Rejected SCL Tiers (Monotype)

[Chaitanya]

With SPL becoming a 12 slot tour this year, and the necessity from the community previously for SCL to mirror SPL, it seems only natural for SCL to also move to a 12 slot tour. With all the argument for mirroring SPL and creating a balance between the two tours, there should really be no debate over this I hope? Equal status and symmetry and whatnot.
I think Monotype should be in SCL. Not gonna rehash every argument from the past as they’ve been beat to death in these two threads below. Nothing has changed since with the transition to SV. There's not too much to add here except Mono would be an obvious add, and maybe a 4th OU slot.
(https://www.smogon.com/forums/threads/tiers-in-scl.3684908/page-3#post-8869375)
(https://www.smogon.com/forums/threads/st-patrick-and-the-casting-out-of-snakes.3674227/#post-8676207)

However, if SCL does does stay at 10 slots, I would like to bring up Monotype over LC or PU. I'm not the most informed on these tiers sure, but I watched plenty of lc last year in scl and slam this year. Speed ties turn 1 deciding games half the time and more. This tier to me is barely Pokemon and I know it’s not exactly a sentiment I am alone in sharing. https://www.smogon.com/forums/threads/lc-in-official-tournaments.3694445/ bit old but this kinda says it all. It hasn’t exactly gotten better or more liked since.
Pu is a different case but I think monotype offers more by far at this stage and this post from a while ago covers all that pretty well. https://www.smogon.com/forums/threads/tiers-in-scl.3684908/page-2#post-8866523 Adding to this, the only PU suspect this generation got 14 qualified voters. Fourteen. Sure one suspect isn't indicative of the whole story but there’s really no excuse for that number, and that’s really no way to convince anyone that a tier is thriving or people are invested in it or that it deserves a place in a trophy tour. Yeah it’s in slam but at this point should it really be? It’s a dreadful excuse for keeping Monotype out of SCL. Monotype is on the way up and has been for long. PU has gone the opposite direction. The tier last SCL had the highest number of different players play in pu games. Maybe I am reaching but this and the fact that 14 people bothered to get votes for a suspect says that either 1) the ‘mainers’ don’t bring enough to the table 2) there aren’t enough actual pu players 3) the tier is genuinely horseshit (which I really don’t think it is). Or some combination of these. Whatever. Shit apparently a couple of these were apparently from a suspect tour so the number that bothered to get reqs is even smaller? lol anyway this tier is obviously not in a good place and in my opinion doesn’t belong in any tour over monotype, especially scl.

I know this came off hostile and I apologize but ultimately these tiers are either not making tours better or they do not have the active playerbase to warrant a spot in these tours. LC has never been a more competitive tier than Monotype. The singular thing both tiers have over monotype at this point is that they were here first. And sure that counts for something but these situations haven’t improved at all, they just continue to get worse. I know people will be mad over my opinions on LC and PU and I do think expanding to 12 slots makes the most sense. I was pro 10-slot spl but with that changed I think expanding SCL is the obvious choice. I’m hoping I’m not in the minority that sees it that way. However I also think Mono can provide more to the betterment of tournaments than either of these slots if forced to stay at 10. These tiers have had their chances. Plenty of them. Give monotype 1.

 

[Nat]

I am not gonna largely comment on the sentiment of adding mono but no shot LC should be removed. To me it's the most well-put together community of people who rlly rlly main their tier along with consistently good performers in the tier who actually play it, showing out at an official level to boot with quality games. The community-oriented factor is ofc subjective but i'd be very offput by entertaining excluding them.

I can't imagine scl increases to 12 slots, since it did for spl purely due to a logistics issue with the normally ideal 3 OU slots now leaving an odd number of slots thanks to generation counts. It was almost 10 with 2 slots, it just went to a vote and 12 happened to win. This current scl scenario doesn't seem like that logistics issue to me.

