1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. Welcome to Pokemon Perfect, Guest!

    Our motto is Pokémon Practice makes Pokémon Perfect. We are a competitive-battling community that encourages the development of players and their ideas, and fosters positive and respectful attitudes. We love Collaboration (working together), Competition (getting stronger), and Communication (being informed).

    You are free to post everywhere, unless the thread explicitly states otherwise (usually in the case of a vote), and there are no private forums whatsoever. We just require you to not make multiple accounts. Let us greet you by posting a thread in the Introduce Yourself! forum.

  3. Tiers

    View Introduction to Tiers if you don't know what tiers are. Pokémon Perfect tiers are named differently to those on Smogon. A numeral followed by the letter U, e.g. 1U, 2U, 3U, represents a main tier on Pokémon Perfect – the '1' of '1U' representing the tier level. For a tier to be a main tier, it must be balanced (nothing is too powerful and game-breaking) and diverse enough (include a variety of Pokémon and strategies). A numeral followed by the letter P, e.g. 1P, 2P, 3P contain all Pokémon that are deemed overpowered in the respective 1U, 2U, 3U tiers. The 1st tier level allows Pokémon that are banned in the 2nd level, and this process continues down. Read the tier list, and in-depth explanations of the tiers naming system and tiering system. Also check out our analyses for all tiers.

  4. Tournaments

    RBY 1U Seasons and its master tournaments are responsible for starting up the community, and tournaments continue to play a big role in maintaining interest in the forums. Signups Open gives you a list of tournaments you can join, and Ongoing lists tournaments that you might want to follow. Additionally, you can tap to find out approximate Schedules for tournaments.

    For historical threads, check out Signups Closed, Finished tournaments and Results. We also have Nominations, Voting and Event threads for exhibitions – past and present.

All Gens Official Tiering Philosophy

Discussion in 'Tiers' started by Ortheore, Mar 2, 2017.

  1. Ortheore

    Ortheore Leader

    Joined:
    May 16, 2013
    Messages:
    1,970
    Likes Received:
    1,212
    What is the tiering philosophy and why do we need it?

    The goal of tiering is to create a range of different rulesets that allow us to use different pokemon in a competitive environment, with different rulesets creating subtly different metagames and dynamics of play. The goal of this philosophy is to establish clear standards for how we should form these competitive rulesets and what our approach should be in various scenarios that are likely to occur.

    What criteria do we use in determining a pokemon's tier?

    When tiering there are essentially two decisions that are made: whether to include a pokemon in a tier or drop it to the one below, and whether or not to ban something. A pokemon's inclusion in a tier is determined solely by its viability within that tier. If it is perceived as being sufficiently viable it is made a part of that tier, if not, it drops to the tier below. A ban is implemented if an element in a tier has an unhealthy effect on that metagame. This can be characterised through a variety of methods, but it is invariably determined solely by playtesting as opposed to theorymon.

    Notably, a pokemon's perceived status is generally ignored if it differs from its actual role in a metagame. This is most relevant for legendary pokemon, which might otherwise face potentially unwarranted bans without testing. This means that when beginning tiering in a new generation all pokemon are initially permitted.

    Complex Bans

    Complex bans undermine a ruleset's integrity and simplicity and as such should not be used, with the notable exception of tweaking established old gens. This can occur because a niche strategy may rise to have an unhealthy effect on the metagame, but a simpler ban would significantly alter the metagame, which is an undesirable outcome in an established old gen.

    Non-Pokemon Bans

    As it is mostly pokemon that are tiered, bans on things other than pokemon (e.g. Items, Abilities) represent an inconsistency with our tiering system, make rulesets slightly more difficult to work with and can potentially impact a broad selection of pokemon, many of which might not be problematic. As such they should be avoided where possible. Nonetheless, they may prove necessary, and can be used when it is unreasonable to ban each problematic pokemon , mostly if there's a large number of them. They may also be considered where the item or ability can be argued to be broken on all pokemon that make use of it even where it might be reasonable to ban individual pokemon- for instance although Lati@s could reasonably be banned individually, it might make more sense to ban Soul Dew.
     
