Other 1v1 Tournament Policy Discussion Thread

Ok so

- adv without dpp just doesnt structurally make sense, we had this discussion
- adv would make the player pool quality go to shit no player that wants competitive games is gonna slot themselves into gen 3 or 4
- both would add more strain on the usual carryjob guys, so you're gonna have to have people think about 6 gens in depth, i expect both tiers to be a rebringing the brokens situation in playoffs or even before that (no this isnt helpful to meta development)
- mg just had a whole 9 weeks of decent to watch series aside from the maki series and maybe 2 or so more, the skill to compete in mg is in my opinion very underrated, thinking across 5 metagames in thr same series or whole weeks if you took the time to be your own team feeder, is in fact more competive than bringing zap and sceptile or cress and clef every week 5 times
- this discussion is largely why adv should be in, there seems to be no concern about mg's playability which to me just makes it more confusing that people are trying to nuke it just for the sake of adding a fringe metagame with 3 active players
-sm2 is largely a shitshow, but the players are clearly of a higher quality than fucking 3 or 4, in a metagame where your team is always gonna lose to something viable bar hax thats just the way its gonna be
But sm tiering is going on right now, unless we want sm 1 to be a shitshow aswell i think sm 2 might be something thats gonna be worth putting up with just to make progress easier for a metagame that ACTUALLY HAS ACTIVE PLAYERS

Lmk if i forgot anything
 
Last edited:

Boat

fuck nintendo
is a Tournament Director Alumnusis a Community Leader Alumnusis a Community Contributor Alumnusis a Battle Simulator Staff Alumnusis a Dedicated Tournament Host Alumnus
re : ADV

won't go on too long cause its all been said, ADV is a terrible tier and the playerbase for it is not super quality. very few strong players actually prefer or even enjoy ADV. so you'd be forcing teams to either start some really sus players, or compromise other tiers.

re : SM2

SM2 in PL was pretty quality this year, and it kinda proves that the SM playerbase is still large enough to warrant 2 slots. people were saying that PL and WC are different tours, and that the SM playerbase is so unfairly distributed that it wont work. im not sure where this trend of people objecting to imperfect lineups is coming from, but guys, variance in year-to-year lineup strength is literally how world cup works. feature, not a bug. just like how west will probably need to train up new players for at least 2 of SS3, ORAS, and BW, some regions have some currently sus SM2 slotting that they will need to work on, and that is okay!
 

Murm

formerly Murman
is a Community Contributoris a Tiering Contributor
Quickly dropping my thoughts:

First off, don’t flame people for being “inexperienced.” Many people’s arguments against SM2 for instance relied on putting down the likes of Arai, NAR, Xander, etc.. These players have since developed a lot of prowess in multiple gens, the biggest example being Xander making it into Champs. Also like, don’t hurt their feelings by saying they’re bad, that’s just rude and oftentimes untrue. It truly shows the sheer amount of elitism and toxicity growing in the 1v1 community, and I hope we can shift away from this culture and be more welcoming of newer players.

Multigen: Most of the series in PL were really cool, it’s a great way to show off many different generations and show the player’s skill. It's a very competitive slot and is very fun to watch. Not much else to say that hasn’t been said.

SM2: There are enough players to support this slot, and again, it’s a competitive slot and fun to watch. Also, it’s not like the player base isn’t gaining any players. I’m sure there are plenty of newer players that can play SM, that is if your region is even struggling with slotting. Training new players isn’t a bad thing, like Boat said.

ADV/DPP: Their player bases don’t support them unfortunately, and the majority of them would rather be playing different tiers.

Overall, be nice and keep the format the same as in PL.
 
