing the tier will be rewarded compared to other people that just pick & play and that are not involved in the building at all, we're not saying new people should go 0-7 and OMs people should go 7-0, we're saying, if you are involved in your slot, you'll probably be fine compared to other people that are not involved in the tournament, if someone like MDB2 who is known to be a great player in OU and has never played OMs before signup up for OMPL, and is actually involved in the tournament and interested in playing BH, they'll be fine, compared to someone who doesn't care about the tournament
TPP, Lily, & clean i'm pretty sure have been building their own teams in their respective tiers during the whole tournament, they're not just tourplayers, they're part of the community, people like crying & fade are tourplayers that are not part of the community, because they're not interested in building the tier and are not involved in the community at all, i think what we all meant with BH rewarding OM people is that: anyone that is interested in OMs and interested in playing the tier will be rewarded compared to other people that just pick & play and that are not involved in the building at all, we're not saying new people should go 0-7 and OMs people should go 7-0, we're saying, if you are involved in your slot, you'll probably be fine compared to other people that are not involved in the tournament, if someone like MDB2 who is known to be a great player in OU and has never played OMs before signup up for OMPL, and is actually involved in the tournament and interested in playing BH, they'll be fine, compared to someone who doesn't care about the tournament
TPP, Lily and clean are 100% a part of the community - but they werent always, and they also saw an OM which they believed was approachable and decided to sign up for it and now they're a part of the community. This is absolutely an example why promoting inclusivity is a good thing.
fade and crying are 100% a part of the OM tours community. They regularly sign up and are involved, nobody can gatekeep them out based off of some imaginary criteria. As far as I'm concerned they sign up and want to play and that's literally enough. If your criteria is building your own teams, I've built maybe three teams in my last few tournaments - am I not a part of the community?
If you're involved in your slot then the meta won't matter, you'll always have an advantage over somebody who doesn't care. It won't be an autowin and it won't favor you all the time either (like if I were to play Redflix in MnM rn and he didn't care and I prepped for a full on week, I'd probably still lose but it'd be close) but you'll still have more of an advantage over people that don't care. If you're still consistently losing after that then.. you might just have to get better.
This line of reasoning is a nonstarter and shouldn't have been brought up in the first place. Get metagames in based on their own merit, not by wanting to gatekeep.
You're involved in the OM community just by doing predicts and by writing post in threads like this, so you're part of it, fade & crying are not involved in the OM community, so they're not part of it, that's how it works, signing up for OMs tournament does not make you part of it, otherwise i'm part of almost every community on smogon
If you're involved in your slot then the meta won't matter, you'll always have an advantage over somebody who doesn't care. It won't be an autowin and it won't favor you all the time either (like if I were to play Redflix in MnM rn and he didn't care and I prepped for a full on week, I'd probably still lose but it'd be close) but you'll still have more of an advantage over people that don't care. If you're still consistently losing after that then.. you might just have to get better.
This line of reasoning is a nonstarter and shouldn't have been brought up in the first place. Get metagames in based on their own merit, not by wanting to gatekeep.
