• Check out the relaunch of our general collection, with classic designs and new ones by our very own Pissog!

Tournament ZU Circuit 2026 Discussion Thread

Tuthur

la Tuth
is a Forum Moderatoris a Top Community Contributoris a Top Metagame Resource Contributoris a Top Tiering Contributoris a Dedicated Tournament Hostis a Site Content Manager Alumnusis a Top Social Media Contributor Alumnusis a Top Contributor Alumnusis a Top Smogon Media Contributor Alumnus
Moderator
Hi ZU tournament players,

Just like last year, it is yet again time to discuss 2026 ZU Circuit. This is also the right place to discuss if you have feedback on the ongoing 2025 ZU Circuit.

I'm suggesting to keep scheduling about the same, but making ZUWC and ZU Swiss earlier, because their endings got delayed compared to 2024 due to qualifiers and bigger playoffs, respectively.

Now onto things, we want to consider for a change and would love to hear being discussed:
  • It's been suggested to replace ZUOL or ZUWC by ZUCL, following the NUCL / RUCL / UUCL format. Do you support this?
  • Are you happy with last year's format change to the 3 team tours? As a reminder, we introduced old gens in ZUWC (and moved to 8 starters), moved to 10 starters in ZUOL (by introducting SV), and made ZUPL 10 starters too (with ADV and one more SV).
You can discuss other topics as well, but the above should be the main focus of this discussion.
 
Hi, I was very vocal during the past months regarding a lot of stuff to be decided here so I figured I would post. Already said some of this in Discord but sometimes privately / not everything.

Re: What team tours should we have?
At this point, everyone knows I’m not a fan of the World Cup. It’s fundamentally unfair — if you’re stuck with a below-average team or one that simply isn’t motivated, there’s nothing you can do about it. So yeah, obviously I’m in favor of dropping it. Still, I’m genuinely looking forward to reading some pro-World Cup posts, because every argument I’ve heard so far has felt pretty weak.
Lower-tier World Cups tend to be dominated by the few regions with the highest concentration of competent mainers. That’s expected — more players putting in effort means stronger teams. There’s nothing inherently wrong with that, but we have to admit it makes the tournament far from competitive if you're not from the 2-3 regions with real chances.
Some people argued that the team imbalance from this year’s edition won’t happen again if we run in back, mainly because of the planned creation of a Midwestern US team (which would pull some players from the Northeast) and, for Europe, well… you know what happened.

USNE:
1762975395232.png

Northeast’s biggest strength was their sheer concentration of top-tier tournament players from across the site — something no other region can really match — combined with mainers who actually care. Even their bench was stacked with strong builders and support players. As long as they have people capable of passing solid teams to competent pilots, they’ll always have a major edge over every other region.
Now, if a Midwest team gets formed, they’re supposedly losing players like avarice, beats, sleid, chungler, and ho3n. But let’s be honest: only avarice and beats played the entire tour. Sleid didn’t play at all, chungler only started in playoffs, and ho3n cancered or something. That’s hardly a meaningful loss looking at the total.
And even then, they’ve got replacements that are hardly downgrades — BloodAce was benched for part of last year, SBPC didn’t even make the roster but could easily fill a slot, and they could bring in Tack or shuffle Monai and others into BW if need be without Beats. The point is: they’ve got the depth. A Midwest team existing doesn’t really weaken them enough; they still have more than enough high-level players to remain dominant.
Europe:
1762973900705.png