I would like to advocate for keeping SM2. People talk about regions lacking knowledge about the tier but the tier is incredibly newbie friendly, as even a monkey can understand that you only need to click four mons to win an SM game: zard, dragonite, mew, and greninja. if people want to try to prove me wrong, I'll be happy to run games with people and smash them using my strategy just like how BBB smashed everyone in pl (until we got haxed in the finals)

In addition, the sets for all four of these mons on team preview are unguessable, so every SM game is basically a coin flip. This is fair for newbies, as they now have a chance of winning when playing against "experienced" players (quotation marks because half of these players are garbage and don't understand the tier based on what I've seen them click in recent 1v1pl games)

people advocating for adv and dpp are boomers who can't let go of the past, the tiers are trash but they keep coming back to it because it's comfort to them, like a toxic relationship

on wc start date: please start the day after nba finals ends, otherwise PB will die and we'll be stuck reading garbage hip hop takes from certain users (not naming names)

- realiti (100% winrate in 1v1pl)
 

The Official Glyx

Banned deucer.
I have no intention of white knighting for any particular tier this time around, I will say what my thoughts are and leave it at that. Also good lord I need to stop writing way too much for these posts-
SM2 - SM2's been in a weird spot for a while now, and at this point in time I feel like it's less useful for giving the pool of SM players a chance to shine and more about allowing the primary SM players on a team to dodge or snipe particular opponents. If you were on a PL team, you likely noticed this on a weekly basis, where managers tried to predict an opposing team's SM slotting when drafting what lineup to send in so that you can get more favorable matchups. Additionally, this is something that we can observe directly impacting how the tour goes, as certain teams would have had more favorable odds of winning the week if their SM slots were swapped:
Finals
1652145911582.png

Edgar had already been 3-0'd by Boat before, while Bopher only managed to hax his way to a win against LBDC. It stands to reason that neither player would want to run it back against opponents they lost/should have lost to.

Semifinals
1652145984122.png

While the end result turned out in favor of Edgar, I was in the team cord at the time and knew that they were really hoping to avoid the rematch of XSC vs Edgar, which makes sense, given that XSC 3-0'd Edgar earlier in the tour. While the Barraskewdas won the week anyways, it undoubtedly would've been more favorable for them if the SM slots were swapped.

Week 7
1652146057011.png

Lancer is someone who has teamed with XSC multiple times in various 1v1 team tours (namely WC), and as such has a lot more experience with getting to know how XSC operates, which is something that would've been very helpful to have if they ended up playing each other. While it's naturally hard to say anyone is ever favored to beat XSC, Lancer undoubtedly would've had the best shot at doing so, while rumia is better suited towards handling whoever the people in control of tsb's account were that got fed teams. This difference very well could have landed the Dragapults a playoffs spot over the Panchams.

I don't really care to go back through all the weeks, so hopefully you get the idea-
The core point I'm trying to get at here is that if player slotting is becoming something that is more influential to the outcome of a tour than the actual games themselves, then there is a problem.

For the sake of comparison, it may also be worthwhile to take a look at the state of ORAS2 in older team tours in order to see if there are any similarities as to how those games played out/who played them, given that there was a growing movement at the time to drop ORAS2 as a slot:
Overall, the ORAS2 pool was definitely a fair amount more dried up than the SM2 pool, though SM2 is assuredly getting there over time. As for whether or not that justifies removal is up to everyone's discretion. Personally, I think SM2 won't kill anyone if it sticks around for one more team tour (especially since it likely only has 1 team tour left before Gen 9). It's nowhere near as dry as ORAS2 was, and every team has at least 1 knowledgeable SM player to help out the slots. It would be a bummer if the outcome of WC gets influenced by the sort of lineup sniping I mentioned above, but for the time being I think most people are willing to accept that possibility.

DPP - DPP is a tough one to argue for. Even if it may not be in a rough place anymore tiering-wise, once people have decided they hate something, it can be difficult to change their minds otherwise. In that regard, I would be curious to hear what people who don't want DPP have to say about what it would take for DPP to get another chance in team tours. Like I said at the beginning of the post, I have no plans on white knighting for this tier again, nor for any others, so to that extent, if people want it, great, and if not, that's fine. Personally, I think DPP is probably the slot out of all of these options with the strongest player pool, but of course more competitive games doesn't necessarily equate to more enjoyment of the tournament or that tier, so to that extent if the people who would likely be relegated to handling/helping DPP aren't interested in doing so, then that's really all that needs to be said.

