Tournament ideas and tournament hosts

Question

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 The banlist is outdated on almost all of them, so that's the reason if you don't see any others.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Torterra02's TechniciMons Tournament ("allow list" also seems outdated)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.

Comments

I mean, under those guidelines, I could (theoretically) be a host. This process could be organized better, and the ORAS tourneys are way outdated. :P

---

Is there a problem with having you host a tournament? I don't see one.

---

Yes, however, I am still a "child", I could get grounded in the middle or near the beginning (or before it begins) of a tournament, so I would highly recommend, if I became a host, that a back-up be designated, so such an incident doesn't end in absolute turmoil.

---

Well if you are too likely to get grounded, then you shouldn't be hosting anything.

---

You said that people can't post ideas if they didn't paticipate in at least one tourney.
I had a couple of ideas though ): And people said it was a good idea. But okay rules are rules....

---

No he said that you shouldn't host a tournament until you have participate in one. Don't worry, you can still post tournament ideas.

---

Oh ok! do I need to comment them or answer them?

---

sumwun says answer. Btw, I am not likely to get grounded, I was just saying, it is possible:\

---

No, post your ideas as answers on the tournament thread. We don't look at comments when we decide which idea to use next.

---

So I talked to SYL and X-Scizor, so regarding Part 1, we have agreed to let the ORAS tournaments go, but X-Scizor wants Ninja's Annoying Woodland Creature Tourney, and I don't entirely get what the new route one does to it (please Explain what Pokemon Ruin it). Also, we weren't sure about banning the others, but we leaned more against it. Anyways, this is just one opinion, if anyone else has anything to say, speak now. :P

---

I want to get input from more experienced people (ie. Fizz) before trying to resolve this. (and none of you nor I would be able to enforce anything we decide by ourselves anyway)
As for Ninja's tournament specifically, I think it was supposed to be a competition among the most common and weakest Pokemon. However, because of the Generation 7 games, the tournament would allow stuff like Snorlax, Chansey, Pelipper, Slowbro, Lopunny, and Lycanroc. Pokemon like these would be way too centralizing and broken and not weak at all.

---

okay, but you said post ideas,as answers. Did you do this knowing you'd turn posts into comments, or what? :P

---

For the Annoying Woodland Creature tourney, why not just make it Gens 1-6? Or we can exclude Pokémon found in the other parts of Route1 in SM. Like, just make it Pikipek, Grubbin, and Yungoos, as well as their respective evolutions. I mean, we didn't allow Shinx because it wasn't really an annoying woodland creature you generally avoid. It makes perfect sense do the same for Rockruff and Buneary, and stuff like that.

---

@Stakatakool I thought Lorika meant ideas on the tournament suggestions thread, not ideas on this one.
@X-Scizor I guess we can, but it's still an old idea that needs either updating or hiding. By the way, we didn't allow Shinx not because it was strong, but because it wasn't an early route Pokemon (its first appearance is Route 202). We're still allowing Beedrill, Pidgeot, and Talonflame even though they're much, much stronger than Luxray. Also, I don't think Grubbin can be found on the first part of Route 1. According to Bulbapedia, it's only Caterpie, Rattata, Ledyba, Spinarak, Pikipek, and Yungoos.

---

Oh whoops. I guess we could hide the tournament to make room for others...

---

Tournaments being more organised comes down to people wanting more and better handled tournaments. If we were to use this question as an attempt to gauge reaction, then I feel as if there isn't a lot of hype around tournaments nor a huge desire to host them.

But I don't think we should let them die either. I think we should just have them less often. One a month maybe? A monthly tournament on its merit of being hyped monthly tournament alone will generate significant interest whenever it rolls around and will make it prestigious too. I find it difficult to be a tour host for multiple weeks on end usually but I could take my time out to be a host for a few weeks every few months.

Or more likely, me and you (sumwun) would be closer to advisers, helping people who would like to host the tour as they come around by answering their questions and (in my case idk about you) actually using the Pokebase/RMT threads to build up hype and information around each tour. Basically, its much easier to have people who want to host the tour do so if it's not on such a frequent basis, and everything surrounding the tour is much more easily dealt with by other people.

Thinking about it, twice-seasonal tours make a bit more sense than monthly. The point was to have less frequent tours with more build up.

---

Okay, I think this is what we've said so far:
We should get rid of the ORAS tournament ideas.
We don't know what to do with the tournaments with outdated banlists.
People don't seem willing to host, and we don't know where we can find more hosts.
The tournaments should be less often than monthly.
Anyone know what to do with the second and third problems?

---

I mean, I guess I got attempt to host a tournament. The only problem is I don't have the right to edit other posts, meaning someone else would have to edit the PokemonDB page. And I don't see anything wrong with monthly tournaments, but it may depend on how long a tournament will take. Also, like PX said, likely more people will sign up.

As for the second problem, we could either hide it or just update the banlist ourselves. For example, for Annoying Woodland Creature, we can unban Gale Wings, ban Loppuny, etc.

---

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