They lost fish anemometer, yo cho, anan2004, and Lily—though to be fair, they lost Lily during this year’s tour and still won it, so take that as you will. Losing fish and cho does hurt, since they were the ones building most of the SV teams for the pilots and were easily among the most active members. I saw it firsthand when I joined their server for finals (or maybe semis, can’t remember). Let's please not buy the Tuthur fake news that they actually lost 3x fish anemometer because the other two were ghost slots.
The real point with Europe is that even without fish and cho, they still have a stacked foundation: strong pilots and top tier mainers like Drud and OBB. The argument that “they’re not broken because they don’t care enough to build for teammates” is honestly kind of ridiculous. Maybe they don’t care that much—but for the tournament to have a chance at being fair, they need to not care. That’s the only thing holding them back from being as dominant as last year.
It’s like they’re saying, “Yeah, we’re still better than most teams, but don’t worry, we’re not trying that hard.” You just have to hope they actually stick to that, because if they start caring like fish and yo cho did, we’re back to square one: an unbalanced tournament dominated by the same region yet again.
So by the points above I would argue to remove World Cup from the 2026 circuit. I also recognize that it brings some benefits like being easily accessible in a different way to olympiad (unfortunately, not for all regions, which back up it being unfair once again) but that can be seen as positive because some people who are totally unrelated can have a play around and end up liking the metagame and sticking around (tldr: can bring people to the tier "by accident"), it's what happened to me after all, yet perhaps only to me so let's keep the impact numbers low. It just really sucks when you're stuck with a crew that gives zero fuck and you want to win and there is quite literally nothing you can do about it. Obviously for the tone of this post you can conclude that I think the cons outweight the pros by a lot, that's why I lean towards removing it.

Re: ZUCL
If we're getting rid of ZUWC, space opens up for ZUCL, which I personally think would be pretty hype. I managed in the original NUCL which spearheaded the flex format and it was a blast, and something I would love to do in ZU. Yet, there are some important points. Firstly, I think this should only be ran over World Cup, I'm saying this because I've seen people argue for it to be run over Olympiad, and it doesn't work for a couple reasons:
My interpretation of Olympiad is to be a beginner friendly tournament and inclusive one towards all the ZU metagames, even the unpopular and least competitive ones. Historically, it has also been used for mainers to learn a generation they have interest in after playing their main gen in PL or wherever else. That is, it's the chill tournament, with no prize, inclusive towards the gens that are still in development and easier to get drafted if you're new to the site or just not stablished in ZU, it's a true entrance door to the tier. And this entrance door proposal has nothing to do with the CL format: CL demands flexibility, and to have high level flexibility you need either veterans or good all rounder clickers, for the veterans, I think most would play anyway but we've seen some skip Olympiad before, maybe a new format can be exciting for them, as for the clickers, you really want the Custom Avatar prize to attract them on my understanding. Not to say that if you're new and getting drafted in CL and starting, you're likely just getting sacked into either a tier the team has no competent answers and the opponents are good, because well they picked it, or into the least competitive tiers. — hard to be less beginner friendly than this. Don't run CL over Olympiad please.
I'm getting tired so this will be quite raw: 6 teams, 8 slots, 2x fixed sv, 3x flex for each team, flex slots are SS-ADV. Yes, no RBY or GSC. These metagames are still in development and shifting while being oldgens in a very unstable fashion. This can potentially be revisited every year obviously but now is very early, mainly when they have like no playerbase.... at all. Why 6 teams? Because manager quality has been attrocious lately and we are lowkey depending on some random tour players to signup to run 8 teams in ZUPL so let's put the feet on the ground please. 10 slots over 8 is less crazy but PL already expanded and i've seen many people saying that 8 slots was better, which I agree with, mainly because 4x SV is too much and the playerbase is small in general, if you give each team one more flex per week in here (cl) the level drop probably won't be crazy but will make drafting tougher and such, I think 8 slots is good enough for a oldgen focused tour that aims on high level pokeman gameplay.

Re: Schedule
Even if we don't go forward with what I'm saying I would propose a change for the team tournament schedule, currently we're running it this way:
Olympiad (January) > ZUWC (April) > ZUPL (June). I would like to put Olympiad between PL and CL/WC so people can have a break if they want to skip it as it's consensually treated as less important. so ZUCL/ZUWC (January or nearby) > Olympiad (April or nearby) > ZUPL (June or nearby).