ADV - ADV falls along more or less the same lines as DPP, where a lot of people hate it, while a handful of players love it dearly. The main difference between ADV and DPP players though is that DPP players are a fair bit more decorated when it comes to finding success in 1v1 tours (teams and individuals). This means that DPP games would likely be more competitive as a result of the generally more skilled pool of players that would be going into it. Conversely, though, ADV players generally only play/are best in ADV, which means that if you did have an ADV slot, putting players in that slot would be taking a lot less muscle away from potential other slots than you would be missing out on if you had DPP instead. This imo is the main redeeming factor that gives ADV potential as a slot, since it makes it more feasible for players to play the tiers they want to play, rather than having to relegate an unsuspecting team slave to the slot because no one else wants to. (That said, though, I don't know who plays ADV well enough to say with confidence that every team in WC would have someone capable of handling it, let alone willing to do so).

MG - This is of course very subjective, but I feel that PL showed more how painfully mediocre MG is, rather than how it could be good. Not only did this slot take away people who would be better suited in other slots more egregiously than DPP ever did, the format itself led to games being more geared towards diceroll matchup fishing and preview 50/50s that you can't really account for in prepping than any standard Bo5 in a single tier would ever have. In many ways it seemed more like playing True 1v1 (1 mon, no preview) than regular 1v1, which is disappointing to see for what's meant to be a competitive tournament. All in all, I personally believe MG should not be in PL again. As for WC, since it's not quite meant to be taken as seriously as PL, if people still wanna play it, then w/e. I think pools will only exacerbate the random nature of it even worse, but if people want it then so be it.

BW - There have been rumblings in the background that perception of BW is starting to go down the same route of DPP. While, I don't think it's quite to the point of the widespread hatred that DPP has just yet, you'd be naive to take things for granted, especially come Gen 9 when BW will be the new bottom slot competing with MG or whatever else for a place in team tours. Even though I don't think the support is there to boot it from this coming WC, I think it would be wise to start preparing for the worst in the future. As a slot, I think it's fine; Snorlax and Cresselia perhaps have no business being as fat as they are, but not really too much else that really sticks out to me from watching PL games; the main issue I see for BW is mostly just that there aren't as many eyes on it as there could be, though the wave of newer players who were outright interested in giving it a try this PL is a breath of fresh air that I'm sure the BW mainstays are glad to see. That said, I have BW and ORAS here moreso to make sure that they stay in the back of people's minds for possible future discussions, even if they likely won't be impacted by this discussion here.

ORAS - This is more a potential move for much further in the future, but ORAS isn't necessarily safe from criticism, either. Between a playerbase that is progressively drying up as time goes on, alongside a centralized meta that is becoming notably similar to how critics of the ADV metagame would describe that tier, it's becoming more difficult as time goes by to hide these problems under the cover of nostalgia that people have for the tier. While I don't think it's quite there just yet, it would be foolish to think that ORAS is immune to the problems dragging down DPP and potentially BW. As a slot for team tours, I find it a little annoying that ORAS somehow manages to make 1v1 more 50/50 heavy than any other tier does besides MG, but I am aware that some people do still like it, so :shrug:. Like I said for BW, I put this here moreso to plant the seed for keeping an eye on these slots for the future.

If I had to do a power rankings for all of the options I listed here:
- SM2, ORAS, and BW are fine enough to stay as the 5th, 6th, and 7th slots for this WC, respectively
- honestly no clue for the 8th slot in this WC

Skipping Gens - The idea of skipping gens is something that has often plagued slot discussion throughout the years, given that it would naturally be weird to have, for example, team tour slots going from Gens 8-5, but then jumping to 3 for the last slot, thus skipping DPP. While it certainly would come across as "messy" to some, the question that really needs to be asked is what difference does it ultimately make? It may upset some people's OCD to see the lack of Gen 4 despite the presence of Gen 3, but is any actual integrity to the tournament lost in doing so? There is ultimately no functional value to be had from upholding this limitation on how we run our tournaments, moreover, if the limitation is doing more harm to the integrity of a tournament than good, then I would say perhaps it is time to consider lifting this limitation. That said though, it is understandably preferred that we can have properly ordered slots without stretching the playerbase too thin, but if the playerbase gives us a sign that the status quo is becoming unfeasible, then I believe it would behoove us to take their feelings into consideration.

