SS OU C&C Happenings
- Thread starter Jordy
- Start date
- Status
Hey everyone! Our apologies for the silence over the past couple weeks. We are glad to announce that analyses will be starting up soon! We're currently looking at Tuesday the 11th to get started again.
We are currently working on getting small blurbs on-site that briefly cover the Pokemon's role, what archetype it fits on, and specific teammates. The first batch will be uploaded later today. It will consist of every Pokemon that is currently ranked S to A-.
We will continue to use the mini analyses format.
If your analysis is still in progress, we'd appreciate it if you'd let us know whether you're still interested in writing it, or if you would rather drop it. If you are still interested in writing it, please update it to more accurately reflect the metagame. If we have no response from you by the time writing starts up again, your analysis will be reassigned.
We are currently working on getting small blurbs on-site that briefly cover the Pokemon's role, what archetype it fits on, and specific teammates. The first batch will be uploaded later today. It will consist of every Pokemon that is currently ranked S to A-.
We will continue to use the mini analyses format.
If your analysis is still in progress, we'd appreciate it if you'd let us know whether you're still interested in writing it, or if you would rather drop it. If you are still interested in writing it, please update it to more accurately reflect the metagame. If we have no response from you by the time writing starts up again, your analysis will be reassigned.
The new Reservation Index was posted and analyses can now be written again!
Hey everyone! Here's what's currently going on with OU C&C and what you should look out for!
Progress may seem slow, but the reason we have yet to start is because of the holiday season; we think that it is imperative to have a strong start. Understandably, our contributors have things to attend to IRL and obviously want to spend their time with others during the holiday season. As such, we've decided to really get things going in early January.
We plan to handle the analyses currently in queue as follows:
We will also be adjusting the writing format. Now that there is no new DLC coming up as far as we're aware, we would like to start doing some more thorough analyses again. We are going to add the Overview, Other Options, and Checks and Counters to the current format.
A more detailed skeleton will be posted when reservations go up.
Progress may seem slow, but the reason we have yet to start is because of the holiday season; we think that it is imperative to have a strong start. Understandably, our contributors have things to attend to IRL and obviously want to spend their time with others during the holiday season. As such, we've decided to really get things going in early January.
We plan to handle the analyses currently in queue as follows:
- We will be putting up analyses in batches. We have not entirely worked out the details, but simply working by the VR makes most sense to us and is the easiest guideline for us to go by.
- The authors of analyses currently in queue will be able to maintain their reservations when that Pokemon is released, if they are still interested.
- We plan to send out a PM to everyone relevant at the start of the Christmas break.
We will also be adjusting the writing format. Now that there is no new DLC coming up as far as we're aware, we would like to start doing some more thorough analyses again. We are going to add the Overview, Other Options, and Checks and Counters to the current format.
[Overview]
[SET]
name:
move 1:
move 2:
move 3:
move 4:
item:
ability:
nature:
evs:
[SET COMMENTS]
[STRATEGY COMMENTS]
Other Options
====
Checks and Counters
====
[CREDITS]
- Written by:
- Quality checked by:
- Grammar checked by:
[SET]
name:
move 1:
move 2:
move 3:
move 4:
item:
ability:
nature:
evs:
[SET COMMENTS]
[STRATEGY COMMENTS]
Other Options
====
Checks and Counters
====
[CREDITS]
- Written by:
- Quality checked by:
- Grammar checked by:
Hello everyone! Here is some news to keep you up to date.
We have been looking to put the next batch of analyses up for reservation, but with the recent double quickban of Magearna and Cinderace, this will be delayed for a week, approximately, in order for the metagame to stabilize first. After this period of time, we will also review what we have so far and make adjustments where necessary.
Some concerns regarding the slowness with which OU C&C has been moving have been raised recently and we have taken note of these. The main contributing factor towards this issue is that analyses are bottlenecked in the QC process. This is largely due to many members of the QC team having their hands full with SPL (a major official OU team tournament), but we'd like to improve on this issue beyond this. Moving forward, we will be keeping an eye out for active quality contributors to add to the QC team. For those who are interested and would like to show that they have what it takes, writing quality analyses is the main gateway for getting recognized for this position. However, we realize that the limited amount of analyses being up for reservation with each batch can make this difficult. Therefore, going forward from the next batch onwards, AM checks are encouraged. For those who don't know, AM checks are essentially unofficial QC checks you can make without being part of the QC team. Writers can implement these checks if they please, but it is not mandatory unless a QC member tells them to do so. We hope this will push OU C&C into a more steady pace moving forward.
