Brainstorming the idea of a player driven "PvP Council" within PRO

[Qeight]

The big disclaimer at the start of everything: This thread is not a confirmation of a PvP Council nor will there be an ETA if one comes. Thread is about brainstorming the idea and execution.

---

A PvP Council has been one of the most suggested things by top level players within this game for months and years now however it was never done. I would like to give everyone the opportunity to brainstorm the idea, how a player driven PvP Council could look like, how things are decided etc.

 

The big questions that should be answered here:

1. How are council members picked?
   
   • How long can they stay on the council?
     
   • What are the requirements?
     
   • Should they be able to participate in ranked PvP while being on the council?
     
   • How would the split between Silver and Gold members look like?

[*]How are suspect tests decided?

• How does the council decide what Pokemon to sent into a suspect testing phase?
  
• How would a suspect test look like (a special suspect ladder is out of question)?
  
• Who gets to vote after the suspect test is over?
  
• What are the requirements to vote?

[*]What would council members need from staff in particular to make it successful?

• How much influence does staff have over the council?
  
• When can staffs interfere in the decision making process?

 

Unlike this thread: PvP Council, this should be about the execution of a council. Any off-topic comments, insults, drama inciting, taunting or any negative posts will be deleted. This thread is also not about writing "+1" or that you like the idea, it is solely for brainstorming how things could be executed. Don't ruin this chance for yourselves, show us if a player driven PvP council is even realistic within this community.

 

Best Regards,

Qeight

 

 

If this in the end doesn't happen, please don't be upset!

[Envymeister]

How exactly will the ''PvP Council'' be able to judge what is meta breaking or not if they dont play PvP matches? And most importantly, who will join the council if it will possibly deny playing the game (yes the game is 99% pvp, 1% pve). U want Pve players in the council?

Edited May 19, 2019 by Qeight

[Qeight]

How exactly will the ''PvP Council'' be able to judge what is meta breaking or not if they dont play PvP matches? And most importantly, who will join the council if it will possibly deny playing the game (yes the game is 99% pvp, 1% pve). U want Pve players in the council?

That's why its a brainstorming thread and not alright dismiss stuff. If you had read through the other thread that you were so adamant in being open then you would have realized that this concern was brought up by someone.

In a normal game, competitive rules are laid out by a staff who aren't eligible for competitive play. Their interest is strictly in making a good and non-toxic gaming experience. In this proposal, the rule-making body is composed of players who have a vested interest in being or remaining the best. As stated, they would be picked from among the best PvP players. If those players are eligible for competitive play, we have to assume that they will make decisions with their own best interests in mind.

 

---

The second part of your comment was deleted, please don't repeat such thing. :)

[Hahahaka]

I would say this is a bad idea

can be easily manipulated

just because of the environment of this game

 

of cause you would pick people with high ranked

then how can you tell they are inter-independent?

what is the high rank environment of this game? they are from only few pvp guilds.

are they from the similar group? yes.

are they friends? probably yes.

only with these 2 feature can make any council/organization corrupted

[Nakofum]

Hi,

 

I will try to explain my opinion about your questions, this is only my opinion.

 

1-

How long can they stay on the council?

I think that the council should stay the same while they're going well, it means that players should maybe vote if the council should stay the same or not, each vote will need some explanation, you can't fire a council because they Don't ban the pokemon that counter your team. The council should recruit new members or maybe make changes but it needs a base stable.

What are the requirements?

The requirements should be a well experience of game, I thought about more than 1000hours, a well experience in pvp (I Don't know how to determinate this), and a proof of motivation, the willing to make the game better.

Should they be able to participate in ranked PvP while being on the council?

I think that every players in the council needs to play pvp, to understand the meta, to be able to know what is wrong, how to improve the system.

How would the split between Silver and Gold members look like?

It should be 50% players gold, 50% players silver, we need both point of view, meta on Silver isn't exactly the same as Gold, so Gold player need silver opinion and inversly.

 

2-

How does the council decide what Pokemon to sent into a suspect testing phase?

This is a reflexion which must be in agreement with 75% of the council, Staff will have the right of veto.

How would a suspect test look like (a special suspect ladder is out of question)?

2weeks to 1month of suspect test, it will be in ranked pvp, there is nothing better than test a changement on the pvp game itself, we will be able to analyze the reactions of players, and to adapt the evolution of suspect test in answer.

Who gets to vote after the suspect test is over?

50 ladder players of both server, council, staff. All vote need at least one explanation, we need to avoid a useless ban, or corruption.

 

3-

How much influence does staff have over the council?