I think it is a valid argument, i would rather see 8 good OMs people that are involved in the community & in the tournament rather than like 4 OMs people & 4 people who don't care about the tournament fighting each other, it just brings more hype to the slot to me, i guess maybe other people would prefer to see 8 people that are not involved in the community fighting each other in this slot, or some other just don't care, but i do care and i do believe that the BO3 slot of OMPL should give an advantage to OM players, because i think this slot should highlight the OM community, and not tourplayers in general
I think it would be preferable to talk in the OM discord if you wanna have a discussion about it because it's prob lame that the thread is just you and me responding to each other, but i wanted to post this before doing so because what i said have been said by no one so far, or at least not explained
You're involved in the OM community just by doing predicts and by writing post in threads like this, so you're part of it, fade & crying are not involved in the OM community, so they're not part of it, that's how it works, signing up for OMs tournament does not make you part of it, otherwise i'm part of almost every community on smogon
Being involved in BH/MnM gives you a bigger advantage vs someone who's not than in GG
I think it is a valid argument, i would rather see 8 good OMs people that are involved in the community & in the tournament rather than like 4 OMs people & 4 people who don't care about the tournament fighting each other, it just brings more hype to the slot to me, i guess maybe other people would prefer to see 8 people that are not involved in the community fighting each other in this slot, or some other just don't care, but i do care and i do believe that the BO3 slot of OMPL should give an advantage to OM players, because i think this slot should highlight the OM community, and not tourplayers in general
I think it would be preferable to talk in the OM discord if you wanna have a discussion about it because it's prob lame that the thread is just you and me responding to each other, but i wanted to post this before doing so because what i said have been said by no one so far, or at least not explained
There's literally no preset criteria or award to certify someone joining a community - this is an open community and fade and crying are very much welcome in it lol. If they constantly join tours then it isn't really up to you whether they're a part of the community or not. It's absolutely wild to me that you took these two and openly stated you don't consider them a part of the community either - not that they give a fuck, but it also isn't really up to you, or any one other person. Clearly the OM tours community likes them enough to keep drafting them and that's literally all that matters. They can be involved in whatever way they want.
Your point about BH and MnM advantages being bigger than GG shouldn't matter. It doesn't matter how big an advantage is, and this also changes based on the meta. If your concern is that it's easier for someone who doesn't care to keep the rest of the playerbase in check, that's a sign that the playerbase should just improve - which, as it happens, stems from constant participation in tournaments and competition against these people. Personally, I'm not worried - everyone who joins a tournament and participates in a specific slot is somebody to test skills against. If they outclick me, then regardless of how much they care, I still have room to improve as a player. My solution to getting beaten by someone who doesn't care isn't to be like "ok well I'll make the game harder for you", it's to just get good.
You can't assign hype to a slot based off of the metagames in it. shiloh vs stresh was one of the most hype AAA games because, despite stresh not being an AAA main, he's still a hella good player who can do super well in the tier and shiloh is one of the best AAA players. I'm hyped to see cityscapes play in most matches because I know there'll be fun techs used. The meta isn't really relevant - hype comes from competitiveness, skill and creativity. If a slot becomes so much less interesting to you because of the players in it, then I can't force you to find it hype, but there's definitely some OM generalists who have room to grow and I think trying to shape the competition of the slot before it's even released is a dumb idea and is ill intended regardless of how you phrase it.
No, I won't be joining the OM Discord - if people are gonna bring up gatekeeping as a reason to pick a meta on the forums then I'm more than glad to respond to it on the forums.
Staff have been pushing back against the idea of there being a "flagship tier", but if one does exist right now it's definitely AAA; it's by far the most popular both within the OM community and externally with newer players/ladder warriors. In my eyes, we either embrace this and present it as such, or we immediately disqualify the idea of having a second AAA slot in OMPL. I don't really care which, honestly, but if we want to maintain equality I think giving a second slot to AAA alone is a bad move.
QT's covered everything I'd want to say about a pick/ban system. It's too much of a strain on managers to have to find 8 viable players for 5 tiers and we should know going into the draft what our players are playing.
With regards to the BO3 discussion, I'm of the opinion that MNM is the best option simply because it's had the most history of being a stable, competitive tier with minimal cheese potential compared to the other two.
Godly Gift is not only relatively new, but being intrinsically linked to Ubers means that it's prone to the same tiering shakeups lower tiers suffer from; losing Volcarona was relatively meaningless outside of taking away one more fat Zacian-C answer, but staples like Great Tusk or Garganacl could hypothetically be taken away mid-tour and that's a huge problem to me, even without going into my other gripes like speed ties that make it far less competitive than BH/MNM (>120 speed tier is very small outside of Gods). The link to Ubers makes it inherently volatile to no fault of its' tiering council.
BH has a different issue, that being that the overlapping playerbase is significantly smaller than that of AAA/MNM and STAB/MNM - though admittedly I don't have any stats to back this up. I don't expect this to be a problem if we stick with this format in future, but I imagine the first team tour will be a bit rough with prospective BO3 players having to pick up the tier from scratch because there absolutely is a steeper learning curve than there is with the other two tiers.