We have been looking to put the next batch of analyses up for reservation, but with the recent double quickban of Magearna and Cinderace, this will be delayed for a week, approximately, in order for the metagame to stabilize first. After this period of time, we will also review what we have so far and make adjustments where necessary.
Some concerns regarding the slowness with which OU C&C has been moving have been raised recently and we have taken note of these. The main contributing factor towards this issue is that analyses are bottlenecked in the QC process. This is largely due to many members of the QC team having their hands full with SPL (a major official OU team tournament), but we'd like to improve on this issue beyond this. Moving forward, we will be keeping an eye out for active quality contributors to add to the QC team. For those who are interested and would like to show that they have what it takes, writing quality analyses is the main gateway for getting recognized for this position. However, we realize that the limited amount of analyses being up for reservation with each batch can make this difficult. Therefore, going forward from the next batch onwards, AM checks are encouraged. For those who don't know, AM checks are essentially unofficial QC checks you can make without being part of the QC team. Writers can implement these checks if they please, but it is not mandatory unless a QC member tells them to do so. We hope this will push OU C&C into a more steady pace moving forward.
We're undergoing a bit of a change in our philosophy.
As those of you as of late have been aware, the rate of which checks and analyses have been uploaded have been going by at a dull pace, only really picking up in the past slate or so. While we've been seeing some major improvements, Ruft and I (with the help of martha) have come to the agreement that engagement with the active contributor-base is absolutely key going forward. While this highlights the value of getting analyses done quickly and efficiently, we believe that above all else it can increase interactivity in OU C&C and allow for budding writers/contributors to have a stronger impact with their work than what has been possible in the past. As such, we also made the choice to make 4 new additions to our QC team based on the quality and number of AM checks and analyses these contributors have completed in the past few slates, which you can see here. We are aiming to expand our team going forward, and introduce new blood where we can.
As always, we are and will continue encouraging AM checks; we understand that reservations have been pumped out somewhat slowly, making this process more tedious, so we will aim to get reservation slates out more efficiently, especially with the extra aid of new, budding QC members. Thank you all, as always, for your amazing work, and we hope to see it continue going forward.
As those of you as of late have been aware, the rate of which checks and analyses have been uploaded have been going by at a dull pace, only really picking up in the past slate or so. While we've been seeing some major improvements, Ruft and I (with the help of martha) have come to the agreement that engagement with the active contributor-base is absolutely key going forward. While this highlights the value of getting analyses done quickly and efficiently, we believe that above all else it can increase interactivity in OU C&C and allow for budding writers/contributors to have a stronger impact with their work than what has been possible in the past. As such, we also made the choice to make 4 new additions to our QC team based on the quality and number of AM checks and analyses these contributors have completed in the past few slates, which you can see here. We are aiming to expand our team going forward, and introduce new blood where we can.
As always, we are and will continue encouraging AM checks; we understand that reservations have been pumped out somewhat slowly, making this process more tedious, so we will aim to get reservation slates out more efficiently, especially with the extra aid of new, budding QC members. Thank you all, as always, for your amazing work, and we hope to see it continue going forward.
Hello, everyone! I have some more updates regarding our approach going forward.
We've heard a good amount of concerns regarding how we executed our new philosophy; rest assured, they have been heard. We understand that we failed to be transparent regarding the matter, which we take full responsibility for. However, OU QC has settled on a compromise that we all think will optimize both quality and productivity without overwhelming any one QC member.
The compromise in question is that we will be employing the Trial QC system, which has been utilized in lower tiers and will now make an appearance in OU C&C. Trial QC members are honorary QC members who are able to stamp analyses, however with some limitations, such as how often they can post in a given time, and also having to get feedback before posting it. Trial QC members will have the ability to choose a 5 day time frame to their personal discretion in which they can post a maximum of 4 checks, which is effective immediately upon request. Unlike other incarnations of Trial QC, these limitations are one-of-a-kind to OU C&C, and are ones we believe will be the most practical going forward.
The four QC members we promoted in the last few days will be made Trial QC members, and those who make knowledgeable AM checks will be promoted to Trial QC in the future if the QC team believes they should be. The thread listing the QC team's members will, of course, reflect these changes.
Thank you again for all of your understanding; we hope this will be the most productive approach that will yield the most constructive, positive results going forward! If you have any questions, as always, feel free to message Ruft and I!