Like I said before, the staff has a right of veto, if they think that the council does something wrong, they can interrupt a suspect test, or changes the council.

When can staffs interfere in the decision making process?

There will be a discord, where staff members and council will discuss, before take any decision.

 

Thank'u for listening to me, I repeat that this is only my opinion, hope you a good day.

 

Nakofum,

[Nechrit]

1. The first question is arguably the biggest roadblock. The whole dispute in previous threads being: should a player who is competing make the rule for the same competition? There might be a solution.

 

-Council members a re-elected every PvP season. If they are doing a good job, keep them.

 

-Requirements are a particularly interesting topic. This is mostly because of how society as a whole works nowadays, everything needs to be quantifiable and benchmarked. Hence why the majority might think only ladder players should be part of it. I believe this is wrong. You never know who is behind that '600 rating'. It might have been a team theory-crafted and built by friends, they might have people screen-sharing with them and what not. By no means I want to sound cocky or 'apply' for the position, but I am the perfect example of that. I rarely play myself, over the last 3 years I built countless teams for friends (still do for my Scarletian guildies ), screen-shared many times with them, few of which made me a proud senpai and made it to ladder. Most notably I unlocked guts Conkeldurr into the meta few years back, and my friend easily got ladder (focus punch version, back when drain punch was banned. Now i wish i never recommended that pokemon haha).

The only REAL and effective requirement in my opinion is experience in PRO, more specifically in that particular meta: 200 PvP games should suffice. Rating doesnt matter. So if you want to apply, show that you at least know the kind of pokemons that are played. For the decision, i would say a single forum thread where anyone can write a text about their experience (with proof of the 200 games previous season) should suffice. Afterwards community decides. Guild-vote caps might have to be set in place, to overcome the 'bigger guild better result' issue we are currently facing in other aspects of the game. Maybe limit vote per guild to 5 players and every guild elects maximum 1 possible council member?

 

-Absolutely not. Or well, you can partecipate, but no rewards allowed. Ladder is out of the question, when you see you are close play some fun shiny team instead.

 

-Why does it matter? It's the same game.

 

2. They are naturally decided. See talonflame back in the days, conkeldurr and manaphy nowadays. Once WAY too many justified complaints are risen, the council investigates the issue. Emphasis non 'justified': chansey will never be banned, im sorry.

 

- ^

-Pretty much every single pokemon with every moveset/ability combination has been tested over and over in the past 20+ years. The only issue is that PRO lacks several things, because broken or missing, which makes it so some pokes lack reliable answers. It's down to the council to discuss it and test it. When a Pokemon can single handedly melt everything because every switch-in gets 2HKO bar 2-3 pokemons, while real games have the proper answers (which we are missing), then the answer is kinda straight-forward. Hint hint guess which pokemon ;)

-Council gets to vote. Staff members will oversee the entire thing to make sure nothing shady happens, and maybe ladder players (or a person they vouch for instead) might have a word.

-no idea.

 

3. A Discord section is all that is required, so that council can discuss there. Hidden from everyone ofcourse. When a new Pokemon is under investigation, a new channel is open under that section and people can give their input/show tests. Before an actual ban, a 2-3 days forum thread can be opened where people are free to comment, of course things like 'HEY but if you run Pokemon X you can counter Y' are ignored.

 

-Its a trust game, both ways. If people voted by the community decide to ban Caterpie, because there is no real answer in the game for that insanely strong little green worm, and none in the last-phase thread finds a real solution, then be it. Caterpie is banned from PvP.

 

-Always as long as they provide good points with all the required information. Going against a butterfree ban because they like the pokemon is nonsene.

 

 

 

My 2 cents. That being said, I am heavily against a PvP Council: because of the drama it can create, and because i am afraid people will vote the 'famous' over the 'capable'. But if you believe you can make it work, that's how i think it should be set up.

[Cobramk]

1. How are council members picked?
   
   • How long can they stay on the council?
     
   • They can stay forever, until they leave. Have like 10 councils is useless and need player active since years and how know meta very well.
     
   • What are the requirements? Expriment in PRO PvP and showdown one (know tier and have like +200 rating at each season.
     
   • Should they be able to participate in ranked PvP while being on the council? Why not ? They need to discover new meta during a new pokemon release, like Shaymin unban, why give restriction to a tier council to stop a thing he love ?
     
   • How would the split between Silver and Gold members look like? For example, i play on 2 servers so i know each meta. Tbh, 5 tier councils from Silver and 5 from Gold will be good.
     

[*]How are suspect tests decided?