    Last edited: Feb 1, 2018
  2. Disaster Area

    Disaster Area Little Ball of Fur and Power Member

    Joined:
    May 4, 2014
    Messages:
    5,385
    Likes Received:
    2,232
    My initial thoughts were that we shouldn't have something like this as 'official' but honestly I think this is broad enough and very accurate and to the point so I support this.

    Great work.
     
  3. Ortheore

    Ortheore Leader

    Joined:
    May 16, 2013
    Messages:
    1,970
    Likes Received:
    1,212
    We absolutely need an official tiering statement though, just to make it clear to everyone what direction tiering is going, and what decisions we can expect people to make in given scenarios. From our perspective we need to be on the same page regarding this, otherwise you end up with scenarios like we had before with GSC, where I'm adamant on doing something with which you vehemently disagree (separating OU and 1U and continuing to run OU seasons).

    Similarly, we've got a mix of players who want to approach old gens with a progressive mindset and those who just want OU, and there needs to be some communication of where we draw the line in terms of tiering (unless we cater for both OU and 1U, which imo is still the best option), otherwise you're going to end up with at least one of those groups frustrated that they're not getting what they expected. Heck I wrote this as something of a compromise, in that it gives the majority what they want (OU), but it notes that the OU tier is not consistent with our philosophy but instead an exception that has been made, with reasons justifying making that exception

    But yeah if you're cool with this then that's all good
     
    Disaster Area likes this.
  4. magic9mushroom

    magic9mushroom BEST END. Member

    Joined:
    May 1, 2013
    Messages:
    564
    Likes Received:
    355
    We don't need to make OU an exception. 1W. Like I've been saying for years. That's what the letters there are for...

    (Or 1R like Mewbers, if we go the extra-bans route, though honestly I don't think you're going to get more balanced than Ubers without throwing so many under the bus that it comes close to being Ubers-as-1U's 2U anyway.)

    I mean, do you really think people will leave PP just because we call it an alternate meta? It's not like there's a rule against running 1W tournaments. I don't understand your reluctance, Londo DA... :p
     
    Last edited: Mar 3, 2017
  5. Disaster Area

    Disaster Area Little Ball of Fur and Power Member

    Joined:
    May 4, 2014
    Messages:
    5,385
    Likes Received:
    2,232
    I'm cool with having this as our official 'tiering philosophy' so long as noone objects.
     
  6. magic9mushroom

    magic9mushroom BEST END. Member

    Joined:
    May 1, 2013
    Messages:
    564
    Likes Received:
    355
    I object to established old generations' OU being 1U without a retest - it's straight-up capitulation for literally no reason, as I just expounded.
     
    Linkin Karp likes this.
  7. Disaster Area

    Disaster Area Little Ball of Fur and Power Member

    Joined:
    May 4, 2014
    Messages:
    5,385
    Likes Received:
    2,232
  8. Ortheore

    Ortheore Leader

    Joined:
    May 16, 2013
    Messages:
    1,970
    Likes Received:
    1,212
    To be fair, a shitty anonymous poll and the opposing perspective being made into a strawman are far from compelling evidence justifying your position. No-one ever proposed retesting all the clauses, and those polls are generally pretty terrible for a variety of reasons. Not to mention that you've done a great job of distorting the discussion so that the fact that I NEVER proposed removing or changing OU got left by the wayside. All the arguments against my proposal were "it looks bad" (so what) and you asking a couple people about redoing OU and them being unhappy with the idea (see my point in the previous sentence). You didn't win this argument because your position was stronger, you won it because I got fucking sick of arguing over this bullshit, to the point where I've considered quitting this community altogether. Meh, it is what it is I guess. I suppose I'll bide my time before restoring the issue
     
    Last edited: Mar 4, 2017
  9. magic9mushroom

    magic9mushroom BEST END. Member

    Joined:
    May 1, 2013
    Messages:
    564
    Likes Received:
    355
    1. Slanted wording in the poll. Particularly since your option 3 actually is an abandonment of PP's tiering policy, but you falsely presented it as "the status quo".

