All Gens Suspect Testing Discussion

Alright this is something I don't think we've really properly discussed yet - how do we do suspect tests? I think we have 2 main contexts to consider: tiers with small playerbases and those with larger ones (within the context of PP). In smaller ones, new frontiers/test games are usually enough to form a decision imo. So the problem is I think with games with larger playerbases. How do we do suspect tests? Do we host a season with the suspect ruleset? I need ideas here - this is firstly going to be important with respect to DPP and Latias (as well as maybe Salamence and Mew)

To be honest I'm kinda drawing a blank at what to do in a proper situation. If a tier has a season and we feel after some time something's worthy of suspecting then we can easily work out some sort of voter eligibility criteria there etc. but I think it's hard to say, should we replace the season with the suspect meta to do a suspect test, or should we host separate tours to do it?

 

I think the best way to suspect test is simply to gather good active players, playtest a ton, and discuss about it. Obviously you need to playtest more for wide tiers like DPP and probably less for RBY 4U. If I had to give numbers I'd say around 40 games is a good sample for 4U, but I don't know about DPP.

 

Thoughts on suspect tournaments? And should they be run in parrallel or over or sequentially with new frontiers / seasons?

 

i suggest in parallel with regular seasons. No reason to delay the normal schedule, as there is the risk that some of the playerbase will not want to invest time into building teams for the suspect, thus delaying the decision for the suspect, which in turn might alienate another part of the playerbase (if I don't have a official season I might lose interest in the tier). If possible let's keep it quick and efficient. When PP is going be so big that running two big tournaments of more or less the same tier at the same time would be problematic, I think that we would have reached the point that we would have a active enough playerbase to do suspect tours without the risk of them going on forever.

 

Thanks for the input.

I think soon we should have a suspect tour (say starting next Monday) for RBY 4U without Nidoking I'd be happy to host. Would like input on the format Enigami Troller Lusch marcoasd Ortheore GGFan CrapAtRBY Peasounay since ideally we'd want it to be finished before new frontiers is over, or we might maybe end up needing to have another full tour like new frontiers with a possible new ruleset.

Also DPP either + Latias or - Stealth Rock should be discussed and we can hold a suspect tour for one or both
tagging autumn leaves HBK ReshiRampage Aurious ThrashNinjax as DPPers I know on here to coment

 

Alright, I guess it's time for me to share my bit.

When it comes to banning things I've never felt a need to test without the ban. Usually if something's borked you should be able to tell without a test. The issue I have with testing is that I think it lends itself to complicating matters by considering the alternative meta, which carries a host of other variables that might complicate things. King in 4U is a good example, as many of us have theorymonned that Queen would simply take its spot in the meta. Based on such a test, one might conclude that King's ban doesn't accomplish much, where I see it as being a sign that more work might need to be done. And that's only a case where a ban might not have a significant effect- if you've got a situation where broken is checking broken, a ban would probably be necessary but an individual ban would be bad in the short term.

On the other hand, I'm cringing at actually writing down my thoughts on doing things without testing them, I'm only now realising how badly at odds with my perspective on most other things that is.

Anyhow, firstly I think there needs to be a council that can decide on a course of action based on general discussion. For established tiers this shouldn't be an issue, since you'd know roughly who's suited for such a role, and possibly you would already have a council set up. Deciding the council for newer tiers is a bit problematic, since it's hard to say who has the best knowledge of the meta and even if you go by new frontiers those rankings are prone to change and based on a limited sample size. I think there's no good options here, you've got to just take the rankings at a specific date and just roll with it.

The thing about new frontiers is that it isn't necessary for it to terminate once everyone's played everyone else once- it can keep going indefinitely tbh, it's just that that happens to be a good point to stop. If we do do a suspect tour, I think a single elim with a losers bracket might work. That should be something that can be wrapped up in a few weeks and it still gives a decent number of battles to everyone

 

Great point. I guess with any ban it's all about whether it should be banned because of the meta with it is faulty (generalising) not whether removing it makes a better meta.

I guess in part this thread is to help with this - what routes should councils be considering most seriously, what're their options? Not so pertinent to 4U right now but an important discussion point.

Nice point

Nice point

Still not so sure what we ought to do with 4U then. I think we just have a suspect discussion thread and have a vote. Should testing how the meta changes after the ban even matter? I guess what we do is #1 suspect nidoking. If no ban is the vote then it stays permanently (or at least for several months~), if ban then we're back where we started, and if we need to for example suspect nidoqueen too then so be it. If we get a tie (perfectly possible) then we leave it until 1 round of frontier has finished (i.e. everyone vs everyone once). Then form a council, do a re-vote with the council. If ban then another round of frontier to test the new meta should happen.

Suspect testing the new meta only matters when diversity is a bigger concern than brokenness in a potential ban.

 

Honestly now thinking if diversity is merely a relevant concern that's enough.

The question now is: how do we suspect test new metas?

 

I feel like it probably depends, some kind of suspect ladder (maybe on typh's What If server), would be nice, though PP isn't big enough to have that many players it'd be good to see what rises, what falls with the changes, as well as anything else. Keep in mind this is for a diversity perspective, if something's being banned for brokenness then we should just have a discussion thread and then a council vote. Nothing too fancy.

For DPP changes I am still blatantly opposed to all those on the table: SR is fine if annoying vs certain things, Latias is near-broken and centralising af, Mence is absolutely insane, Mew idk but with that versatility+stats it'd probably be very hard to deal with. I think we actually should hold a vote on Nape though, it (along with Loom and U-Turn spam) is what makes people complain about SR because they abuse the hell out of it (though it does bite them back a bit). Also Iron Head and Body Slam should be banned on Jirachi outright, talk about skill-less broken garbage.