Thanks for reading,
-- the knight
 
In my opinion, ZUWC should be nuked and not replaced by another teamtour. ZUOL should be given its custom. Lower tier world cups are kinda bunions for partially the reasons havoc said and I also plain don't like being forced onto a team. If we keep it add ZU midwest though. If we add ZUCL instead make it during the fall or something because there's a gap there (UMPL doesn't count). Give it GSC but not RBY (im not trying to tierbash but RBY is not fun). I think Olympiad should always be in the winter, it has kind of became the winter zu tour at this point. If you wanna make it during the spring so I can manage though I don't mind. Make ZUPL so the auction is like late June at the latest, it's been getting progressively later and later and it's frankly getting ridiculous at this point.
Because manager quality has been **atrocious lately and we are lowkey depending on some random tour players to signup to run 8 teams in ZUPL
I think this is mostly untrue, we have plenty of influential people willing to signup to run 8 teams in ZUPL and we could probably get 10. 6 team playoffs are atrocious and the tournament is also short if we do that, which I don't like. I think we should run 8 teams in ZUOL and theoretically ZUCL too. 8 teams in ZUOL lets us have extra slots for beginners that would otherwise be lost due to the custom creating more signups.
I also still don't like how Olympiad is the "beginner" tour, but has tiers that are useless to learn like RBY and GSC, because they are not in ZUPL. It's fine but contradictory of the tour's mission.
I still think ZU Swiss should be ZU Majors instead, but the way it's been ran this year has been much better so I don't mind either really.

tldr
give zuol custom, make it 8 teams, manager quality is fine, remove zuwc and don't replace it > zuwc but with US midwest > zucl. dont move olympiad and the theoretical third tour. make ZUPL start in the 6th or 7th month of 2026.


You can discuss other topics as well, but the above should be the main focus of this discussion.
free this "zause" guy
 
I do like the idea of a ZUFL at some point somewhere down the line to promote not only the players that miss out each team tour but also for new managers who arent comfortable or experienced to showcase what they can do

I think not would do wonders for everyone involved

Of course whether it can be facilitated or not would be down to the council and the personel available to host and run teams
 
Olympiad should use the flex slot format. Players seem split on Olympiad’s identity -- is it the Old Gen tour or the beginner-friendly tour? I lean towards the former since it’s the highest level of ZU team tour play for Gen 1/2 players and Gen 3+ players often fight the same pools as ZUPL, but the addition of flex slots to Olympiad lets us ignore that question by catering to both parties.
  • It capitalizes on the ZU playerbase’s affinity for Old Gens by appreciating the value of multi-gen factotums who can defend opposing picks.
  • It allows managers to more confidently draft newer players who can slot into a duplicated meta pick that would otherwise have a deep starter pool with higher barriers to entry.
Managers seem to love the extra layers of draft strategy from flex slots too, so everyone wins.

If we really want to have some fun with flex slots, then teams should each be allowed to gamble/weight one flex slot per week to where the impact of that slot’s win or loss is doubled.

Olympiad should have a custom over ZUWC. The best Gen 1/2 players deserve to compete for one. I’d also expect stronger one-off signups since players don't have to field or adhere to regions.

ZUWC should include ORAS. It's competitive, accessible, and Ruffles wants to play it.

ZUWC has the bones of an elite tournament. A dynasty tournament that isn’t restricted by auction credits is a good change of pace from other team tours, but this idea is still limited by regional imbalances and the inability to truly choose one’s team.

I propose that we remove regional restrictions. Players who sign up would form their own teams to submit, and hosts/mods would select top cut if there are too many teams. Rename the tour accordingly, but keep the rest of the format the same.

Players want to play with their friends more than they want to play for national pride, and this concept still allows for regional teams if your countrymen are your preferred teammates anyways. I believe that natural order will prevent superteams since the best team can lose to the volatility of this game on any given day, but I also like the idea of teams assembling to take down a titan.

Let the players control their own destinies. Embrace friendship and the free market.

-- the skrimp
 
Last edited:
ZUCL at this stage is worse than ZUWC
I agree with all the points estra said about ZUWC and I could even add more layers to explain why this tournament is truly bizarre, arbitrary and unbalanced. Yet, ZUCL is even less appealing than ZUWC. While the format of ZUWC is broken, it's at least somewhat fun for teams like France or England to mess around together on top of bringing new players to ZU. ZUCL on the other hand has rulesets very similar to ZUPL with only minor twists and lack of clear identity, prestige and hype. It looks... blant on paper and uninspiring. I have seen a lot of posts and discussion trying to trash (rightfully) ZUWC but I would really like to see more points about WHY ZUCL would be a good idea. ZU is already present in four team tours across the website, do we need a fifth one? How would it provide a better or at least different experience compared to ZUPL? Is there anything you want to achieve with this specific format?