• How does the council decide what Pokemon to sent into a suspect testing phase? If player complain a lot about this Pokemon and we didnt found any commun counter, we test this pokemon outside the meta and see what happens.
  
• How would a suspect test look like (a special suspect ladder is out of question)? No, a daily tourney, you can play like one tourney with this mon and an another one without.
  
• Who gets to vote after the suspect test is over? In PvP section and see opinion with argument.
  
• What are the requirements to vote? More than 200 rating, sure but possible with a good winrate.
  

[*]What would council members need from staff in particular to make it successful? Just moves (so much illegal move got added since 1/2 years).

• How much influence does staff have over the council? PvP staff have importance but PvE staff didnt, you can only ask staff opinion who do PvP.
  
• When can staffs interfere in the decision making process? Speak with tier council and with regular player who have reach ladder or a good winrate/a lot of rating.
  

[Abygaelle]

Hi, I think its really hard to create a PvP council

 

1. How are council members picked?
   
   • How long can they stay on the council? I think 6 month is good
     
   • What are the requirements? Get any sanction for cheat/boosting/Guild boosting/Use ban Poke or forbidden moove/abilities, then any sanction with Pvp should be fine
     
   • Should they be able to participate in ranked PvP while being on the council? Sure they have too, and i think they should be active player in PvP. Inactive in Pvp during a month = kick. How can you judge and make rules, if you never see what happen in fight.
     
   • How would the split between Silver and Gold members look like? 5 Silver and 5 gold. They choose One leader and one Co leader with vote. Leader and Co-Leader have to be from gold and silver. impossible to get the 2 from Silver or from Gold.
     

I want to say something about this, players shouldn't be choose by the pvp ladder. Cause we all know one thing, its not cause you are in the ladder during x month that you are good or you get good knowledge in PvP. The members should be choose, on some points, first of all and its the most important they have to get different main pvp style : balance, Hyper offense, Staller,

Original player ( = player who don't use Pokemons in the most used list ). Cause if you get 6 staller main on 10, rules will always go in favor of stallers). i think Staff should choose members after a postulation and a discussion about PvP in general (for test their knowledge). And at the end, some PvP match to test them. Sorr but a men who win only with a Togekiss timid scarf and flinch, all the match has nothing to do in this council.

1. How are suspect tests decided?
   
   • How does the council decide what Pokemon to sent into a suspect testing phase? By vote, if there is an egality, leader choose between the 2 options
     
   • How would a suspect test look like (a special suspect ladder is out of question)? Open a topic, ask the players questions about this Pokemon and listen to the Return of PvP players and the members of council when they do PvP.
     
   • Who gets to vote after the suspect test is over? Council they are here to decide
     
   • What are the requirements to vote? Players should not vote, they are only here to give their feeback. A player is 90% not honest when he take about his own experience. Point of view of 10 experiments players will be 10000% more useful then 400 vote. If they are salty, they are not honest, then the poll is distorted
     

For example a player make a topic about unban dugtrio, then council discuss about it. if they agree with player, they can create a new topic to open phase test with this dugtrio or unban him directly if they think, this rules is just useless and won't change nothing. A staff members say yes or No.

1. What would council members need from staff in particular to make it successful?
   
   • How much influence does staff have over the council? They have to watch and give their agreement when they will decide on a new rules.
     
   • When can staffs interfere in the decision making process? When the staff think its necessary.
     

Edited May 19, 2019 by Abygaelle

[Komata]

First of all, thanks to all Staff members to give us the opportunity.

 

Lets start with the questions:

1. How are council members picked?

This is one of the difficult ones, Basically you cant use the ladder as a reference. You need People with a really good knowledge about POKEMON.

Honestly, I think the best way is create an open recluitment, like an interview with questions about the way they would work in a council. After that, a workshop where Staff who will participate in the council can supervise how the players work. (Like a workshop).

 

How long they can stay on the council? Indefinately. (you can be kicked for inactivity or toxicity). (as not all the people knows talk with other in a team way). The Council should look for the game and only for the game.

 

What are the requieriments? Not specified. You cant take in mind the ladder, as several people just copy and copy what other uses. You need to found a way to evaluate people according with their knowledge.

 

Should they be able to participate in ranked PvP while being on the council? Of course, otherwise you can't talk about the metagame.

How would the split between Silver and Gold members look like? I think this doesnt matter, the metagame is the same. And I'm sure that We have pretty capable people in both servers.

 

2. How are suspect tests decided?

Basically when a new pokemon will be released and when a pokemon is much used than others. For example conkeldurr wirh the 30% is debatable. Or Manaphy when he appears on the game, or Shaymin.

