Four months is a good length of time; it fits in with 3 months testing and 1 month of sorting paragraphs, voting, and so on. 6 months was mostly an idea to fit in with the 3 or 6 month suspect tests, but it may be less practical due to the extra time needed on top of the testing. The more I think about it, the more I like a tiering update every 4 months plus the "if a Pokemon changes tier in between a test, it goes to the next 'BL tier' above the tier it is going to" idea.Six months for revising tiers seems a bit long... We could probably get away with every four months with still being current with the tiers.
Why shouldn't we create a tier below NU? Currently there's 51 Pokemon in OU, and 57 in UU. NU currently has almost triple the amount of Pokemon in OU...so it's likely that a lot of Pokemon won't make the "OU of NU". Of course, I'm using the Pokemon actually classified as that tier and not the Pokemon allowed, because I'm looking at the most used Pokemon in that tier.If we were to explore NU a lot more I could see some mons hopping up a tier or two. There's bound to be an undiscovered set or two lying around that could be quite useful in OU among NU pokes. At Smogon we want to have as much knowledge available for the various metagames of mons, right? Given the size of OU and UU though... will a tier like... Never Ever Used emerge?
We can't really tell at this point if it would be a success though...I'd say we're definitely looking too far into the future here!
It's hard not to repeat myself here, so I'll just say I completely agree.I'd love to see the results of testing NU, giving it ladders, etc. It would be fun.
I have no problem if an admin or supermod wants to move this to Policy Review or wherever they feel it should go to get the best reception. I don't like the idea of gauging how many people may play NU via a public discussion though (mostly because there will be people who will claim they will play and won't, and some people who will play just won't post). I'm mostly looking to see if there are reasons not to start NU.We probably should have a more public discussion about this though, that way we can gauge how many potential players we'd have for it. All of this NU discussion would be kind of moot if we didn't have any players...