I tend to agree with zause that both ZUCL/ZUWC should be both nuked and 2 team tours was fine. 2026 look to be a dry year for Pokemon so let's not overload the tier with heavy commitment team tournament if the hype is not there. Keeping ZUWC/ZUCL is fine that being said and doesnt hurt much. Skrimps suggestion of a ZU Friends tour looks fun on paper so why not.


ZUOL should not have the custom (if it's a newbie friendly tour)
If I'm manager of a team tournament with Custom avatar as reward, I know that some of my players care deeply about the reward (some only sign up for that). Then, I would self-sabotage my own team in drafting unproven players instead of tournament warriors. It would be a shame because I think a beginner friendly teamtour is a must in ZU as it is the only teamtour where active players like SMHorizon, Kriegueur, Praise The Salt, Oof, risin_glory, etc have a chance to get drafted and improve their tournament plays with the support of their team. I read zause's proposition to extand it to 8 teams to balance the fact it would get the custom and while it's the move to do if a custom is finally given to ZUOL, I unfortunately think that it still would lead to community members to not getting drafted which is not the spirit of a beginner friendly tour.

Now, I get skrimps point that Olympiads is also an Old Gen heavy team tour. However, I also think that ZU team tournaments already provide a big enough plateform for old gens and with already a Custom avatar as reward at the end. This year saw the inclusion of adv in ZUPL so the only two tiers without representation are RBY/GSC, which both have in common to have an extremly small playerbase. I do no think that the state of these tiers currently justifies a custom. I'm also skeptical of the fact that these two tiers deserve a place in team tournament in the first place as there will be a clear lack of competent sign ups. I agree with zause that i would prefer seeing both RBY/GSC deleted from this tour.

Ultimately, I also think Olympiads has the opportunity to be a testing ground for new formats or rulesets that would be hard to justify in other tournaments. Removing or adding a tier in ZUPL tend to always lead to diplomatic crisis and without knowing the format of the potential third team tournament, it is unsure if an other teamtour would be able to accomodate these new ideas. Olympiads by its no so serious nature is perfect for that.

Ideally, the Custom avatar should be given to the third team tour (ZUWC/ZUCL/other) if there is one. Otherwise, other projects. I do not think we need a farm league as alluded by SMHorizon but I do think that Olympiads should be a very low-entry level tournament to allow new competitive players to play in teamtours. I'm indifferent with the flex slots suggestion.

Format and schedule of team tours

Both suggestions by estra and zause about the schedule of teamtours are fine. I do not have strong preferences with when Olympiads should be. I would not put anything in autumn as UMPL/UMFL are actively played and allow players to sign up and know other people from different communities. I also think ZUPL should start sooner. Ideally, ZUPL manager sign-up should be up last week of june.

The format of last year was fine too. The format of ZUPL is difficult to change so I think it is good to let it like that. I'm not a fan of 8 teams tournament but there was a hype each week about watching the games of different teams so I think it is oke like that. It also makes everything more chaotic and fun to be fair.


Make a second ladder tournament

Replace ZU Open by a second ladder tournament. Good ladder activity is essential for ZU to become official. With less suspects due to a stable end of gen metagame, ladder activity is getting lower. They need to be incentives to send good players on the ladder and doing it only once a year is clearly not enough. If this is not done, then give the Custom avatar for ladder related activity.
 
ZUCL on the other hand has rulesets very similar to ZUPL with only minor twists and lack of clear identity, prestige and hype. It looks... blant on paper and uninspiring.
I've obviously been a major proponent of the flex style tours for awhile now, not just because helping come up with NUCL is a source of pride for me, but also because that tour ended up being the most fun I've had on Smogon in ages. I think anyone who has participated in either NUCL so far will attest to that as well. It's the most hyped tour on our calendar, and despite me drafting Tuthur this year, this iteration is off to a great start.

The joy of the CL format is that it's a dynamic style of team tour that always has exciting matchups, mind games, drafts, and more because of how the flexing works. Since the tier picks are matchup dependent instead of set, teams are encouraged to get really creative with their drafts and their subsequent lineups, so, at least in NU, we constantly see tier mains flex all over the map to cover weaknesses that might've been exploited by opposing managers. It feels entirely differently from a classic PL in how it plays and it's a fascinating tour to manage and fun to participate in as a player. As a general rule, I hate tours that the only "gimmicks" are in the drafting (*cough* BD *cough*), but the really cool part of the CL format is that the gimmick lasts throughout the tournament. In an old gen heavy smaller community like ZU, it makes perfect sense for us to try it out.