 

[Hera]

However, if SCL does does stay at 10 slots, I would like to bring up Monotype over LC or PU. I'm not the most informed on these tiers sure, but I watched plenty of lc last year in scl and slam this year. Speed ties turn 1 deciding games half the time and more. This tier to me is barely Pokemon and I know it’s not exactly a sentiment I am alone in sharing. https://www.smogon.com/forums/threads/lc-in-official-tournaments.3694445/ bit old but this kinda says it all. It hasn’t exactly gotten better or more liked since.
Pu is a different case but I think monotype offers more by far at this stage and this post from a while ago covers all that pretty well. https://www.smogon.com/forums/threads/tiers-in-scl.3684908/page-2#post-8866523 Adding to this, the only PU suspect this generation got 14 qualified voters. Fourteen. Sure one suspect isn't indicative of the whole story but there’s really no excuse for that number, and that’s really no way to convince anyone that a tier is thriving or people are invested in it or that it deserves a place in a trophy tour. Yeah it’s in slam but at this point should it really be? It’s a dreadful excuse for keeping Monotype out of SCL. Monotype is on the way up and has been for long. PU has gone the opposite direction. The tier last SCL had the highest number of different players play in pu games. Maybe I am reaching but this and the fact that 14 people bothered to get votes for a suspect says that either 1) the ‘mainers’ don’t bring enough to the table 2) there aren’t enough actual pu players 3) the tier is genuinely horseshit (which I really don’t think it is). Or some combination of these. Whatever. Shit apparently a couple of these were apparently from a suspect tour so the number that bothered to get reqs is even smaller? lol anyway this tier is obviously not in a good place and in my opinion doesn’t belong in any tour over monotype, especially scl.

I know this came off hostile and I apologize but ultimately these tiers are either not making tours better or they do not have the active playerbase to warrant a spot in these tours. LC has never been a more competitive tier than Monotype. The singular thing both tiers have over monotype at this point is that they were here first. And sure that counts for something but these situations haven’t improved at all, they just continue to get worse. I know people will be mad over my opinions on LC and PU and I do think expanding to 12 slots makes the most sense. I was pro 10-slot spl but with that changed I think expanding SCL is the obvious choice. I’m hoping I’m not in the minority that sees it that way. However I also think Mono can provide more to the betterment of tournaments than either of these slots if forced to stay at 10. These tiers have had their chances. Plenty of them. Give monotype 1.

i totally understand wanting your tier in a team tour, especially as one as big as scl. but why does it have to be at the expense of other tiers? and even if scl was absolutely forced to stay at 10 slots, your arguments for removing either lc or pu are bad and thinly veiled attempts to say "i personally do not like this tier so it should go because my tier is better". if you wanna talk objective stats, pu had has more signups for its most recent team tour than nu (190 vs 177), along with more games played over the past 3 months on ladder (99597 vs 80318). maybe nu should be removed from scl because from these two pieces of data, i can tell that the tier is obviously not in a good place and doesn't belong in any tour, especially scl. if you want your tier to be in scl and you don't like pu/lc, then just outright say it; don't hide behind the shield of "competitiveness" and act like this is an objective decision when it clearly isn't (and that goes for all past and future posts that try to pull this shtick as well).

anyway i see no reason to arbitrarily exclude monotype when scl is now 2 years old, the monotype community wants into the tour, and spl has expanded to 12 slots. expanding scl to 12 slots to include monotype (and adding another ou slot to compensate) seems like a solid idea, but if this isn't feasible, maybe cutting back an ou slot for monotype is an option? although that depends if tds do want to include monotype and their urgency on including the tier. it does seem to me like those are the only two viable options though.

 

[Vulpix03]

If I'm not mistaken SPL is going to be 10 slots moving forward, since it was only temporarily increased due to the community's desire to have more than 2 slots of the brand new generation. 12 slots is also just terrible.

As for PU.