    2. Argumentum ad populum. There is literally no upside to what you want to do; without any plausible reasoning in favour of X, a poll supporting X merely demonstrates that the polled are misinformed or stupid. Please argue rather than hiding behind others.
     
  10. Disaster Area

    Disaster Area Little Ball of Fur and Power Member

    Joined:
    May 4, 2014
    Messages:
    5,385
    Likes Received:
    2,232
    Except it was currently what was going on.

    1. Our goal is to serve the majority of our site's playerbase. If this is what the playerbase votes for, then that's what the playerbase votes for. Therefore this isn't some sort of a fallacy: we're doing what our players decided on and that's what we're supposed to do.

    2. We did have discussion before this and I made this to decide it because the argument was at a stalemate where noone was going to persuade anyone else who was arguing and this was made to essentially resolve the argument, just like the freeze clause vote after the discussion. Especially as Ortheore and I were both getting super stressed out over it to the point where both of us at one point or another took some time off the forum to cool off emotionally, I just wanted it to be done with so we could accept the result and move on.



    Ortheore I'm happy if you want to give this a few weeks and then discuss with you how to present a poll between our two preferred options which we can agree on having decided the issue. There are some fair criticisms of the poll I made, and although I disagree that those criticisms are enough to invalidate the result of it, I'm happy to do a redo which both of us agree upon.
     
  11. Enigami

    Enigami Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2015
    Messages:
    1,037
    Likes Received:
    563
    But... isn't the majority served as long as we support the original metagames? Regardless, at this point I refuse to acknowledge anything outside of our RBY/SM/ORAS tiers as Pokemon Perfect's tiers, and GSC/ADV/HGSS and potentially BW are nothing more than a Pokemon Perfect variant of Smogon's tiering and thus not Pokemon Perfect's tiers, and only done that way because Pokemon Perfect is perceived to lack the ability to tier them and its leadership is willing to pretend variants of Smogon tiers are actually its own, yet somehow at the same time upset about the possibility of supporting that same variant of Smogon's tiers while acknowledging it as separate from Pokemon Perfect's own tiering.
     
    Linkin Karp likes this.
  12. Disaster Area

    Disaster Area Little Ball of Fur and Power Member

    Joined:
    May 4, 2014
    Messages:
    5,385
    Likes Received:
    2,232
    We do what the majority request, which is what that vote said. That's what votes are for.
     
  13. Enigami

    Enigami Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2015
    Messages:
    1,037
    Likes Received:
    563
    That's fine. But still not Pokemon Perfect tiering, no matter what is said, we're simply using Smogon's tiering with minor variants for GSC/ADV/HGSS/maybe BW and not our own.
     
    Linkin Karp likes this.
  14. Disaster Area

    Disaster Area Little Ball of Fur and Power Member

    Joined:
    May 4, 2014
    Messages:
    5,385
    Likes Received:
    2,232
    Alright. Well that's your opinion and that's fine and obviously there's more than a grain of truth to it.
     
  15. magic9mushroom

    magic9mushroom BEST END. Member

    Joined:
    May 1, 2013
    Messages:
    564
    Likes Received:
    355
    If 80% of a town votes to lynch the other 20%, is that the right thing to do?

    For the people who want to preserve the old metas, the choice is between preserving them as 1U or preserving them as 1W.
    For the people who want an independent and sane tiering system, the choice is between getting said system and not getting it.

    There is an inherent inequality between these motivations.
     
  16. Disaster Area

    Disaster Area Little Ball of Fur and Power Member

    Joined:
    May 4, 2014
    Messages:
    5,385
    Likes Received:
    2,232
    No but a vote on a pokemon forum doesn't infringe a person's human rights so I don't see your point?

    Anyway it's not like Smogon doesn't exist if you want to play Smogon metagames...