I believe the best team tour options this year are ZUPL / ZUCL / ZUOL. I do think ZUOL has a unique space within the ZU community. The generally more relaxed tour for beginners and people looking to try new tiers is a great thing to have. It's a tour that I feel has a really strong grip on the ZU community and it would be a shame to see that thrown out. ZUCL I will always support as I feel it'll work especially well in a community like ZU with less depth to their old gen heavy pools. As for ZUWC, I think that tour is extremely mid at best, rigged for the French at worst. the ca is better off going to a more balanced and fun tour format.


Make a second ladder tournament
I've been wanting to mess with ladder tours for awhile in NU and I believe it's the one part of mainstream Smogon tours that feels unoptimized. I'd love to see a new and improved version of the tour/2 tours/spaced out tours/any other idea for circuit. Or even in a ladder achievements style of thing. A lot of potential here if it's thought out I think, so +1 from me.
 
Not really happy with how ZUOL is framed by some posts. It is for sure not as elitist as ZUPL, but that doesn't make it the beginner-friendly team tournament where people try out new tiers (read skrimps post). If we want such a tournament, we can surely have ZUFL take place next year. I don't really have an opinion on changing to a flex slot format, though this could come with some benefits. First, it would help differentiating ZUOL from ZUPL, so users don't consider ZUOL as just a worse version of ZUPL. Second, it would allow to feature every ZU Old Gens even with less than 10 slots, which was a bit of an issue last year. Unrelated to the above benefits, if we end up switching ZUOL to a flew format, I would argue for a 2 SV + 6 Flex slots format or 8 Flex slots format with 8 teams, which I believe would make the ZUOL experience better and also combat what is CL biggest flaw imo; every week feeling the same and many teams aiming for having 1 of each tier. I also believe that with 6 teams, teams don't get enough opportunities to mix up with tier picks and with 2 additional weeks, they'd have more time to express tier picking skills.

ZUWC should definitely stay. It's the biggest entry point for non-mainers (unlike ZUOL); I believe both editions made for very competitive tournaments and the tournament's introduction has been the greatest change to the ZU tournament schedule since I've been involved in ZU leadership. Just thinking about this year's edition, Fille, PTKmoekyuun, and Terracotta were given opportunities they never had before and might have never been picked in any other ZU team tournaments otherwise. This is now the part where I have to tackle estra's arguments. On the one hand, I've to admit he is right in saying that ZUWC is by nature more unbalanced than auctions based tournaments, on the other hand this problem is overblown. The two examples cherrypicked are USNE and Europe; two teams which made it to semifinals this year. The post explains deeply how they were much better than every other team in the tournament, and how even with nerfs they would still be too powerful. USNE litterally finished last in 2024 with a total 4-14 record despite still having BloodAce, sleid, and zause, and when Europe didn't have fish and yo cho in 2024, they missed playoffs despite having strong names like Drud, OranBerryBlissey10, and TheFranklin. Likewise 2024 champions, USS missed playoffs in 2025 despite having a similar line-up. Equating strong names to success is kinda disrespectful to the teamwork put by the players and diminisses the efforts that they've made to achieve this result. Over ZUWC two editions, only 3 teams have managed to make playoffs twice; Italy, France, and Brazil; three teams that barely feature mainers and that weren't expected to perform exceptionally well. I believe that with the right motivation, any region can win ZUWC, and if you don't like your team, you are free to skip the tournament.

Didn't think I'd need to mention it, but ZU Open and ZU Seasonal are non-negationable circuit tournaments; they are part of the UM circuit. I believe only having one ZULT is fine, but if others agree with Apa, voice yourself.

Likewise, I'm aware many people (including myself) dislike UMPL, but it still remains the biggest UM team tournament and overlapping a ZU tournament with it seems counter productive both for ZU and UM. It would also overlap with SCL, which many top ZU mainers have been taking part to and would rather focus on than a ZU team tournament.