With the release of a new generation, PU gets absolutely fucked. Especially when the new generation releases Pokemon in waves. The tier started out as NFE Ubers and it was a turn off to a lot of the playerbase. However, with the release of Home and the monthly drops, the tier is beginning to blossom into a real tier and the playerbase is beginning to grow again. With the new generation we are seeing new talent emerge in the community, and with the tier beginning to settle we are seeing the old guard return.

As for the suspect test, yes 14 is a very low number. I think the main reason behind this though is indifference towards the Pokemon that was tested (coupled with what I said above). I personally did not get reqs because I don't care if Tauros stays or goes. I can assure you that the next test (Lilli) will have a lot more participants due to the fact that it is a much more polarizing, and in my opinion, broken Mon.

Also, LC is a great community and they create their own talent yearly.

 

[Coconut]

LC has never been a more competitive tier than Monotype.

We have been and will continue to be.

 

[MANNAT]

I can’t speak to the whole axing tiers meme, but monotype deserves a shot in SCL regardless. The tier has an incredibly active playerbase (backed up by ladder stats), and a very vibrant and active community that takes on an identity of its own (seen in their various tournaments). Adding monotype to SCL would draw a ton of new player interest and is a good move for tournament growth. Let’s stop pitting tiers against each other and just give everyone equal representation in scl instead.

 

[Kev]

We have been and will continue to be.

Before I get into the topic, this kind of substance less one liner is frankly embarrassing from someone in such a position on this site. We get it, you are in your feelings because your tier got insulted - we are no strangers to that. But if you are going to make such a bold (and wrong) claim then you should at least attempt to back it up. Let's face it, LC is the most hated tier in the official tournament circuit, there's been threads demanding to kick it, and constant outcry and jokes ever tour. Is any of that justified? I am not the judge to decide that, but neither are you for our tier and this attitude makes you no better than those haters you complain about in the aforementioned threads. If you are going to contribute to this discussion, have some shame and defend your tier with something a bit more mature than a "no you" response..

---

As for the actual purpose of the thread, Monotype definitely deserves our shot in SCL. We've already had two threads on the topic, both ending with 0 real reasoning on why we were denied. I think people misread Chait's post as a direct attack to remove the named tiers, because well yes it was pretty aggressive in tone. But the point it is making is that frankly, those tiers, and others in the tournament, do not have anything significant that should make them an automatic lock-in over us. If those tiers are deemed to meet the criteria for inclusion, why are we left out?

o me it's the most well-put together community of people who rlly rlly main their tier along with consistently good performers in the tier who actually play it, showing out at an official level to boot with quality games.

Also, LC is a great community and they create their own talent yearly.

With the new generation we are seeing new talent emerge the community, and with the tier beginning to settle we are seeing the old guard return.

To be clear, this is not a question or rebuke to either of you, but just pointing out that these exact lines could be said about Monotype. Our tier is undoubtedly one of the most active on the site and we have one of the biggest, more dedicated communities. The numbers make it clear that Monotype is extremely popular in terms of interest and it consistently eclipses a lot of the other tiers in this tournament in that aspect. In terms of consistently good performers, we are a great example. The only thing we lack is that "official tournament" showing because we simply were never given that opportunity.

I personally am not a fan of the whole low tier cannibalism thing - and strongly believe 12 slots is the best solution and accommodates everyone deserving well. The whole "10 is best" argument just feels so cheap and lazy as a justification to not give tiers what they genuinely deserve. If SPL can be "compromised" to have 12 slots sometimes to better promote and include CG, then SCL should have no issues encompassing more meta games to better represent the most popular, competitive current generation formats of the site.

However, if the TDs are adamant about the 10 slot format, then we deserve the opportunity to be one of those. I again want to stress that I do not want to attack any of the other tiers, but as it was so often repeated last time, being an official tier does not guarantee you a spot. The other tiers should be met with the same scrutiny that we are when it comes to the right of inclusion. If the last two discussions proved anything, it is that Monotype meets the same criteria of inclusion as the other formats and any arguments used against us can be applied to many of them as well. I won't go over all those points because they have been covered ad nauseam for the past years, and you can read through the threads linked by Chait to get the idea.

