Meta-PokéBase Q&A
5 votes

I think these are the two things we should probably figure out before starting the next tournament.

Part 1
The tournament suggestions thread is old, and it seems to be filled with ideas made for long-forgotten times by long-gone people. I'll try to list them all here, along with reasons why I think they're on the list. The banlist is outdated on almost all of them, so that's the reason if you don't see any others.

Ninja's Annoying Woodland Creature Tourney (the new Route 1 completely ruins the "spirit" of this tournament)
Pina Coladas's Generation 3 OU Tournament (ORAS was already released)
Torterra02's TechniciMons Tournament ("allow list" also seems outdated)
Pina Coladas's Little Big Cup
~Wolf~'s Mega Showdown Tourney
<%7CSkymin%7C>'s ORAS megas tournament (ORAS was already released)
mew2002's Alpha and Omega Tourney (ORAS was already released)

Additionally, a few tournament ideas were made for long-forgotten times, but not made by long-gone people. These ideas were from users active less than a year ago, and they can possibly still be responsive enough to update these ideas.
MrKijani's Battle of the Titans
trachy's Mixed Tier Mono-Region Tournament (made for 5 regions and 16 people, neither of which are true now)
Sir Dan's OU Monotype Changing Tournament

A few of these can still be played with a slight adjustment to their banlists, but I honestly think most of them should be hidden and possibly forgotten forever (at least get rid of the ORAS ones). Do you guys have any better solutions?

Part 2
As most of you know, Pokemon battling tournaments are parasitic organisms that need hosts to survive. When a tournament finds a host, it takes residence in the host's digestive system and grows at the host's expense. Unfortunately, we seem to have a lack of expendable hosts, so I propose making the hosting process more organized somehow. My idea was to let people comment on answers in the tournament thread, sometime during or after the previous tournament, to claim host status for that tournament. The host should have enough free time to check his/her/its tournament thread every day for however long the tournament will last, and doesn't need to participate. People should also participate in at least one tournament before they try hosting so they sort of have an idea of what they're doing.

edited by
Yeah, I and maybe PX or Fizz can do the editing other peoples' posts.
OK I'll throw in a few points for discussion/ideas in general.
- Maybe consider having more than one host? If individual people's schedules don't permit running the tour on their own, then I think this is the logical way forward. I am more than happy to co-host.
- Agree 100% with PX, people will lose interest in tours again if we make them too frequent. My suggestion would be to install an actual schedule for tournaments, so we can all plan them ahead of time. Create dates and allocate potential hosts weeks in advance. This gives us a plan and a clearer goal to meet.
- The problem with the current suggestion thread being cluttered can be resolved by creating a brand new one. We can encourage people to repost suggestions (whether they are their own or not) on the brand new thread. Then we can decide again which ones we want. Literally, someone can go and post this right now if we think it's a good idea. This would weed out the dated suggestions as well.
- I am aware that posting a new thread would eventually cause this same problem again, as the 'vote economy' has too much bearing on what tournaments are popular. My suggestion would be that instead of choosing the tournament based on which has the most votes, post a poll on the scheduled tournament day and let people vote the one they want at that point. So voting posts in the actual thread wouldn't matter. Then choose the tournament that is leading the poll after... a day maybe?
- If people like these ideas, I could host one with that system so we can see how it might play out.
Other than the ideas I listed, I think most of them are good ideas and worth trying. I really don't want to get rid of all the old ideas just to weed out a few outdated ones. And we were going to do all those tournaments (except maybe the ORAS ones) anyway. The votes on the tournament thread only really decide what order we do them. Does the order matter? I think it would be better to simply hide all the outdated ideas and let us play with the old but still playable ones. We were going to get through them eventually anyways.
Btw, I didn't say I wasn't willing to host :P

Anyways, I agree with PX, having the tournaments that close together made it feel rushed and quickened, I gave up halfway through the second one, not because I was the worst (at the time, I have grown since then :/), but because: A) 2 weeks is a lot to keep up with for a possible infinite amount of matches in 1 round, and B) I definitely felt I couldn't keep up.

I don't believe the order of tournaments matters, but polling may help and develop hype for a tournament. Polling also means there has to be more time in-between tournaments to Poll. (In the long run) Maybe if the Meta gets merged a soon made forum section (or a stand alone forum/test forum section is made), we can have polls centralized there.

I think this system (may) work better than the current one, but (of course) I cannot predict the future...
You have no idea how much '100% agree with PX' boosts my ego

Please log in or register to answer this question.