Now is a suggestion of mine on ZUWC format. I preferred 2024 6 SV to 2025 multigen format; our old gens slots felt like isolated islands with little support and I believe smaller teams have a harder time competing with those allowed. I would argue to 6 SV + 1 SS + 1 SM/BW would be preferrable; if not I'd like to replace one of SM or BW by ADV, which has imo proven to be a more popular old gens in recent times. Also ORAS should definitely not be included, it's not threatened anymore of being cut from ZUOL and ZUPL, but it's still has playerbase issues and on a completely different scale than SS, SM, BW, and ADV imo. I also wouldn't be opposed to moving toward 4 US teams if that's what the playerbase wants, but this should be decided quite early so players can make plans.
 
Olympiad should stay as is. It's been a successful tour for three years now. There's no need to mess with something that works. That being said, I'd still join oly if it was turned into a flex-slot tour assuming there's no SV. ZUOL is an old gens tour and adding SV to it, even in a flex format, messes with its identity. Olympiad happens to have an easier entry point compared to ZUPL because it's never had a custom and caters to more communities (gens 1-3). No custom means fewer tour players/CA chasers sign up.

My experiences with ZUWC have all been negative so I'm not a fan of the tour. From my experiences in ZUWC I and helping Brazil last year, ZUWC is a tour that relies on one or more mainers to carry the load. I won't act like this is the norm or that other teams have good teams with balanced support. From an outside view, team Nordic and maybe US East looked like real teams and not ones that put a lot of pressure on a couple builders to last the whole tour. I could be wrong though I didn't pay much attention to ZUWC II.

Although world cup is an unbalanced format, in theory it's the easiest entry point for tours. Any nation/region can form a team if they have enough people that care. In terms of format, 6 SV gets stale real quick (+super recycling) and I feel ZU old gens generally have good resources. Old gens slots shouldn't be difficult to make work. I'm curious why the player base argument is still going on against ORAS. ZU had good exposure in ORAS Underground and ORASPL, which I'd like to think helped get more people into the tour (i.e., Ruffles & Dugza). ORAS feels easier to get into than SS to me too.

ZUCL > ZUWC.
 
ZUWC: I personally do not like zuwc or world cups in general on Smogon. I don’t find an unbalanced format to be fun. Being on northeast last time was fun, but it was mostly because we were winning and I wouldn’t get to team with most of those people in a World Cup usually. ZU just don’t have the player base to support a World Cup format well. Would never want to manage the tour myself and don’t have any interest in playing it again. I understand it helps some people get into the ZU tier, but I think a standard auction tour can do that just as well, it just depends on the managers to draft well.

ZUCL: strongly in favor of every ZU generation being pickable in ZUCL. There is no reason to explude GSC and the metagame would benefit it. GSC zu is small right now but it’s not going to grow if we exclude it from team tours with every other generation. The metagame is not hard to pick up and can be very fun. Part of the onus is on me and the gsc council to keep resources updated with samples/VR/Etc, and I’m sorry for slacking on that so far. RBY is a no-brainer, it just has the player base similar to other ZU oldgens and supports itself regarding a solid draft pool. Also, just generally the CL format has been great in all of the ones I’ve participated in so I think it’s a no brainer

Olympiad: it’s also fine to keep Olympiad, it’s a fun tour that’s not too serious and it helped me get into GSC in the first place. SV is great in Olympiad but only 2 slots please, same for CL.

I’d like ZUCL to be added and ZUOL to stay with one of them earning a custom (CL).
 
I do like the idea of a ZUFL at some point somewhere down the line to promote not only the players that miss out each team tour but also for new managers who arent comfortable or experienced to showcase what they can do

I think not would do wonders for everyone involved

Of course whether it can be facilitated or not would be down to the council and the personel available to host and run teams
+1 for a zufl, for same reasons smh said. its hard to get drafted unless you do really good in like open or something. Good way for the people that wanted to play to be able to come together somewhere.


Make a second ladder tournament

Replace ZU Open by a second ladder tournament. Good ladder activity is essential for ZU to become official. With less suspects due to a stable end of gen metagame, ladder activity is getting lower. They need to be incentives to send good players on the ladder and doing it only once a year is clearly not enough. If this is not done, then give the Custom avatar for ladder related activity.
+1 here too
but it would have to be different somehow, only times i ever get angry or frustrated/ragequiting is during the laddering qualification rounds.