    Once a tier is formed it isn't hard to put in other playable metagames but it depends on what the 1U tier is as to what they're named. So for example, traditional HGSS Ubers is HGSS 1R, since HGSS 1P is that tier + arceus (which isn't traditionally permitted) and HGSS 1U is something like HGSS OU. There's no reason that if, say, we have a different GSC 1U, we can't preserve GSC OU under a different name, be it GSC 1U (if it ends up being the same tier) or GSC 1R (if GSC OU has fewer bans) or GSC 1V (if GSC OU has less bans). However the case is complicated when for example, the Smogon tier might have additional or fewer clauses / bans, so in some cases we can't preserve the old tiers within the tiering system whilst maintaining 'transitivity' (or what you might consider as comparability by considering the set of tiers within a generation as a poset), and in any case, unless you end up with OU = 1U, then the old OU won't have the same position in the seasons (unless a decision is made otherwise of course; to my knowledge, Ortheore is for this and I'm against this)

    And if you specifically have some old metagame you want to continue playing and preserve there's no reason it even needs to be within the tiering system. E.g. you could have 'RBY UU Classic', RBY2K10's RBY UU, if you felt like it, preserved as a tier, and it doesn't require a place or indeed fit into PP's tiering system directly, but that doesn't stop you discussing it on the forum and so on.
     
  17. magic9mushroom

    magic9mushroom BEST END. Member

    Joined:
    May 1, 2013
    Messages:
    564
    Likes Received:
    355
    ???

    Wanting 1Us to not be locked to "classic" OUs is exactly what I and Ortheore and Enigami have been asking for, so if you want to get on board that's perfectly fine by me.
     
  18. Disaster Area

    Disaster Area Little Ball of Fur and Power Member

    Joined:
    May 4, 2014
    Messages:
    5,385
    Likes Received:
    2,232
    I'm confused but whatever if we can stop this drama for a few weeks then all is good, that's all i want rn
     
  19. Disaster Area

    Disaster Area Little Ball of Fur and Power Member

    Joined:
    May 4, 2014
    Messages:
    5,385
    Likes Received:
    2,232
    Proposing some rudimentary changes.

    In particular, I think that once the guidelines for what makes something banworthy are established, we should include them in this thread.

    Everything up to the point should be kept as is.

    I think it'd be best to remove the bolded part and replace it with something that notes that to determine something is banworthy requires some amount of playtesting.

    Remove the part I have strikethroughed here.

    Recommend simply removing this part completely. I think that a recommendation against using complex bans or doing bans on non-Pokemon entities will be implicit in our guidelines on what makes something banworthy.

    Obviously this part should be removed now.
     
  20. Ortheore

    Ortheore Leader

    Joined:
    May 16, 2013
    Messages:
    1,970
    Likes Received:
    1,212
    Removed all mention of established old gens. I won't remove the stuff on complex and non-mon bans yet because I think it's worth explicitly stating that they ought to be avoided and if they are to replaced by guidelines on banworthiness then I'll wait until those are finalised (though I'll probably forget lol)
     
    Disaster Area likes this.
  21. Disaster Area

    Disaster Area Little Ball of Fur and Power Member

    Joined:
    May 4, 2014
    Messages:
    5,385
    Likes Received:
    2,232
    Do you think we should try and merge this thread with All Gens - Tiering System | Pokémon Perfect ? They're closely related topics and the fewer stickied threads in the Tiers forum the more likely each will be read etc.
     
  22. Ortheore

    Ortheore Leader

    Joined:
    May 16, 2013
    Messages:
    1,970
    Likes Received:
    1,212
    Yeah definitely, maybe a new thread would be ideal so we can spread all the content over multiple posts
     
  23. Disaster Area

    Disaster Area Little Ball of Fur and Power Member

    Joined:
    May 4, 2014
    Messages:
    5,385
    Likes Received:
    2,232
    Alright. I think once we're done the tiering guidelines we should make that a specific project.
     

Share This Page