WC slots vs PL slots - Perhaps a bit of a hot take, but I don't believe WC slots and PL slots have to be one in the same. While it'd undoubtedly be great if they could be the same without any issues resulting from it, the fact of the matter is that that may not always be the case. The unique teambuilding systems between PL vs WC alone shine a spotlight on how some tiers may not be as realistic in one team tour vs the other. With a more restricted drafting format in comparison to PL's open auction system, WC runs the risk of some teams not being able to cover the more niche slots simply because they don't have the right players living there, or that the players who do live there simply don't want to play in those slots. With this in mind, I think we should keep an open mind as to what slots could be viable for one team tour vs the other, rather than just assuming PL and WC always have to be the same.

Team votes - I'm not overly keen on putting things up to vote all the time, but if there's a lack of general consensus on a subject then I suppose there's only so much else you can do about it. When it comes to doing things this way, the ideal balance you would naturally want to achieve is gathering the thoughts of the people who would be most directly impacted by whatever change we're attempting to get through; in this case that'd naturally be the players most likely to be relegated to handling the extra slots, as well as the rest of the team that would be working alongside them or otherwise picking up the slack if they don't have a player who is self-sufficient in that tier.

Throughout this discussion, there have been a few mentions of doing a manager vote, akin to the method that was used for determining the slots for the 2022 Smogon WCoP. While I do think the runoff idea is pretty good, I don't believe that having it be managers only would result in the most accurate portrayal of how the community feels, nor would it take into account what the players who will have to live with the consequences of this vote feel about the whole ordeal. While I'm sure it would be less "messy", the purpose of doing things like this isn't to be clean or organized, but rather to make sure that what we do as the people who organize these massive projects is always done in the best interests of those who participate in them. Even if some teams do vote in step with their managers, what matters is that those players have the opportunity to make their voices heard, especially those who partake in our tours but generally don't participate in long winded discussions like these on smogon or discord.

"Objectivity" - One criticism I've seen of discussions like this is this that having discussions or votes in this manner generally makes the matter of determining slots into less of an objective matter and more into a subjective one, since it's effectively turning the issue into less of "what makes sense" and more of "what people like". While that does sound bad at the surface level, the matter of these discussions is more nuanced than just that; one of the reasons that changing slots was brought up in the first place for PL wasn't just based off of player enjoyment, but also due to logistical concerns over the sustainability of keeping DPP in as a slot. While there are certainly subjective aspects to it, it's not necessarily true that we can't discuss these matters in an objective way. Basically everyone agrees on the fundamental understanding that we won't be adding tiers that blatantly aren't 1v1 into 1v1 team tours, and so to that extent it is unrealistic to suggest that any kind of "slippery slope" in that regard could emerge from this.

As it pertains to the notion that we need to have consistent slotting each year, while I do think it would be ideal if we could afford doing so, I would also disagree with the thought that it should be mandatory. Like I said above, it could be a matter of logistics, or it could be a more subjective matter of enjoyment, the fact of the matter is simple: if a slot isn't sustainable, it shouldn't be in the tour. It's for this reason that we don't have 10 or even 12 slots in our team tours, going from Gen 8 all the way down to Gen 1; even though we certainly have the signup numbers to support such a move, the reality of the matter is that there aren't a sufficient amount of RBY or GSC players, who aren't also generally bound to other slots, to make such a move feasible. Why should this logic no longer apply when it comes to moderating the slots we already have?

Rotating slots - This is an idea that I thought could be pretty interesting, the basic premise is that you'd have slots that have shown lackluster activity alternating each year so that other tiers with potential can get a moment in the limelight as well. The main things that would need to be hashed out are things like how you would go about determining how slots rotate, as well as potential restrictions like whether or not a rotating slot can be picked multiple years in a row, and etc.