The only thing Monotype does not have that LC, PU and some others have is history - which is an absurdly unfair thing to hold against us. The historic presence of those meta games in these tours is happenstance not justification. They should not have priority purely because they were there first. Instead, there should be a real reason on why they merited the position above us. In all the interactions I have seen, I have not once seen a real legitimate argument that demonstrates their superiority - any claim always relates to the history or legacy they have.

All these formats have at least two trophy tournament representations, yet one of the most popular metagames and active competitive scenes does have not a single one. I think our track record and growth over the last few years proves that we earned a legitimate shot at being brought into the main scene. We've built an incredibly large and engaged community that exceeds some of our contemporaries and should get fair representation.

In conclusion, Monotype has put the work in for years, and have fought for this countless times, and it's time we get that earned shot. There is a lack of justification on why we should be left out over other formats when we meet the same criteria for inclusion. I do believe the best option is a 12 slot tournament that gives all these hard working, dedicated communities the representation they deserve for their contributions to the site. However, if someone has to be left out - I do not think it should be us; a fair chance at showing our worth is long overdue.

 

[ninjadog]

Genuinely blows my mind that anyone associated with monotype has read the previous threads re: tiers in officials and seen the resolution and feedback to those and has then decided the best way to go about it is attacking other tiers rather than solely advocating for 12 slots.

 

[Theia]

Amaranth told me to post, I am not advocating for or against any tier being included or excluded from this tournament, as a TD or as a person.

Adding to this, the only PU suspect this generation got 14 qualified voters. Fourteen. Sure one suspect isn't indicative of the whole story but there’s really no excuse for that number, and that’s really no way to convince anyone that a tier is thriving or people are invested in it or that it deserves a place in a trophy tour.

To comment on this and only this, this is not solely an issue with PU. Other lower tiers have had similarly low suspect turnouts this generation. See also:
SV NU Indeedee - 16 Voters
SV RU Oricorio-Pom-Pom - 14 Voters
SV RU Flamigo - 18 Voters

Compared to other lower tiers:
SV LC Sticky Web - 29 Voters
SV DOU Ursaluna - 52 Voters
SV Ubers Calyrex-Shadow - 63 Voters
SV UU Sandy Shocks - 44 Voters

This is not an attack on any tiers listed, simply a statement of fact in reference to a point made in the OP.

Carry on.

 

[fade]

The notion on mono being in officials got shut down two years ago and it shouldn’t continue to be entertained. An active playerbase / being popular doesn't outweigh the tier being essentially an OM where who wins is often based on matchup. I've played in the past five mono team tours, watched most games that took place in these, and at least half of the games were almost unplayable for the less favorable matchup. This is not a result of ‘good prep’ no matter which mainers say so in this thread or have said in previous threads, a tier that is consistently decided on preview has no place in officials. Imagine your chance at a trophy coming down to a monotype game. Unrelated to above but this is also the only tier to have Tera banned. SCL is fine with last years format, no need to add more slots or change around tiers.

 

[Eeveeto]

I am yet to play a SCL, but in case I ever am chosen there, I am fully opposed to remove LC. At least before Home (didn,t play after Home), LC is one of the most fun Low Tiers, would be a shame to remove it. Neutral regardless PU vs Monotype, but LC should surely have a team tour representing it, its a fully competitive Tier, just a little different from the other ones.