GG and BH also suffer from another problem; there's no calc. MnM has a well maintained, accurate damage calc with sets provided (shoutout placuszek). BH only really suffers because of Impostor, but that's a huge part of the tier, and Godly Gift is absolutely impossible to calc for under a regular battle timer because you have to enter all the stats in manually. If we're talking about entry barriers, I feel this is a really underdiscussed one.
I also agree with Ren; anybody trying to disguise "harder for new players" as "better for OM players" is being really weird. There shouldn't be this stigma against tour players and we shouldn't be thinking about anything except which addition to BO3 would promote the best competitive games.
GG and BH also suffer from another problem; there's no calc. MnM has a well maintained, accurate damage calc with sets provided (shoutout placuszek). BH only really suffers because of Impostor, but that's a huge part of the tier, and Godly Gift is absolutely impossible to calc for under a regular battle timer because you have to enter all the stats in manually. If we're talking about entry barriers, I feel this is a really underdiscussed one.
wanted to reply to this rq, I actually didn't even think about that. that's a really good point and honestly is enough for me to change my mind to mnm being slightly better than gg for the 3rd slot, but I also heard that apparently revisiting the definition of gg as a format is something that's happening rn? which honestly makes this a really chaotic time to have this discussion in general.
fully agree w/ the thing you said about being dependent on ubers though and if there's a policy thread on gg I'd probably like to read more about the discussions they're having, because it's totally fair to mention that it's possible for a god to just.. not exist the next week or something. having a tier in the bo3 slot that doesn't have complete agency over its own tiering and is unfriendly towards calcing is probably not a good idea -- idk how mnm resources are rn but if they're up to snuff then that probably establishes mnm as a clear pick
tldr not rly adding much I just like rocks and think that instead of playing with gods we should be playing with rocks in the 3rd bo3 meta :)
Re: BH learning curve + skill gap + approachability
I think that learning BH does take longer than MnM and GG for new players, especially with full dex stuff, however I think in terms of the accessibility in learning the tier BH is way higher than the other 2 tiers.
As mentioned previously and by other people such as Sevag, BH Resources are actively maintained and includes both a more regularly maintained Setpedia and more accessible Smogon Dex Sample Sets. BH's far more active ladder also means learning through actually playing the tier (the best way to gain practice) is way more accessible. High level BH support is also more accessible than either of the other tiers, where there are a few top level players that gap the remaining (evidence in OMPL records), while there are a larger group of capable BH players that also have a similar skill level to provide similar levels of support. Thus while BH will take longer to get in by virtue of the extra aspects that need to be learned, it also provides the best support for actually learning the tier.
And regarding calcing, BH calcs are not less accessible than MnMs. The Dex BH Sets are directly accessible through the calc and any Imposter related calcs can be done directly by replacing the HP of the mon by 250 and adding +1 to the defense stats or -1 to the attackers offense stats.
Which brings us to the approachability part. I am not suggesting to gatekeep non-OM players. I am suggesting to reward players that invest into OMs.
The reason why I want this slot to favour OM players more is because I believe that we should be rewarding the players that actively play and develop the metas, and not just every few months during a tour. It is these players that invest time to contribute to the success of the meta, that regularly build teams and test sets that propel the meta forward. If a player's only involvement with OMs is signing up for OMPL/OMWC twice a year, then get passed teams and play, then quite frankly the player is contributing nothing to the meta. If a player is willing to invest weeks of activity into playing a tournament then surely it is not much to ask for the player to spend some time familiarizing with a meta. If a player truly wants to be somewhat involved with OMs and want to play in the Bo3 slot surely they should at least have the dedication of learning all the tiers, rather than just having a team being passed to them.
The "signing up for tour and not building to get passed teams" is also not something that can be just ignored. How many builders actually want to spend time building teams for a player that doesn't even care enough about the metagame to test/build their teams (I know at least one counterexample)? I think that at minimum the player should be involved in the teambuilding process and BH is a meta that highly rewards this involvement. Players that understand how the team that passed to them was built and the ideas behind the team are able to use that team much more effectively.