7 slots - This was something that initially I joked about in a discord conversation, but after thinking it over, has more merit to it than I initially thought. The main reason stated for keeping an even number of slots in PL is so that teams can tie during the weeks and get differing numbers of points, thus making it a lot less likely that you'd have a bunch of teams with the same number of points when it comes time for playoffs. With WC's pools, the number of slots doesn't actually matter, and so the only thing you'd be preserving with even slots is the ability to tie in playoffs. The idea sounds cursed on paper, but if people are confident that the 8th slot's gonna suck no matter what it is, it may just be worth considering.

Post-tour surveys - To clarify, these would be for the purpose of evaluating how the general playerbase feels about each given slot, since having that data would be a lot more helpful towards getting an idea of what the community is feeling like, rather than hoping that the more vocal types in discussions like this speak for everyone. While this naturally wouldn't fix the issues surrounding this particular discussion, I think it would be a good thing to do in the future.

Creating guidelines - While this similarly is less of a potential solution to the current issue of slotting, it is still something we should probably be doing as things continue to develop. With more old gens than ever before and Gen 9 on the way, discussions like these are undoubtedly going be happening more and more frequently, and so to that extent, we should probably establish some form of generally agreeable terms for which we can refer to for future discussions in order to make sure that future discussions are had with common goals and understandings in mind.

Old gen representation - Similarly, this is another thing that isn't really pertinent to this particular discussion but probably should be doing. As old gens (or any tier, really) continue to develop and stabilize, people will lose interest over time. It's for this reason that we need to give people a reason to care about the tiers we have available, since for tiers like ADV and DPP, it's hard for people to care about them when the only things they get are playing 1/5 of the part in 1v1 Classic or the occasional unofficial tour if lucky. The same goes for BW, ORAS, and possibly SM down the line as well; even though they have slots in team tours, that only gives so much extra over what ADV and DPP have. As for what exactly we should do about this, I think that's a bit out of the scope for this particular discussion, but I think it would behoove us all to keep this on our minds moving forward.

tldr
- SM2 is fine
- 8th slot idc
- start date idc
- old gens need more eyes on them so we don't have to have this discussion each tour
- if you're gonna have a vote, make sure it includes the people whom the vote impacts
 

The Official Glyx

Banned deucer.
With there being a clear divide in what people preferred for WC's slots from what we could see in discussions both here and elsewhere, the TD team felt it best to put things to a vote between the notable users involved with WC (being people who were on the teams last season, as well as notable new players from this PL who will likely play in WC). While the vote wasn't perfect by any means in how it was carried out, the results are clear enough that any margin of error can't really overturn anything:
1652549374179.png

Full sheet: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1tQLx73SLxuRiD1kZDp_QcPm4RFeljZQU_dNJK49ZymY/edit?usp=sharing

People's top two picks are clear: The 7th and 8th slots in this year's WC will be SM2 and MG

On the matter of WC's scheduling, there hasn't really been as blatant of a consensus, nor do the TD team really have any particular preference in when the tournament is carried, and as such, we shall be sticking to the status quo; WC signups will stay on its initially scheduled date of May 23rd. With that said, though, the TD team will be looking into figuring out a more ideal tournament schedule so that these tensions will hopefully not happen again for future seasons, in addition to accounting for the possibility of PL having as many added weeks as it did this year.
 

DEG

The night belongs to you
is a Community Contributoris a Forum Moderator Alumnusis a Tiering Contributor Alumnusis a Smogon Media Contributor Alumnus
On; Tournament Circuit.

The 2022 circuit is nearing to an end so it's a perfect time to send out a questionnaire. There will be some open questions but you don't have to write paragraphs, something that gets your point across will be fine. I'd like to do this instead of a google survey is because its easier to moderate and engage into discussions.

On discord discussions throughout the year, many people liked the 2022 circuit compared to the 2021 one due to factors including format changes, and a more spread out schedule. Some minimal issues popped out though, we had a very loaded early-mid year schedule with PL being a prep heavy tournament grouped with LT, and WC also tournaments that require dedication and prep. We also ran into a hiccup this year with early LT cycles running with PL due to the tiebreakers, which is something I'd rather avoid.

