Pokemon World Championships 2015 Discussion

[Slife]

The Pokemon World Championships for VGC 2015 kicks off today in Boston, Massachusetts! This is the Battle Center after all, and with the largest official Pokemon-sponsored battling competition taking place as we speak, there will no doubt be plenty to discuss!

Below are some resources that are relevant for this years' Worlds, if you want to know more information about the format, the competitors, streaming schedule, and where to watch all the action!

2015 Pokémon Video Game World Championship Preview | Pokemon.com

2015 Pokémon World Championships Preview - Nugget Bridge

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2015_Pokemon_Video_Game_World_Championships

Twitch

Tournament Results

http://www.pokemon.com/us/play-pokemon/worlds/2015/teams/masters/

 

[Zeb]

I caught a bit of it earlier on my phone, but I was busy a lot of the day so didn't see much. Hoping tomorrow I'll get more time!

 

[Necrozma]

I watched the first battle. I was impressed by this Kotaru's Heart Swap on Smeargle strategy.

It's a shame he lost.

 

[Zeb]

Spoiler

I was super busy and missed pretty much all of saturday and sunday.. but looking at what it ended up as on this image (found it on Twitter) I frankly don't care about missing them cos it looked boring as hell looking at the teams lol

 

[Almonds]

Spoiler

I was super busy and missed pretty much all of saturday and sunday.. but looking at what it ended up as on this image (found it on Twitter) I frankly don't care about missing them cos it looked boring as hell looking at the teams lol

...seriously? Mega Kanga? Landorous? Cressy? So much for variety.

 

[Zeb]

...seriously? Mega Kanga? Landorous? Cressy? So much for variety.

Yeah, Kang + Landorus-Therian on every team. Cresselia on 4/5, Heatran, Amoonguss, Thundurus and Aegislash on 3/5. So boring.

It's pretty funny that VGC '14 was restricted only to the Kalos Dex and had much more variety than this years National Dex. There was 11 unique species for '15 in that top 5 image, compared with 22 for last year's. (There was probably lots of variety overall in the tournament, but the top five being such repetitive cookie cutter stuff is the disappointing part.)

I was talking to Winterdaze about it earlier this morning, and I said maybe next year they'll ban the top 20-25 most used Pokemon for the year's VGC run, like they have done for a few Battle Spot tournaments. It would certainly give a bit of a different scene at least.

 

[Almonds]

...seriously? Mega Kanga? Landorous? Cressy? So much for variety.

Yeah, Kang + Landorus-Therian on every team. Cresselia on 4/5, Heatran, Amoonguss, Thundurus and Aegislash on 3/5. So boring.

It's pretty funny that VGC '14 was restricted only to the Kalos Dex and had much more variety than this years National Dex. There was 11 unique species for '15 in that top 5 image, compared with 22 for last year's. (There was probably lots of variety overall in the tournament, but the top five being such repetitive cookie cutter stuff is the disappointing part.)

I was talking to Winterdaze about it earlier this morning, and I said maybe next year they'll ban the top 20-25 most used Pokemon for the year's VGC run, like they have done for a few Battle Spot tournaments. It would certainly give a bit of a different scene at least.

That should really happen D: Along with variety, the Pachirisu syndrome was really amazing last year. Banning certain pokemon allows for others to shine.

That being said... I hope they do another ban on the top 25 most-used pokemon again on Battle Spot. I am so sick of getting matched with the Genies 99% of the time. AND Heatran as well.

 

[Life]

I saw that image late yesterday and wasn't sure whether to laugh or sigh. I normally try to watch one or two matches each year, since I like watching the strategy from each side, but probably won't be watching this year unless I get really bored. One of the biggest reasons I've become disinterested with competitive battling now is because whenever I'd try to find recommendations, it'd essentially be "use these super common pokemon".

I dunno. Just not very fun when everyone is using the same pokemon.

 

[Chibster]

One of the biggest reasons I've become disinterested with competitive battling now is because whenever I'd try to find recommendations, it'd essentially be "use these super common pokemon".

I dunno. Just not very fun when everyone is using the same pokemon.

I can't agree with you more. Where's the fun if you can't really use your favorite Pokemon that aren't OU?

 

[UB-01 Kenobi]

One of the biggest reasons I've become disinterested with competitive battling now is because whenever I'd try to find recommendations, it'd essentially be "use these super common pokemon".

I dunno. Just not very fun when everyone is using the same pokemon.

I can't agree with you more. Every single person is guaranteed to have a Landorus, Heatran, Garchomp, Tyranitar, Charizard, or Cresselia in their team. Where's the fun if you want can't really use your favorite Pokemon that aren't OU?

The fun is in the mind games, the competition, etc. Your team is just the tools you are competing with, the fun comes from the battle of wits between two opponents. There are only a certain number of viable pokemon, bringing something else is asking to lose. If you were in a woodcutting competition and you were given the choice between a buck saw and a chainsaw, everybody who placed would have been using the chainsaw

 

[Life]

One of the biggest reasons I've become disinterested with competitive battling now is because whenever I'd try to find recommendations, it'd essentially be "use these super common pokemon".