We've heard a good amount of concerns regarding how we executed our new philosophy; rest assured, they have been heard. We understand that we failed to be transparent regarding the matter, which we take full responsibility for. However, OU QC has settled on a compromise that we all think will optimize both quality and productivity without overwhelming any one QC member.
The compromise in question is that we will be employing the Trial QC system, which has been utilized in lower tiers and will now make an appearance in OU C&C. Trial QC members are honorary QC members who are able to stamp analyses, however with some limitations, such as how often they can post in a given time, and also having to get feedback before posting it. Trial QC members will have the ability to choose a 5 day time frame to their personal discretion in which they can post a maximum of 4 checks, which is effective immediately upon request. Unlike other incarnations of Trial QC, these limitations are one-of-a-kind to OU C&C, and are ones we believe will be the most practical going forward.
The four QC members we promoted in the last few days will be made Trial QC members, and those who make knowledgeable AM checks will be promoted to Trial QC in the future if the QC team believes they should be. The thread listing the QC team's members will, of course, reflect these changes.
Thank you again for all of your understanding; we hope this will be the most productive approach that will yield the most constructive, positive results going forward! If you have any questions, as always, feel free to message Ruft and I!
For transparency's sake; for the Zamazenta-C suspect, we will be temporarily halting operations to both recharge and let the suspect take its course. This is a suspect test with inherently very little precedent, so naturally we will need to take new precautions as far as the process goes, should Zamazenta-C be unbanned. If Zamazenta-C remains banned, it's business as usual; if it's freed, we will then discuss and decide what to do!
Until then, we mainly suggest that analyses in the WIP phase be worked into the QC phase; but, that's it for the most part. Bear in mind we will probably be refraining from checks until the suspect ends. Thank you all for your understanding!
Until then, we mainly suggest that analyses in the WIP phase be worked into the QC phase; but, that's it for the most part. Bear in mind we will probably be refraining from checks until the suspect ends. Thank you all for your understanding!
Hi all, with WCoP live and with many changes likely to be on the radar, we will be slowing down our process a bit; if QC checks are a bit slower, this is why! Progress will not completely halt, but we mainly just want to be more deliberate with our checks and scout out potential developments. Thank you for your understanding.
Hi all! I would like to share with you a few things, namely our process going forward.
To be blunt, our process has a few internal issues that have been brought to my attention, between communication, efficiency, burnout, and quality. As many of you have noticed, a lot of our analyses find themselves frozen in GP (in Volcarona's case, frozen when supposedly completed) because of some issues that fly past the radar. However, above all else, our team is in a bad spot currently for several different, internal reasons, which hurts both the quality and health of the team.
Currently, we're working out an approach to make the process easier, healthier, and more effective between QC members, analysis writers, and our products themselves. This may be a bit; until we get our approach more outlined, our process will be on pause. Thankfully, this also works out given that WCoP is still going and is wrapping up. We guarantee there will be a bunch of fresh content ready to be worked on very soon.
I will be sure to keep you all posted regarding what changes we make. Thank you all for your understanding, and if you have any questions, you are welcome to message me.
To be blunt, our process has a few internal issues that have been brought to my attention, between communication, efficiency, burnout, and quality. As many of you have noticed, a lot of our analyses find themselves frozen in GP (in Volcarona's case, frozen when supposedly completed) because of some issues that fly past the radar. However, above all else, our team is in a bad spot currently for several different, internal reasons, which hurts both the quality and health of the team.
Currently, we're working out an approach to make the process easier, healthier, and more effective between QC members, analysis writers, and our products themselves. This may be a bit; until we get our approach more outlined, our process will be on pause. Thankfully, this also works out given that WCoP is still going and is wrapping up. We guarantee there will be a bunch of fresh content ready to be worked on very soon.
I will be sure to keep you all posted regarding what changes we make. Thank you all for your understanding, and if you have any questions, you are welcome to message me.
Hello everyone, I have some updates about our process that have been discussed in-depth with the team. There are going to be a few public changes, as well as a couple of internal changes. For the sake of transparency, I will be listing every one and explaining how they will work if necessary.
1: QC Checks will be risen from 2 to 3 before being sent to GP
A very common complaint from many people about our analyses comes in the form of quality of analyses, which is the primary responsibility of QC members. So, akin to lower tiers, we will be adopting an extra QC stamp in order to ensure higher quality and to cover the weaknesses of our QC team more assuredly. While this isn't foolproof, this will guarantee that there is greater coverage toward potential weaknesses in analyses that may slip past the radar with only 2 checks.