We've also welcomed more fun tournaments to the scene, and a lot were run with official tournaments even if it crams stuff, well, because in the end they're fun and aren't "mandatory" (mandatory is defined as a cash prize tournament, or a circuit tournament). We also brought back gimmick tournaments like the BST limit tournament, and would love to have more next gen.

Basically, I would like people's thoughts about the 2022 circuit, and as said before, they do not really have to be long paragraphs, some sentences explaining what you think and why is enough.
  • What are your thoughts on the 2022 circuit? (Think, great, crammed, any change you'd do)
  • What are your thoughts on format changes? (GC changes, Majors changes, Swiss playoffs format for LT/Champs) and would you change anything in them?
  • Would you like to have more gimmick tournaments? (BST Limit, Monotype, Monopoke...)
Obligatory my (DEG) own thoughts and they don't reflect rosa's below.

Now, I would run the circuit again for 2023 but I would like to advance an idea that I think would make the circuit better. As we know, SV drops at the end of November 2022 which can be annoying for the 2023 circuit. We do have GC scheduled end-December and 2022 PL with end January. I am suggesting a change that would keep GC where it is but pushed PL a month or a month and a half further. We could definitely fit a tournament too. I was thinking of fitting LT in that timeslot.

My reasoning is simple, having a team tournament when a generation is new isn't something really wanted. A new generation means broken stuff and sometimes council can be a bit slow to act. I like when team tournaments are hosted into more stable metagames. GC and LT will push SV into a good and long developmental phase in preparation for PL, specially LT. This would roughly make, GC end December, LT end January and PL end Feb/Beginning March. This would mean we have to push WC a month or a month and a half too so it no longer starts in May but most likely early July.

This is the proposed order for the 2023 circuit.
GC
LT
PL
Majors
WC
Masters
Classic

Another idea would be swapping Majors and LT but we're just playing Majors and we have some changes to propose (pools into pools) which would make the tournament longer and a bit annoying to fit there. Plus, LT would definitely push development further.

I would love if people contributed without shit-posting, trolling, and hate comments as they are unproductive, and in the end community feedback is important because this circuit is made so the community can have play 1v1 competitively and have fun.

Thank you.
 
Last edited:
Not really a current generation player, but just random thoughts as a spectator to the chaos ig!

I felt like there was too much overlap between tours, specifically Masters and Majors. Despite the argument that most players were already out of Masters by the time Majors started, I feel like this overlap would end up basically torpedoing any potential metagame development that we would get out of these individuals. Also, I think there should definitely be more care taken with the situation we had with LT starting before PL was over. PL is probably the most fun tournament of the year and features the highest quality of 1v1 games, and LT's first round should not (at least in my opinion) be acting as a distraction to that. Another thing I wanted to bring up is potentially making the time between Premier League and World Cup longer as a way to mitigate burnout. This year, there was only one month (exactly) between the last game of Premier League and signups for World Cup, which did not (at least to me) seem like sufficient time to recover from burnout. Maybe this could be mitigated by making Classic be the tournament during the time of World Cup and moving World Cup to later in the year? I don't know... There's even the possibility of moving World Cup to start in the beginning of September, having PL start in mid-May, and moving Classic to the beginning of the year, which would allow for the SV metagame to develop a bit if GC and LT are before PL. In between PL and WC, there could be a tour like Majors and then Masters after? Another idea is having Classic early, making World Cup start in April to May, and having PL go from late July to near the September. There's a lot of options here, but I feel like having Classic at the beginning of the year may free up the schedule considerably and allow for World Cup and Premier League to be more spaced out.

also can we please get a break week after week 4 of PL this year-

okay that's all back to lemonade and studying cya-
 
i want to bring up the fact that pl should not be taking place before wc. sv is gonna be a complete mess in the beginning and i think wc should be taking place earlier since wc is a rather less important and competitive tournament than pl which also gives sv more time to develop. i also agree with the people who think there should be a bigger gap between wc and pl cause of the burnout factor, maybe smth like this?