I dunno. Just not very fun when everyone is using the same pokemon.

I can't agree with you more. Every single person is guaranteed to have a Landorus, Heatran, Garchomp, Tyranitar, Charizard, or Cresselia in their team. Where's the fun if you want can't really use your favorite Pokemon that aren't OU?

The fun is in the mind games, the competition, etc. Your team is just the tools you are competing with, the fun comes from the battle of wits between two opponents. There are only a certain number of viable pokemon, bringing something else is asking to lose. If you were in a woodcutting competition and you were given the choice between a buck saw and a chainsaw, everybody who placed would have been using the chainsaw

I guess it's simply the mindset I can't get with - I've always played the pokemon games treating my team as teammates, not tools. Granted they're just pixels, the anime and story lines have gotten to me. I completely understand that some pokemon are good and some pokemon aren't, but there are too many players with the mentality of "anyone who does not use 6 of these 10 pokemon is a n00b and can't play" that I simply can't appreciate the meta. Though perhaps those are just the types I people I tend to come across, and are actually a small minority? I don't frequent smogon or anything like that, of course.

I do agree that there's fun in the mind games and competition, but when so many people are sourcing the same minds, the competition gets stale and repetitive. Of course I can see why some people like the meta, but it's just not my cup of tea. (Not to mention it's quite time consuming, trying to acquire all the items and IV bread and EV train handfuls of different pokemon.)

 

[Slife]

While I agree that the lack of variety made the Masters Division Top Cut less interesting to watch compared to previous years, I think there's a reasonable explanation for that (besides the one that Glory Blaze explained). First, there was something unique about this years' Masters Top Cut, which is the fact that 7 of the Top 8 (and all of the top 5) players are from Japan. Although this is obvious, it's an important detail because Japan is known to play really conservatively, and to use standard Pokemon; unique/gimmick sets don't usually find a place at the top of their metagame (with the unique exception of the Japanese Sand Team that picked up popularity around the world towards the end of the season).

As shown by the Top 5 teams from the previous years, team variety is more likely when the finals are more diverse country-wise. The rest of the tournament, as Zeb said, did have some interesting Pokemon choices: Aurorus, Arcanine, Azumarill, Gothitelle, Smeargle, and Porygon-2 to name a few. Even Entei and Volcarona aren't seen too often but still made it to Top Cut. And that's only the Masters Division! This year the "Pachirisu moment" happened in the Seniors Final, when Mark "Machampion" McQuillan used a unique and unexpected Machamp to win the Seniors' title. The Seniors Top Cut in general had more team diversity than the Masters, and the Juniors Divison even more than the Seniors. Regardless of how much the age factor is related to the level of competitiveness, and thus how "standard" a team is, the importance of having a diverse Top Cut and Finals is still apparent.

 

[Almonds]

There are only a certain number of viable pokemon, bringing something else is asking to lose.

Asking to lose? That's really offensive :/ So we shouldn't be using pokemon we like and know best if it's not viable? Nobody brings a pokemon asking to lose. By your logic, last year's winner brought Pachirisu to the tournament - asking to lose - but got lucky and won?

 

[Lanstar]

Looked at the top 5... If this is the state of the metagame right now, where these are the few Pokemon that were successful for winning, I seriously would call it unbalanced. Either that, or the game has been incredibly over-analyzed to a point that the winning strategies are way overly defined.

If anything, I seriously hope Gamefreak is looking into this, as I see the monodiversity as quite a threat to the state of competition in the game. Matches with a supermajority of the same pokemon are really boring to watch, and I think they bring down the interest in newcomers playing competitively. I know that it made me avoid playing in the Battle Spot competitions.

 

[UB-01 Kenobi]

There are only a certain number of viable pokemon, bringing something else is asking to lose.

Asking to lose? That's really offensive :/ So we shouldn't be using pokemon we like and know best if it's not viable? Nobody brings a pokemon asking to lose. By your logic, last year's winner brought Pachirisu to the tournament - asking to lose - but got lucky and won?

Yes, bringing something nonviable is asking to lose. You absolutely should not bring Pokémon you "like and know best" if they are not viable in the format you are playing in. When I play OU, I will not bring, like, Aggron even though I love him. I like to win. Losing isn't fun for me.

LOL, Park's Pachirisu is not the example to use. Pachirisu is viable in the bring 6 pick 4 doubles format due to its unique set of tools (specifically Nuzzle + Follow Me + Super Fang). Sejun Park knew this, likely due to both familiarity with the metagame and extensive testing beforehand (iirc he said that he was considering Amoonguss but chose Pachirisu due to fitting his team's synergy better). Just because something is uncommon doesn't make it unviable - they overlap a lot, but they're entirely different things. Park is a skilled player and a skilled planner; he selected a tool that went well with his kit.

 

[Almonds]

There are only a certain number of viable pokemon, bringing something else is asking to lose.