 

[Sneakyplanner]

Speaking on behalf of dead lower tiers, one of the reasons that those suspect tests have lower numbers is that they were kind of forgone conclusions. I am an RU mainer but didn't ladder for flamigo because we all knew that was getting banned and I wanted to keep scizor in UU, and when oricorio was being tested I had a realization that playing Zelda was a better use of my time than playing 40 ladder games vs a gimmick team that pokeaim made a video about so I asked everyone to ban the bird and then stopped playing pokemon for 3 weeks

 

[Éric]

i couldnt care less about what tiers do get into scl or not but i just wanna comment on one thing

I watched plenty of lc last year in scl and slam this year. Speed ties turn 1 deciding games half the time and more.

this is not true in the slightest. idk which lc games you watched but this doesnt happen. lc has speed ties, sure, undeniable, probably moreso than any other tier, but speed ties deciding games turn 1 arent common at all and they just mean the player who lost is bad. if you wanna hate on lc go ahead, but dont base it on something untrue.

 

[Chaitanya]

doesn't outweigh the tier being essentially an OM

Every tier on smogon has made up rules. LC plays with level 5 pokemon. I really dont know what this is supposed to mean. Is mono different from ou and uu? sure. so is dou and so is lc. genuinely nonsense. The previous threads have talked about the matchup issue way too much and it's been addressed to death but I just want to say one thing. With this ongoing MPL I am managing my 9th monotype tour. In the 8 previous I have never missed a playoffs. The only reason I bring it up is it speaks to the consistency that is possible in this tier. In every tour I have managed I had a major hand in building across every tier. Sure you can play the tier. But as you said about oras so often that people don't understand it or the ones that hate it are bad at it, it's pretty similar here. The hate is predominantly from people who either haven't played more than 3 mono games or take a team passed to them and don't understand what went into building it. In the end the best players and teams win much more often than not. It's true in our team tours and it's true in our individuals. What screams competitive more than that.

Imagine your chance at a trophy coming down to a monotype game. Unrelated to above but this is also the only tier to have Tera banned.

lol what a load of nonsense man. shitting on mono was expected, but goddamn try to make it make sense cause this stuff is completely irrelevant. Prolly the worst post in the 3 threads that have talked about this topic. god knows what tera has to do with it. saying stuff for the sake of making your post longer

To comment on this and only this, this is not solely an issue with PU. Other lower tiers have had similarly low suspect turnouts this generation.

I just want to say I did see all this while typing up OP and I brought up PU due to the uncertainty in the playerpool shown in previous tours and that it had been brought up before. I have no dislike for the community or the tier. I just think that Monotype provides more towards the betterment of SCL at this stage, which should be the goal of TDs imo. I think likewise for LC except i find the tier worse. My preference is pretty clearly 12 slots. I apologize again for how I went about it but I also don't think it warranted some of the stuff I heard from supposed leaders of the community.

 

[ken]

I'll preface this with I'm clearly biased as a forum mod & RO for Monotype and favor expanding with OU4 + Mono, but I don't necessarily see a point in rehashing the same arguments from the 2021 thread.

Instead, I ask for elaboration on what requirements are present for tier inclusion in SCL or why the tournament should remain at the same 10 slots in the first place. "Tradition"? Grandfathered tiers with previous official tournament presence? Tiers being locked in from previous iterations? Is it community size? Recognizable tournament players that can play or build multiple tiers and support other slots? Personal opinions? An amalgam of the aforementioned? Do we need to fight for a place in Slam first? Does 10 slots look aesthetically more pleasing to the eye or is the number derived from anything specifically? What harm is there with expanding the number of slots beyond someone saying individual wins matter less in a team tournament?

Some transparency in why exclusion and keeping SCL the same is (allegedly?) preferred over expansion and inclusion may help drive discourse in a more positive direction, or at least allow for more focused discussion on what Monotype or other potential future official tiers need to do or why they're excluded rather than a hodgepodge of personal opinions defending their own preferred tiers and number of slots or beating the words matchup and preview to death.

I'm not arguing for tiers to go head-to-head; we're all part of the same larger community. I'm not even asking for everyone to agree or like or play Monotype. Rather than repeat the same arguments every year or so and/or end with a "maybe in the future", what can or should concretely be done or accomplished here?

