12-20-2015, 09:41 PM | #1 |
時の彼方へ
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Lafayette, Indiana
Posts: 20,578
|
Should VGC have multiple formats?
Magic: the Gathering, a trading card game, has a number of formats (or rulesets) for play. These include Standard (which prohibits the use of cards that haven't been printed in the last two years), Modern (which bans cards printed before Summer 2003), and Vintage (which bars the use of no cards but restricts some to only 1 copy per deck).
When the DCI hosts the World Championship tournament for Magic: the Gathering, they don't usually just run a tournament for Standard or one just for Vintage. They run concurrent tournaments for several of the most popular formats. So there is a World Championship match for Standard, and another for Modern, and another for Vintage, and so on. Well, what about Pokémon? We have multiple formats too, from Smogon's tiers to VGC's yearly variants. Casual players often roll with such clauses as no legendaries, no megas, or monotype. But each year, the organizers of the Pokémon Video Game World Championships -- The Pokémon Company International, or TPCi -- opt for a single, yearly format. Should this be the case? And if so, why? If not, why not? What I'm asking you is, do you think the World Championships for the Pokémon video game scene ought to feature two or more formats? (And if so, what would you pick?) Or do you think it's too much to ask a company like TPCi to host more than one format-tournament and that we're best off sticking with just one, global format that we all play in?
__________________
|
12-20-2015, 09:43 PM | #2 |
時の彼方へ
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Lafayette, Indiana
Posts: 20,578
|
Doh. I meant to make this a poll. Oh well. Not worth deleting!
Alright. On to my own thoughts ... (which I wanted to seclude from the OP post above so as not to bias): Obviously there are costs to consider. Costs to host and operate multiple tournaments at once, for starters. But I really think it'd be nice if we could have an eternal format for the players who want that and then a yearly-surprise format for those who like things to be shaken up a bit. Something like VGC 2013 / 2015 is closer to fitting the bill of an eternal format, one where nearly nothing is banned (and all the things that are banned are all birds of the same feather) and one where the changes year to year are generally not too huge. Meanwhile, something like VGC 2014 is more for those players who want to try something new each year, who feel like the eternal format's code has already been cracked and there's nothing left to discover. (They may well be wrong! But that's not how they feel, and that's the point: catering to the many.)
__________________
|
12-21-2015, 11:04 PM | #3 |
Naga's Voice
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: somewhere gay idk
Posts: 3,280
|
I think your post as regards to why 2014 was such a good meta is also a good argument for this as well. Legend-clogged metas in cart competitions see people who can't put in the time to legitimately get their perfect teammate, and so use either RNG abuse or straight up hacks to get it instead, and it becomes less accessible. That's why I think a no-legend format is desirable.
__________________
|
12-22-2015, 12:35 AM | #4 |
Caffeinated
|
I'd personally like to see singles with an official VGC set up, I've never much liked doubles and have pretty much exclusively played in singles.
Obvious bias is obvious.
__________________
Life, but a series of paths and flows Down many one can go May yours run smoothly and be soft to your feet |
12-22-2015, 02:07 AM | #5 |
seems theres a case aclaw
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Virginia, USA
Posts: 1,276
|
Zelphon darling if you think doubles is a bad, try triples. It's a hoot.
__________________
|
12-22-2015, 06:50 AM | #7 |
Banned
Join Date: Dec 2015
Location: Hyrule
Posts: 92
|
We should speak only of doubles.
|
12-23-2015, 02:38 PM | #8 |
Barghest Barghest Barghe-
|
There isn't likely to be a Singles VGC metagame. Gamefreak has shown more of a balancing lean towards doubles, and if they were to create a format for each of their Battle Formats (Singles, Doubles, Multi, Triples, and Rotation) you'd very likely have a mess on your hands in terms of balancing them all out. Gamefreak took a large step balancing the game this Generation, a step that only has its equal in Gen II, and a lot of their changes were more doubles oriented. Adding more unique battle formats to that would likely be a train wreck. Also Gen VI Singles just sucks ass.
Different doubles formats, however, would be pretty interesting. Far less of a hassle to balance compared to the above, and allows for a variety of interesting playstyles when you alter what Pokemon are in which format. The only real issue is cost (and likely space to host these tournaments) but Pokemon makes a literal killing so I assume that's hardly an issue.
__________________
|
12-23-2015, 09:15 PM | #9 |
プラスチック♡ラブ
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: 蒸気の波の中
Posts: 14,766
|
Gen VI Singles is pretty much unbalanced at its core; doubles really is the format that actually works as far as competitive play goes (though it has some major problems regardless).
Also triples is a glorious clusterfuck everyone should play triples. |
Lower Navigation | ||||||
|
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
|
|