This will be effective immediately; any analyses currently still in the QC phase will need 3 checks, and any future analyses will as well. Most analyses in GP are fine, but if modifications are necessary, then they will still be open to feedback.
2: Analyses will be rejected on a more liberal basis
This amendment bears in mind the sustainability of our process. More often than not, many analyses are forced through the wringer to be brought up to par, sometimes requiring a couple or even more checks from the same QC member to come to par. While this expands writer accessibility, the issue with this philosophy at its core is that it harms the QC team by not only divvying resources but draining the motivation and willingness of QC members to check as a whole. This point was discussed a fair bit over a long period of time, especially with several analyses that some believed needed to be rejected while others were afraid of scaring away potential new contributors. In other words, this point means that analyses will be able to be rejected more readily.
However, as a tradeoff, certain members of the QC team involved with evaluating the analysis will provide personal criticism and advice to writers whose analyses are rejected. We believe that it's important to support and help new contributors who may be interested in the process; though, while this is a priority, it is also important to consider the effect this philosophy, when applied in great excess, has on our team. This is the middle ground we met in order to account for sustainability, efficiency, and contributor accessibility.
3: Sets will be pre-decided by the QC team when slated
This one is a pretty straightforward amendment, however is one that we feel has been necessary for a while. We spend a lot of time discussing what sets should be used, to where our efficiency and focus on other, more pertinent matters wears thin. This can especially be a problem when people have the initiative to check certain analyses, which can skew the QC process by mitigating the impact of a check when a set is changed. When we put new Pokemon up for analyses, we believe listing the sets alongside them is the best approach.
They will be provided in a spoiler tag in the "Unreserved" section for people to copy and apply to their analyses before being moved to the "in QC" section of the reservation thread.
4: The QC team will have weekly meetings to assess the workload and future slates
While this point has little impact on contributors, this point will be listed regardless for transparency between the public and the QC team. As a sort of continuation from the above point, our efficiency is lacking as we spend a great amount of time leaping from one point to the other with scattered discussions. This amendment will add a much-needed layer of control to our process by allowing the QC team to focus on future slates and what needs to be done in an easy period of time. It will last throughout a 24 hour period to account for timezone and schedule disparities.
5: QC Members can take a break at any time so long as they alert the team.
This is one that's more unspoken than anything else, but we feel it's important to emphasize to create an added layer of communication between members and the team at large. It's imperative to consider that our section is at its core meant as a hobby; it's for that reason that the mental health of our members takes precedence over anything else. This approach lets us consider health and sustainability more directly while creating transparency that enables us to adapt more readily.
___
While these are the main changes we will be implemented immediately, there will likely be a few small philosophical changes that will be employed as well, primarily around QC/Trial QC members and member amendments. I just wanted to get these big ones that we agreed on live as soon as possible so we can resume progress.
Thank you all again for your patience, and we hope to see improvements in our process going forward as we continue to adapt to problems and prosper.
1: QC Checks will be risen from 2 to 3 before being sent to GP
A very common complaint from many people about our analyses comes in the form of quality of analyses, which is the primary responsibility of QC members. So, akin to lower tiers, we will be adopting an extra QC stamp in order to ensure higher quality and to cover the weaknesses of our QC team more assuredly. While this isn't foolproof, this will guarantee that there is greater coverage toward potential weaknesses in analyses that may slip past the radar with only 2 checks.
This will be effective immediately; any analyses currently still in the QC phase will need 3 checks, and any future analyses will as well. Most analyses in GP are fine, but if modifications are necessary, then they will still be open to feedback.
2: Analyses will be rejected on a more liberal basis
This amendment bears in mind the sustainability of our process. More often than not, many analyses are forced through the wringer to be brought up to par, sometimes requiring a couple or even more checks from the same QC member to come to par. While this expands writer accessibility, the issue with this philosophy at its core is that it harms the QC team by not only divvying resources but draining the motivation and willingness of QC members to check as a whole. This point was discussed a fair bit over a long period of time, especially with several analyses that some believed needed to be rejected while others were afraid of scaring away potential new contributors. In other words, this point means that analyses will be able to be rejected more readily.