 

[DugZa]

We have been and will continue to be.

i couldnt care less about what tiers do get into scl or not but i just wanna comment on one thing

this is not true in the slightest. idk which lc games you watched but this doesnt happen. lc has speed ties, sure, undeniable, probably moreso than any other tier, but speed ties deciding games turn 1 arent common at all and they just mean the player who lost is bad. if you wanna hate on lc go ahead, but dont base it on something untrue.

From the two screenshots below from the LC Circuit Champion, I'd say the objectivity of your statements isn't as clear as you make it out to be.

Spoiler

I'm not saying that this is proof that LC is a speed tie tier, or even classifying it as one to be clear. However, this absolutely shows that the type of stigma Monotype receives, and all the mu whining you see from outsiders - can be pointed towards LC too. I'm sure you can find mono players using mu as an excuse for losses too, not going to pretend that isn't the case. The bottom line however is that if you are going to discredit Monotype for any point, you absolutely should give LC the same scrutiny. If you want to say Monotype games come down to mu and imagine that being the decider for your trophy. The same should be thought about for LC regarding its stereotypes.

If you want to say Monotype is "basically an OM" then you absolutely need to say the same about LC. Both fall under the definition of using "broad changes off a consistent rule" that is used by OMs. As was stated a bunch of times in this thread already, the only distinguishing factor is LC is older and had the opportunity to form a history in the scene. But there really is no arguments to make it seem all that much better than Monotype as proven so many times. I'm not saying LC is a bad meta and needs to be axed. I play its team tournaments because I do enjoy it to an extent. However, Monotype definitely deserves a fair shot at inclusion (as 12 slots preferably). We now have 9 years of tournaments that showcase our ability to generate consistent, top performers and have one of the largest communities on the site; I think it's time that is acknowledged in the larger scene.

 

[Éric]

From the two screenshots below from the LC Circuit Champion, I'd say the objectivity of your statements isn't as clear as you make it out to be.

yeah but you see, thats another tier. thats ss lc. and the og post is talking about sv lc. two different tiers. i even disagree completely w the ties in ss thing but thats besides the point. this is like if i said “well monotype sucks because in bw monotype genesect was broken”

 

[Hacker]

From the two screenshots below from the LC Circuit Champion, I'd say the objectivity of your statements isn't as clear as you make it out to be.

hi its me i dont know what point your trying to make with this but thats a completely different metagame which i dont like because of what i complained about in the screenshot, it even explicitly states what metagame i am talking about as well?? dont use my name for this thread, thanks.

 

[Camden]

Genuinely surprised this thread has been allowed to stay open for nearly 48 hours despite the original proposal being non-constructive at best and inflammatory at worst. I agree that there should be more of a dialogue around Monotype's high-level tour inclusion since it was inducted as a proper metagame years ago yet hasn't seen the same amount of inclusion as metagames like Little Cup or PU. I'm not involved with high-level play so it's not my place to discuss their tour schematics but I can speak as a former Tier Leader. I think if these clearly popular and strongly supported metas are going to exist in this space then there should be further discussion as to why they aren't/should be included into these tours and what we can do to accommodate the thriving playerbase. It's time for a real and serious discussion about Monotype.

 

[teal6]

The only thing Monotype does not have that LC, PU and some others have is history - which is an absurdly unfair thing to hold against us.

I do not think it is unfair to hold this against Monotype. Bluntly, if LC didn't have history it wouldn't be included in SCL. It is by virtue of already having that history that it demands inclusion, were we to instead smash the current tournament circuit and reconstruct it from the ground up while being completely agnostic to history, I highly doubt LC would end up being included at all. However, this is where we find ourselves today.