GC
WC
LT
Masters
PL
Majors
Classic
 
Last edited:

Trashuny

Banned deucer.
I think something we should do is putting more old gen tours in between the 1v1PL and World Cup. A lot of players will skip one of the tours, and I think trying to get more players familiar with old gens is a good idea. I also think there is no good reason for LT's time to change, with SV coming out sometime soon the meta should be more stabilized by the time that the tour usually happens. Lastly, I just want to say that I don't really like how demanding GC finals was. Playing the same person 4 times in a row is not fun to play or prep. I think that making it just one bo5 after how many games the tour had previously would just be better for the players and make it so every game matters.

But most importantly free GSC Cup
 

SiceXV

Banned deucer.
i want to bring up the fact that pl should not be taking place before wc. sv is gonna be a complete mess in the beginning and i think wc should be taking place earlier since wc is a rather less important and competitive tournament than pl which also gives sv more time to develop.
I think this shouldn't be a valid reason, both tours are pretty competitive and since we have only 2 team tours a year I wouldn't say wcup is less important. It's basically saying you would rather have our WCUP look like a joke than our PL. The best way to develop the metagame is through tournaments, and I think one GC and LT before PL would be fine to sort out the kinks of what needs to be suspected / quick banned. New players or players trying to get a new reputation will be sweating their asses off for the new gen to get drafted to PL so I don't think the metagame will be as much of a mess as everyone seems to think. I still think a fun snake unofficial team tour could be beneficial for meta growth, especially with a new gen, and be able to include more options for people that want to play old gens.

other sidenotes - idk why wcup signups wasn't july 4th like it always was, please give more time between the tours, and please don't add a week break to PL we don't play in NFL

GC
LT
PL
MAJORS
WCUP
CLASSIC
SNAKE
 

The Official Glyx

Banned deucer.
  • What are your thoughts on the 2022 circuit? (Think, great, crammed, any change you'd do)
The early half of the year being as crammed together as it was left a bit of a bad taste in my mouth, whereas now there's hardly anything going on (hence all the non-circuit tours being hosted). Ideally with better scheduling we should be able to pace these things out better.
  • What are your thoughts on format changes? (GC changes, Majors changes, Swiss playoffs format for LT/Champs) and would you change anything in them?
GC was a great format imo, since it was essentially double elim without all the garbage that comes from double elim, but ultimately got kinda swept under the rug as a result of it running alongside PL + finals taking like a month- Locking Majors to only 4 person pools is good imo, and I would imagine what most of us pictured the tour being when it was first proposed, even if it does leave us having to figure out these sloppy tbs. Swiss LT
1661965727352.png
. Champs being double elim is so lame, but people "want" it so :shrug:.
  • Would you like to have more gimmick tournaments? (BST Limit, Monotype, Monopoke...)
idc.

Circuit-wise, I think the schedule could do with some broader restructuring, namely including a bit more focus on the latter half of the circuit by moving things around from the early half, so that way we can retain people's attention year-round, plus keep people from being burnt out earlier in the year from PL/LT/WC all being right next to each other. Additionally, if people are willing to play through the week of Christmas/New Years, I would be willing to try pushing Champs and Classic further into that area so that we can have more space to work with for the rest of the year.

Format-wise, I would honestly make every instance of double elim (LT playoffs/Champs/Masters) into the GC format or Swiss if I could. For Majors, there was an idea brought up to potentially have more than 1 round of pools before moving to playoffs (or even having the entire tour be pools until top 2), which I feel is potentially interesting and would be worth a proper round of discussion in this thread on its own.

My personal order of tournaments would be this:
Masters
PL
Majors
GC
WC
LT
Classic
Champs
1661965837972.png

A few notes on this version of the schedule:
- 1v1 Masters has been moved from the rear end of the circuit to the front. Given that whatever the first tour of the circuit is will be running alongside PL, it's ideal that we make sure it's nothing too distracting so that people can hyperfocus on PL, to which a straightforward double elim tour that doesn't have much hype behind it fits the bill perfectly. Additionally, because Masters does seeding based off of circuit standings instead of randomized brackets, the seeding would have to be done based on the concluded 2022 circuit standings, rather than waiting for every other cg tour within the year to finish (which is a major restriction on how we handle the entire schedule).