 

How does the council decide what Pokemon to sent into a suspect testing phase? As I said previously. Basically any Pokemon who Centralize the metagame, as OLD OLD Talonflame, Ghotiele or Blaziken.

 

How would a suspect test look like (a special suspect ladder is out of question)? It will be a debate between the Council members where the council discuss about the data that we have. Damages, Counters, Answers, Moves, Etc. (For example how many answers have Manaphy? Have any swich in? Are they on the meta? Or ar the only answer for him a specific answer? (I mean a poke wich only utility is stop 1 pokemon and is useless vs the rest of the metagame, for example Cofragigus, wich means that you can stop conkeldur but then you are playing 5 vs 6 if the enemy is not running Conkeldurr).

 

Also, when you ban a Pokemon for any tier (In this case, the only 1 tier we have), the pokemon will be banned from PvP meanwhile the Council takes his final decision. (You can see how the metagame evolve when you retire one pokemon, and maybe you can found a new broken one, or just a better metagame where more pokemon are usable and there are no one with No-Coounters.

Who gets to vote after the suspect test is over?

Here we have 2 Options: or lets Council vote and decide what ban or not. Or make a Poll with some previous requisites, for example, as Pro do time ago, You need at least 100 points in ranked to vote and only 1 vote per player.

 

But if honest, I preffer that the council decide and limitate the community to talk about who pokemon their think that deserve a Ban. then council can study each case and decide.

 

(For example, community talk about unban Dugtrio as now we have team preview) then, the council study Dugtrio, how it will affect the metagame, counters, playstyles, etc.)

 

3. What would council members need from staff in particular to make it successful?

We will need a platform where talk with Staff (The staff who will participate in the council or the staff who will give support to the council).

Staff can provide the stadistic (Most used Pokemons for exaple, Maybe staff can share when a Pokemon will be implemented, in a short term, to allow the council to start working with the new Pokemon). (Work with the new Pokemon is not play with him or something like that, just study and talk about how this pokemon will affect the metagame). For example, How Zapdos will affect the metagame?

 

How much influence does staff have over the council?

Staff members can read and participate in the debate. (Of course in a Team way, as every player who participe in the council is equal than others).

 

When can staffs interfere in the decision making process?

Staff can participate and share their points, but the final decision (Poll) what the council takes is definitive.

 

(For example, we have a council with 5 silver players, 5 gold players and 5 staff members, if "Ban Manaphy" gets mayority then manaphy will be banned).

 

(Of course the metagame changes all the time, with every single change the game do, so if for example, Staff decide to open Legendaries Dogs (Catch the 3) or maybe the staff makes a really good spawn for snivy, then we can re-open a case, in this case, Manaphy.

 

Other example is Dugtrio, as Staff add Team Preview you can predict Dugtrio same as Magnezone (Of course they have differences). As the team preview change the way how people play, then council can re-open this Case.

 

First of all, Thanks you if you read the entire post. Sorry for my English, i tryed to write as better as I could.

 

I hope this Idea will be discuss in a good way.

 

If you have any question about my system or want to add something please, let me know.

 

Best Regards,

Yakuzah / Komata

[Smokincatcher]

1. How are council members picked? Maybe after an application, then staff decide
   
   • How long can they stay on the council? as long as they are active in pvp
     
   • What are the requirements? Should be ofc active and good pvp players 1st, and imo not rain, full stall or togekiss players ( fine if they are able to reach ladder with something else ) 1000/1500 hours minimum and at least once in ladder or a proof showing the player is experienced enough to be credible, and maybe minimum 20 year old, we cant have a kid council
     
   • Should they be able to participate in ranked PvP while being on the council? i dont see why they shouldnt
     
   • How would the split between Silver and Gold members look like? 50/50 if possibl, but maybe silver will have more experienced players who will apply for this
     

[*]How are suspect tests decided?

• How does the council decide what Pokemon to sent into a suspect testing phase? maybe after a topic asking a ban or deban as brainstorming, and maybe then council vote, or maybe with staff members also
  
• How would a suspect test look like (a special suspect ladder is out of question)?
  
• Who gets to vote after the suspect test is over?
  
• What are the requirements to vote? maybe at least 1000 hours, and at least once 250 rating
  

[*]What would council members need from staff in particular to make it successful?

• How much influence does staff have over the council? Staff must have some influence to avoid possible corruption imo
  
• When can staffs interfere in the decision making process? maybe a staff vote to see if mostly are for or against a decision