PU almost certainly should never have been shoved into the tournaments it was shoved into, we did not and do not in any sense require additional usage based tiers. The appeasement of PU was one of the gravest mistakes and most easily avoidable unforced errors I've seen in our circuit design, so I will not pretend that it has some special place over Monotype, but rather, that neither should be included.

Mono's absurd teambuilder restrictions are what make it "functionally an OM". The fact that there happens to be an active ladder or a lot of people signing up for subforum PLs does not strike me as a particularly moving argument for it's inclusion in a trophy-awarding tournament. We could make the same argument for any number of tiers that also absolutely shouldn't be in a trophy-awarding tournament.

As I read through this thread I see startlingly little effort to address that fact (perception?). Instead most of the arguments seem to rest on either community existence (signups, new players, etc.) or conspiratorial thinking ("people only want 10 slots so that they can exclude other tiers!"). I think the former is not convincing personally (after all, we could add RandBats if "a big community" is the reason we add tiers to tournaments) and the latter is nonsense entirely. There's no conspiracy here to engage with, my point is blunt and clear, 10 slots is better because there are not enough good players on the website and increasing the slots solely for the purpose of making certain tiers or people feel better is betraying the circuit.

 

[Floss]

yeah but you see, thats another tier. thats ss lc. and the og post is talking about sv lc. two different tiers. i even disagree completely w the ties in ss thing but thats besides the point. this is like if i said “well monotype sucks because in bw monotype genesect was broken”

hi its me i dont know what point your trying to make with this but thats a completely different metagame which i dont like because of what i complained about in the screenshot, it even explicitly states what metagame i am talking about as well?? dont use my name for this thread, thanks.

I don’t think I need to point out the fallacy of comparing SS LC (a tier that’s been in all three editions of SCL, including the most recent one) to BW Monotype. It’s certainly reasonable to consider how SS LC was viewed as a factor in deciding the slots for SCL, especially when the problem of the tier being reliant on speed ties might be due to an inherent flaw of playing with Level 5 Pokemon.

As someone with the experience of playing Monotype and a lot of other lower tiers over the last couple of years, I feel that the matchup issues attributed to Monotype have been overstated. This might be down to the expectation that you can figure out the matchup just by looking at the team preview, when the truth is that you need more information to accurately gauge whether an advantage exists in favor of either player, similar to any other tier.

On the topic of format, my personal belief is that 12 slots would be the best way to go, with 4 OU slots and Monotype included. The original decision to have 10 slots in SCL was based on SPL being the same number of slots, and SPL’s recent expansion to 12 slots should be taken into account when considering a similar change for SCL. A move for SPL to revert back to 10 slots in their next edition would likely be short-lived, lasting for 2 years before the onset of the new generation would demand another change back to 12 slots. Therefore, the cleanest solution for both tours would be to accept 12 slots as the new standard, and move forward with that thinking in mind.

 

[QWILY]

so we can change smogon tour's 17-year-old format, give doubles an individual and get rid of old gens in wcop but when it comes to adding one of the most played formats to a team tour, we draw the line on inclusiveness? this type of gatekeeping just prevents this site from growing for no real reason. most of the lower tiers are unbalanced. hell, even most of ou's generations are unbalanced. yet the best players keep winning and putting up the best records tour after tour. there's no reason to not give it a try at least. sure, you'll piss off some boomers spouting about prestigous blabla, but if you really wanna attract new players, expanding this tour is a good step.

 

[Finchinator]

RE: 10 vs 12 tiers,

I strongly echo these sentiments:

I can't imagine scl increases to 12 slots, since it did for spl purely due to a logistics issue with the normally ideal 3 OU slots now leaving an odd number of slots thanks to generation counts. It was almost 10 with 2 slots, it just went to a vote and 12 happened to win. This current scl scenario doesn't seem like that logistics issue to me.

If I'm not mistaken SPL is going to be 10 slots moving forward, since it was only temporarily increased due to the community's desire to have more than 2 slots of the brand new generation. 12 slots is also just terrible.