The time investment spend into learning BH is also just a one time thing. Once a player learns the metagame basics of improofing, utilizing and playing against Imposter, the rest of the metagame knowledge is no different than the constantly changing metagame knowledge that we see in every other tier that doesn't become stagnant. When we consider that WC doesn't start until at least 2 months from now, I think it is completely reasonable for players to take some time to learn the fundamentals of the tier in this period. Once again, if a player thinks its too much effort to spend time learning about a meta present in a slot they want to play, are they really invested into playing in an OMs tournament (especially considering the time they are spending in the actual tournament)?
Lastly we have seen plenty of top OM players have success in BH. stresh and lydia both did not begin as BH mains but after learning the tier developed into some of the best BH players. Plenty of non BH mains involved in "multi-meta" tours such as OMGS and Championship playoffs are involved in BH tournaments such as Open and currently SSNL. The reverse (BH player -> Multimeta), while being less common, also has notable examples. Current circuit champion Ivar started as a BH main, and OMGS semifinalist TTTech is also a BH main, and past Championships also saw BH mains participating. While there are not really any players that can start both BH and one of AAA/STAB, I don't think this number is actually that much less than say for MnM. Strong multi-meta players are uncommon and I think this applies even between AAA and STAB.
I am not suggesting to gatekeep non-OM players. I am suggesting to reward players that invest into OMs.
The reason why I want this slot to favour OM players more is because I believe that we should be rewarding the players that actively play and develop the metas, and not just every few months during a tour. It
Can you explain how attempting to limit the amount of success a player can find in a slot based off of their past history in OMs is not the same thing as gatekeeping the slot by the extent of their participation?
ftr since I've been namedropped a few times, when I signed up for my first OMPL I didn't actually sign up for GG at all (in fact, I'm fairly sure that and BH were the only tiers I didn't sign up for). I just offered to fill the slot because my managers didn't have a dedicated GG player and I was happy to do whatever was required - since then I've obviously become known for GG within the OM community and that's totally fine but I don't necessarily feel it's more approachable than other OMs, it was probably the one I was least excited for. A big draw of OMs for me was a completely different way of playing the game, with stuff like STAB's Boomburst Sylveon and AAA's Regenerator Garchomp and all that kinda funky stuff that felt really fun to build with.
@ the barrier to entry wrt BH: yeah that's absolutely there. It would absolutely limit a bo3 slot in ways that are pretty atypical; usually your bo3 player is your overall best player (or at least the player that is perceived to be so). BH is completely foreign in terms of how competitive Pokemon works, so you absolutely do need to put in a lot of time to learn it. GG or STABmons or AAA or whatever else doesn't really have this, fundamentally you're still playing the same game at its core.
I don't really feel like I'm in a place within the community to have a say on what gets in and what doesn't, so I'm just speaking as someone who shows up for OMPL rly. I don't think I'd sign up for Bo3 with BH because it's a pretty big commitment to learn it and stay on top of it, and I can't just pilot a team given to me the way I can in other metas. That subjectively could be a good thing so I'm not using it as an argument, just a statement so that ppl can chew on it.
Side note: bo3 sucks in general, it's really awful to prepare for. This has been my experience in other tournaments like UUPL and PUPL where bo3 exists or existed, and I can't imagine it's any better in OMPL where you need someone who is proficient in all three metas (or, more realistically, good enough at clicking to just kinda wing it). I think the fact that not many people are truly good at all three save for titans like stresh will lead to overall lower quality games means a different, non-represented OM should be tried first. Unsure what that would be - those who are more involved will know better than I do for sure - just smth to consider. Ideally metas where info is right in front of you as opposed to stuff like Convergence where you just have to know every mon's movepool ever, but maybe that's just the lazy boomer in me talking.
We are not considering expanding to an 8th individual metagame at this time. This would result in 10 OM ladders at any given time (8 permanent + 2 rotational), and we don't want to stretch resources too thin such that there are large activity gaps.