Don't know enough to have a good opinion on the other stuff

Edit: Did have positive experience with zuwc but mostly because it was the first time i got picked for a team tour, probably cause not alot of zu in my region. Would def sign up again but it makes sense why people dont like it
 
As someone who really only really plays ZU in team tours, i must say i think the ZUWC format is alot more enticing to me than ZUOL. Me and the rest of the nordics guys had a great time learning and playing the tier this year and we would love to do it again-- despite many of us not signing for zu/umpl (and i dont expect it for OL either tbh). I dont think theres a reason to get rid of either WC or OL, and if people arent a fan of WC simply moving over the custom to OL is a sufficient solution. I dont think CL would "be better" than either wc or ol, as OL specifically really suits itself to the identity of ZU imo. Needless to say im excited to play whichever the next TT is.
 
I don't think there are any *tours in the circuit that don't work. As much as I would like to see a CL happen, I don't think it should replace ZUOL or ZUWC, and I think both of those tours worked (in my experience) and should both stay.

I've only had good experiences in ZUWC. It got me into ZU and was pretty welcoming. US West is small enough for lesser known players to have a shot, but big enough to where I know we have enough names/builders for a good roster. The only thing (besides midwest existing because its goofy that it doesn't) I want changed in ZUWC is for the tour to start sooner. I don't think outright cutting countries is a good idea (obviously) but if there's a way for qualifiers to happen before the main tour (via staggered sign-ups ig) I'd be in favor of it. It's prob the same amount of waiting but it feels less if I'm not chillin in a teamcord waiting for the round to go up.

I'm probably the only person affected by this, but if ZUPL and UMPL can be staggered more I would appreciate it. I'm gonna bring it up once there's an UM circuit thread too, whether ZUPL starts the same date or a week or 2 earlier. In UMPL W1 I had to prep with Esteb4n + plague (pekos) against beavs + a team with Terra (my zupl team), and W2 (or 3 tiebreaks suck) I had to help prep with Esteb4n in UMPL and prep against Esteb4n in ZUPL finals. Tbf, the odds of beavs + terra ending up on a team against me + lbn (not in zu tbf) W1 while I'm supporting 2 pekos before we face off in finals is probably really low, but it would be really nice to just not have to worry about this at all. I think I was tryharding/burnt out enough to where it was fine and didn't affect much (as long as I was ignoring the tspikes MU), but come on, this shouldn't happen.


And here's the hot take:

If we really do want a flex slot format, I don't see why this couldn't happen in a potential ZUFL. I know this is kind of antithetical to the whole idea of a farm league, but if we decide that PL players (or managers?) can play tiers they've never touched in FL anyways, I can see this format working.

This does run the risk of only ZUPL starters getting drafted into the supposed FL (in theory, but we all know no CA means less tour players sign up), but locking PL people out of their starting tiers and SV would help with that. We could also lock people who costed a certain price or more out of FL, but idk if that's a good idea since price is a bit arbitrary and would lock out someone 26k in 1 tier from playing a tier they're barely 3k in. I think that ZUPL bench people should have a shot at playing in FL either way, and some PL starters should be eligible for oldgen tiers they don't know.

In my head, a CL-style FL is hype and will get people into oldgens they don't normally play while also letting the FL SV pool play (because i wanna lock PL players out of SV), but it's definitely a self-centered proposal because its the type of tour I want to play in lol. It's also dependant on having a large number of oldgens, which might be harder to support at a FL level. CL is also a slot-heavy format, so who knows if there are enough ppl. Also, this sounds ridiculous at face value and I'm aware of it, but it feels like the only way to fit both CL + FL into the schedule since the only tour with support to cut is WC and I don't agree with that. And a Champions league can feed into a Premier league, look at the English Football League as an example.