12 was only used as an emergency option with once-in-a-generation circumstances in SPL. The community has been happy with the product generated from 10 slots recently.

This is partially because extra OU slots have aged poorly across prior tournaments like SCL/SSD (see: any prior thread discussing tournament tiers). If we go to 12, a 4th OU likely fills up the 12th slot (no, this is very much not an invitation to pitch your fringe format to be included or for 2 UU slots) just for the sake of keeping an even number, which feels like a major step backwards. Let's not have bad history repeat itself. 3 OU slots has been the ideal fit here. It is also partially because we get greatly diminished returns by stretching the playerbase thinner, but I am less convinced on this point as we do not have sufficient data on this generation yet (and no, I do not want you to pull up total ladder battle stats and @ me -- that is irrelevant).

I strongly prefer we keep 10 total slots in SCL.

 

[Kev]

3 OU slots has been the ideal fit here.

If SPL is going back to 10 slots and can accept having only 2 SV OU - then why can't SCL? There was a lot of talk about mirroring last time and whether that is the focus or not, it doesn't really make sense that one tour should have more SV OU than the other. Of course, I know your post mainly refers to OU4 but it does lead to that question. If the status quo for CG OU slots is being fixed to 2 for SPL, SCL should reflect that same convention. Instead, the OU3 slot should be replaced by Monotype. The reasons on why have been covered exhaustively in this thread and the last two.

I've seen people using there being no "native synergy" playing wise for Monotype like there is for usage based lower tiers as a reasoning. This concept does not make sense. There's nothing about Monotype that is so intrinsically different that makes it any different in methodology than any of those. The fact that Pokemon share the same type does not suddenly change core Pokemon concepts, it's just another singles format with the same calculator. A player just needs to have an idea of what things run and recognize their wincons - the same could be said for a UU player going to NU, an OU player going to RU, etc... The idea that Monotype is played any different than any of those are making the format something it is not. Moreover, there is almost 10 years of Monotype tournaments to prove otherwise. There is constantly strong "outside players" who participate in tournaments without prior or limited experience and are able to perform well by putting in a modicum of effort. The reverse has also been shown many times, with examples like Floss winning RU Open last year when he had never touched the tier before round 1.

 

[Finchinator]

If SPL is going back to 10 slots and can accept having only 2 SV OU - then why can't SCL?

This is not an apt comparison. The clear consensus in the SPL thread was 3 slots were best (more on this later).

SPL will only be made 2 SV OU, effective next year, because of the amount of generations there are and the need for an even amount of slots. If you want to argue that Monotype will have the most merit of any potential tenth slot, then absolutely be my guest -- that is fine and I applaud your enthusiasm (as well as the LC, PU, etc. players discussing the positives of their formats), but it feels like you misrepresented the SPL discussion, which ultimately boiled down to an awkward vote between 2 and 4 to keep it an even total despite 3 being the "ideal" amount or the sweet spot.

In the SPL thread, there was a clear consensus that 3 SV OU slots would be ideal to the point that there was a week or so where people were pitching ideas for 3x SV OU + a past generation lower tier or DOU. 2 was going to be the default with a "new" old generation like SS, but too many people thought this was too few, so a lot of discussion ensued.

This was hashed out at length in the thread and here are some posts explaining why 3 SV OU slots is an optimal number in general from experienced players: 1 - Excal, 2 - blunder, 3 - Star, 4 - me, 5 - vulpix, 6 - CBB, 7 - reyscarface, 8 - Nails, etc. -- and there are more if you dig deeper to SCL/SSD threads after 4 slots was deemed too many. The TL;DR is that 3 is the sweet spot for SV OU slots.

If you think that a third Monotype is more representative of our community and brings more to the tournament than any other slot, be it a lower tier or a third SV, then by all means continue to talk about your tier. I just do not think any SPL comparisons are apt given the circumstances surrounding that discussion.