However, as a tradeoff, certain members of the QC team involved with evaluating the analysis will provide personal criticism and advice to writers whose analyses are rejected. We believe that it's important to support and help new contributors who may be interested in the process; though, while this is a priority, it is also important to consider the effect this philosophy, when applied in great excess, has on our team. This is the middle ground we met in order to account for sustainability, efficiency, and contributor accessibility.
3: Sets will be pre-decided by the QC team when slated
This one is a pretty straightforward amendment, however is one that we feel has been necessary for a while. We spend a lot of time discussing what sets should be used, to where our efficiency and focus on other, more pertinent matters wears thin. This can especially be a problem when people have the initiative to check certain analyses, which can skew the QC process by mitigating the impact of a check when a set is changed. When we put new Pokemon up for analyses, we believe listing the sets alongside them is the best approach.
They will be provided in a spoiler tag in the "Unreserved" section for people to copy and apply to their analyses before being moved to the "in QC" section of the reservation thread.
4: The QC team will have weekly meetings to assess the workload and future slates
While this point has little impact on contributors, this point will be listed regardless for transparency between the public and the QC team. As a sort of continuation from the above point, our efficiency is lacking as we spend a great amount of time leaping from one point to the other with scattered discussions. This amendment will add a much-needed layer of control to our process by allowing the QC team to focus on future slates and what needs to be done in an easy period of time. It will last throughout a 24 hour period to account for timezone and schedule disparities.
5: QC Members can take a break at any time so long as they alert the team.
This is one that's more unspoken than anything else, but we feel it's important to emphasize to create an added layer of communication between members and the team at large. It's imperative to consider that our section is at its core meant as a hobby; it's for that reason that the mental health of our members takes precedence over anything else. This approach lets us consider health and sustainability more directly while creating transparency that enables us to adapt more readily.
___
While these are the main changes we will be implemented immediately, there will likely be a few small philosophical changes that will be employed as well, primarily around QC/Trial QC members and member amendments. I just wanted to get these big ones that we agreed on live as soon as possible so we can resume progress.
Thank you all again for your patience, and we hope to see improvements in our process going forward as we continue to adapt to problems and prosper.
Due to how long many of our analyses have been in GP, us wanting to implement our changes across the board, and make the process generally easier for the GP team (due to the length of some of these analyses), we are going to push for nearly every analysis to be given another QC check in a similar vein to the ones currently in QC. If you have an analysis in GP, please change the label before the title to [Quality Control] and then mark it as [QC 2/3].
Tagging relevant writers:
airfare
PA
Anvil Head
Abhi
Fc
TailGlowVM
vNatFly
Tagging relevant writers:
airfare
PA
Anvil Head
Abhi
Fc
TailGlowVM
vNatFly
From this point forward we are going to restore the 72 hour implementation time limit between each QC check in order to pick up the pace on check implementations. This essentially means that you have to implement the QC check within 72 hours or the analysis will be reassigned. You will be warned when you have 24 hours remaining either on the thread and/or via Discord. This will be effective immediately.
Tagging relevant writers:
Fc - Tapu Lele
TailGlowVM - Tapu Fini
PA - Tangrowth
Tagging relevant writers:
Fc - Tapu Lele
TailGlowVM - Tapu Fini
PA - Tangrowth
Hello everyone. As those of you who have been following this section could probably tell, things have been really slow lately on all fronts. ausma and I agreed that this is something we need to fix and we will be working to address this. In the meantime, we will be halting operations for this section until the release of BDSP as we work through this. We will have a gameplan by then.
For those analyses in GP, we will upload them once finished, but for everything else (QC/WIP) we're going to halt.
We appreciate your patience as we navigate this. Feel free to approach either of us with any questions. My Discord DMs are open and I'm sure ausma will be happy to answer questions as well.
Have a good rest of your day
For those analyses in GP, we will upload them once finished, but for everything else (QC/WIP) we're going to halt.
We appreciate your patience as we navigate this. Feel free to approach either of us with any questions. My Discord DMs are open and I'm sure ausma will be happy to answer questions as well.
Have a good rest of your day
Hello everyone! As promised, an outline of the gameplan for OU C&C will be detailed below in this post. As it stands now, BDSP is entirely separate from SS, so we will proceed as such. Currently, a lot of mons have either outdated analyses, or in cases of newer metagame developments, none at all. We will have a slate ready next weekend to address the most high priority mons.