-1v1 Premier League was moved to be 3 weeks later. While the exact timing of it doesn't particularly matter imo, I've heard that some people want it later, so here you go- With this schedule, we pretty freely have the ability to move it back to where it was if people suddenly don't like that idea.

- 1v1 Majors doesn't really have any particular notes as it pertains to this schedule, however, if we do implement that suggestion of having more than 1 pool round, then we would have to make sure that we add 1 extra week to its duration for each additional round of pools, since they last twice as long as an ordinary round of single elim.

- 1v1 World Cup, in addition to being moved to about a month later, has had its signups length shortened to two weeks, since with the successful new methodology of picking captains we implemented this year, we shouldn't need to have an extra burner week.

- 1v1 Ladder Tour was moved to be after WC, since having it between PL and WC this year created a very top-heavy circuit that undoubtedly burned out a lot of players. Having it in the fall season helps to more evenly distribute people's attention across the year, rather than having everything important happening in the first half.

- 1v1 Classic's exact date doesn't particularly matter, however, I think most of us can agree that having a bunch of cups running alongside LT cycles would be a bit rough, so I moved it to be after that point.

- 1v1 Circuit Championships was pushed much later, in addition to potentially overlapping with the 2024 circuit's Masters if we reuse this schedule. With the placement of Champs, it wouldn't be lasting into a round of Masters that requires replays, so anyone doing well in both tours wouldn't have to worry about being scouted from playing in Masters. While it does seem unconventional to have these tours overlap, this overlap is exactly what allows this schedule to have as much breathing room between tours as it does, as well as even potentially creating space for more tours (if people are willing).
Overall, I believe this version of the tournament schedule will do a lot of good for people's engagement in the 1v1 tournament scene as a result of properly pacing people's focus throughout the year, in addition to not having to compete with SPL and WCoP as much when it comes to our own PL and WC. On top of that, the extra breathing room this version of the circuit has even allows for us to add in more tournaments if we so desire it.
 
I think we should just let XSTATIC COLD run everything. I think everyone would have the same enjoyment whether he fails or not. Plus maybe a little more. Imagine seeing round 1 and its just Nalei vs 10 people. Plus it gives hosts and TDs a break. <3

That being said, I hate playing every week for 3 months. I don't want to be exhausted because I can out pick 10 year olds. Allow me to qualify for champs in March so I can relax without having to win the tour. So, let Elo Bandit win some tours, so we can have a YouTube channel user again that isn't busy freaking out about ADV or TRYINGTONUZLOCKETWOGAMESATTHESAMETIME

Also give us the Snake tour. TD really lacking in their expansion of the 1v1 business. We can turn 1v1 into a profitable community. Make it be a buy-in tour. Prize pool is split among winning team. With a portion going to paying people to host and affectively gaining more members and money. Through this we can finally start the "Touch Grass Program" where the proceeds will be enough to pay for pqs to go to college or other users like them. They still have like 10 years but if the people in charge take the time to see the global business success is the only outcome.
 

bilb owo

Banned deucer.
I think we should just let XSTATIC COLD run everything. I think everyone would have the same enjoyment whether he fails or not. Plus maybe a little more. Imagine seeing round 1 and its just Nalei vs 10 people. Plus it gives hosts and TDs a break. <3

That being said, I hate playing every week for 3 months. I don't want to be exhausted because I can out pick 10 year olds. Allow me to qualify for champs in March so I can relax without having to win the tour. So, let Elo Bandit win some tours, so we can have a YouTube channel user again that isn't busy freaking out about ADV or TRYINGTONUZLOCKETWOGAMESATTHESAMETIME

Also give us the Snake tour. TD really lacking in their expansion of the 1v1 business. We can turn 1v1 into a profitable community. Make it be a buy-in tour. Prize pool is split among winning team. With a portion going to paying people to host and affectively gaining more members and money. Through this we can finally start the "Touch Grass Program" where the proceeds will be enough to pay for pqs to go to college or other users like them. They still have like 10 years but if the people in charge take the time to see the global business success is the only outcome.
Suggesting a buy in tour has to be bait.
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 1, Guests: 0)

Top