EDIT: or just ZUCL > ZUOL, ik that ZUOL worked and I don't want it gone but at the same time flex slots are hype and this less outlandish than ZUCL as FL
 
Last edited:
A biased opinion:

- I'm not a fan of WC format, especially if they're all SV.
- However, the main argument for WC format is that it is the best entry for casual ZU players, and because of that, I think it's actually a good long term strategy if you're trying to grow bigger as a community. Though if you are keeping WC on that argument, you should just rip the bandaid and make it all SV. Maximize the fun and minimize the prep. These WC tours always end up being 2-4 players prepping the whole squad which makes it really not fun for the players. So all sv = less prep + more people join ZU
- That being said, I do think that for serious ZU players, ZUCL is the most fun. I fall in this category.
- I think why not just have both, but preferably have WC after spl or scl regular season, that way many top players who are looking for casual fun tours to cool off can join, which is a good way to get people invested. I understand that this is biased as an SPL player, but I'd eagerly join ZUWC without my tier (oras) if there is no concurrent big tour so i can put in effort in learning SV ZU instead of being thwarted there with 0 prep and end up losing and letting my team down because i was too busy with spl.
- That being said, if WC stays without all sv and there are still old gens, ORAS should 100% be there. I think the playerbase is fine but if you're argument that the playerbase is bad, that should is an argument for ORAS not against it. In WC you want formats that are both really fun and easy to get into. I'm not sure about the other tiers, but ORAS satisfies both, and if the playerbase is scarce, that means its just that much easier for unfamiliar faces to slot in
- If you do make ZUWC post spl (march-ish), then I think a ZUCL or something that includes old gens would be nice in January

Either way, excited to participate more in this community. I had a blast in ZUPL :heart:
 
Hi, the ZU moderation team has settled on having ZUCL replace ZUOL this year. Here is the calendar;

Team tours:
  • ZUCL
    • Manager signups - January 4
    • Player signups - January 11
    • Week 1 - January 25
  • ZUWC
    • Manager and player signups - April 5
    • Qualifiers / Pools if no qualifiers - April 19
    • Pools if qualifiers - May 3
  • ZUPL
    • Manager signups - June 21
    • Player signups - June 28
    • Week 1 - July 12
Individuals:
  • Open - January 4
  • Triathlon
    • SS Cup - January 18
    • SM Cup - January 25
    • ORAS Cup - February 1
  • Ladder tour - April 19
  • Seasonal - June 7
  • Classic
    • BW Cup - August 23
    • DPP Cup - August 30
    • ADV Cup - August 30
    • GSC Cup - September 6
    • RBY Cup - September 6
  • Swiss - August 6
Discussions are still open on ZUCL format (notably 8x8 vs 6x10 teamslots) and ZUWC (mostly old gens).
 
If ZUCL has a custom, 10 slots 2 sv 4 picks per team, this is standard for CL formats and other tours that have tried fewer slots with flex slots have been flops. If ZUCL doesn’t have a custom (lower signups overall and fewer managers likely) 6 teams with 10 slots instead of 8
 
ZUWC should have ORAS if old generations are included. ORAS has made strides this past year with its addition to ORASPL and in the new ORAS Underground Team Tournament. Each tournament showed competitive slots and gained a lot of interest from the ORAS community. We saw new tour players in ZUPL try the tier out and enjoy it. I don’t see a good reason to skip it this year, as last years reasoning was somewhat fair but not anymore.
 
Sad to see ZUOL go but for ZUCL go 8x8 and each team gets 2 picks with 4sv, keep zuwc format the same just add Midwest pls
Highly recommend not doing 4 sv. Besides that the zu community is frankly more old gen based, the point of the tour is the flex and old gens. 4 sv made rucl pretty rough as well ngl. If anything, you do tuthurs suggestion awhile back of 8 slots with 2sv and 3 picks each in order to maximize the difference in tiers and mus every week. I’d go that route for zu
 
Sucks to see Olympiad go. Since Olympiad was six teams, I believe ZUCL should be six teams. Eight teams doesn't seem that feasible to me because that makes for a super long tour and I'm doubtful we could fill eight teams with fully competent players (especially if there's no custom avatar for ZUCL). I agree with 2 SV for ZUCL. 8 slots > 10.

I agree with sleid that ZUWC should include ORAS.

Fwiw, ZU should've done a community survey about what people want for team tours & formats. That way, imo there would more data to work with and more transparency in the decision-making process. It's far simpler to vote on a poll and provide some reasoning if needed than to write up forum posts.
 
Back
Top