The most important thing to take away from this post, is that effectively immediately, all new analyses (ie not currently being worked on), will be switching to a new format. We will be proceeding with minis, consisting of the Overview and Set Details. This is to address the painstakingly slow progress we saw prior to the hiatus, and to get the most vital information out there to those that use the Dex for teambuilding purposes. This mini format will remain in effect until Pokemon Home becomes compatible with BDSP in February. We will gage if this needs to be amended at that time. We will have a new slate ready next weekend for people to reserve.
This leads to the next point, where we will be barring QC member from writing new analyses at the moment. This is to get newer contributors who are interested in participating a chance to contribute. We will keep a close eye on this policy and it may be changed in the future if needed. As always, when a slate goes live, just request to reserve a mon and either ausma or I will address the request.
Finally, as we are resuming operations, all analyses will need to have QC checks implemented. There will be a strict 1 week deadline at 11:59 PM GMT -5 next Sunday, December 5th. Any analyses not updated will be reassigned with the new slate. Please post in the thread when the check is implemented and tag the QC member, so I can keep track of this.
Tagging relevant writers below:
simp (Aegislash)
Stareal (Melmetal)
Magnum (Dragonite)
PA (Scizor)
Fc (Tapu Lele)
As always, feel free to ask any questions to me or ausma and we will be happy to answer.
The most important thing to take away from this post, is that effectively immediately, all new analyses (ie not currently being worked on), will be switching to a new format. We will be proceeding with minis, consisting of the Overview and Set Details. This is to address the painstakingly slow progress we saw prior to the hiatus, and to get the most vital information out there to those that use the Dex for teambuilding purposes. This mini format will remain in effect until Pokemon Home becomes compatible with BDSP in February. We will gage if this needs to be amended at that time. We will have a new slate ready next weekend for people to reserve.
This leads to the next point, where we will be barring QC member from writing new analyses at the moment. This is to get newer contributors who are interested in participating a chance to contribute. We will keep a close eye on this policy and it may be changed in the future if needed. As always, when a slate goes live, just request to reserve a mon and either ausma or I will address the request.
Finally, as we are resuming operations, all analyses will need to have QC checks implemented. There will be a strict 1 week deadline at 11:59 PM GMT -5 next Sunday, December 5th. Any analyses not updated will be reassigned with the new slate. Please post in the thread when the check is implemented and tag the QC member, so I can keep track of this.
Tagging relevant writers below:
simp (Aegislash)
Stareal (Melmetal)
Magnum (Dragonite)
PA (Scizor)
Fc (Tapu Lele)
As always, feel free to ask any questions to me or ausma and we will be happy to answer.
Hello everyone, I would like to address a couple of things with what is happening OU C&C.
Firstly Clone is stepping down as a mod and I will be taking his place as the new OU C&C mod.
Now as many of us aware analysis have halted for a while now and would want to bring up what QC is going to be doing and our plans as we are slowly transitioning into the new gen. Analysis won’t be continued sometime until Gen 9 is released, however, we are going to be updating the sample sets for each Mon in the dex.
Now the one thing we are going to be working on as well as we prepare for the new gen is that we are wanting to restructure the qc team as well as how trial qc will work. Our main goal is to prevent ourselves from repeating the same mistakes that happened with this gen as well as improving how we do c&c as a whole.
We appreciate for everyone’s patience as we slowly make progress for the next gen and we’ll keep you posted with further notice.
Firstly Clone is stepping down as a mod and I will be taking his place as the new OU C&C mod.
Now as many of us aware analysis have halted for a while now and would want to bring up what QC is going to be doing and our plans as we are slowly transitioning into the new gen. Analysis won’t be continued sometime until Gen 9 is released, however, we are going to be updating the sample sets for each Mon in the dex.
Now the one thing we are going to be working on as well as we prepare for the new gen is that we are wanting to restructure the qc team as well as how trial qc will work. Our main goal is to prevent ourselves from repeating the same mistakes that happened with this gen as well as improving how we do c&c as a whole.
We appreciate for everyone’s patience as we slowly make progress for the next gen and we’ll keep you posted with further notice.
Greetings everyone I would like to bring up a little attention as C&C is not working on any analysis as we slowly wait for the metagame to settle, so please refrain from posting sets for the time being otherwise it will be locked. If you feel you want to contribute to a sets discussion feel free to do so here. I will say that I do appreciate a couple of people wanting to begin write-ups or are interested and would encourage them to have that same energy for when C&C is up and running.
- Status