Asking to lose? That's really offensive :/ So we shouldn't be using pokemon we like and know best if it's not viable? Nobody brings a pokemon asking to lose. By your logic, last year's winner brought Pachirisu to the tournament - asking to lose - but got lucky and won?

Yes, bringing something nonviable is asking to lose. You absolutely should not bring Pokémon you "like and know best" if they are not viable in the format you are playing in. When I play OU, I will not bring, like, Aggron even though I love him. I like to win. Losing isn't fun for me.

LOL, Park's Pachirisu is not the example to use. Pachirisu is viable in the bring 6 pick 4 doubles format due to its unique set of tools (specifically Nuzzle + Follow Me + Super Fang). Sejun Park knew this, likely due to both familiarity with the metagame and extensive testing beforehand (iirc he said that he was considering Amoonguss but chose Pachirisu due to fitting his team's synergy better). Just because something is uncommon doesn't make it unviable - they overlap a lot, but they're entirely different things. Park is a skilled player and a skilled planner; he selected a tool that went well with his kit.

Well if you say so. Moving on.

But it would be really boring as hell if the next top players of the World Championships all had the same team. Like, why am I wasting time watching a Kangaskhan mega evolve, ten times a day? Did everyone really have to use Landorus? There's over 700 pokemon to choose from and 5 pokemon repeatedly appearing in everybody's team means something is broken here. Balance or whatever. GF does keep an eye on the competitive environment (since they did add the Fairy type to nerf dragons) so I do hope they fix this in the future and let a lot more pokemon appear for the better.

 

[UB-01 Kenobi]

There are only a certain number of viable pokemon, bringing something else is asking to lose.

Asking to lose? That's really offensive :/ So we shouldn't be using pokemon we like and know best if it's not viable? Nobody brings a pokemon asking to lose. By your logic, last year's winner brought Pachirisu to the tournament - asking to lose - but got lucky and won?

Yes, bringing something nonviable is asking to lose. You absolutely should not bring Pokémon you "like and know best" if they are not viable in the format you are playing in. When I play OU, I will not bring, like, Aggron even though I love him. I like to win. Losing isn't fun for me.

LOL, Park's Pachirisu is not the example to use. Pachirisu is viable in the bring 6 pick 4 doubles format due to its unique set of tools (specifically Nuzzle + Follow Me + Super Fang). Sejun Park knew this, likely due to both familiarity with the metagame and extensive testing beforehand (iirc he said that he was considering Amoonguss but chose Pachirisu due to fitting his team's synergy better). Just because something is uncommon doesn't make it unviable - they overlap a lot, but they're entirely different things. Park is a skilled player and a skilled planner; he selected a tool that went well with his kit.

Well if you say so. Moving on.

But it would be really boring as hell if the next top players of the World Championships all had the same team. Like, why am I wasting time watching a Kangaskhan mega evolve, ten times a day? Did everyone really have to use Landorus? There's over 700 pokemon to choose from and 5 pokemon repeatedly appearing in everybody's team means something is broken here. Balance or whatever. GF does keep an eye on the competitive environment (since they did add the Fairy type to nerf dragons) so I do hope they fix this in the future and let a lot more pokemon appear for the better.

To each their own, I suppose. In chess, every player has the exact same pieces but it's one of the most impressively complex and intricate games there are. Then again, not many people outside of chess players would watch a chess match. Maybe high level competitive Pokémon is the same way - stuff like Nuzlockes or w/e are more accessible to people who don't play competitively. Idk, I still would like to see Pokémon make it as an eSport

 

[Osprey]

To each their own, I suppose. In chess, every player has the exact same pieces but it's one of the most impressively complex and intricate games there are. Then again, not many people outside of chess players would watch a chess match. Maybe high level competitive Pokémon is the same way - stuff like Nuzlockes or w/e are more accessible to people who don't play competitively. Idk, I still would like to see Pokémon make it as an eSport

Chess can work like that because although each player has the exact same pieces with the same capabilities, the possibilities for strategy are nearly endless. When everyone playing Pokemon is using the exact same kinds of Pokemon, all with similar EV's, IV's, and movepools, it doesn't work like chess at all. You select, breed and train a Pokemon for a specific purpose in a team, and unlike chess, it can't be rearranged in the middle of battle. A sweeper is a sweeper. It can't be switched to a support role like you can in chess, because that's just not how Pokemon works.

 

[UB-01 Kenobi]

To each their own, I suppose. In chess, every player has the exact same pieces but it's one of the most impressively complex and intricate games there are. Then again, not many people outside of chess players would watch a chess match. Maybe high level competitive Pokémon is the same way - stuff like Nuzlockes or w/e are more accessible to people who don't play competitively. Idk, I still would like to see Pokémon make it as an eSport

Chess can work like that because although each player has the exact same pieces with the same capabilities, the possibilities for strategy are nearly endless. When everyone playing Pokemon is using the exact same kinds of Pokemon, all with similar EV's, IV's, and movepools, it doesn't work like chess at all. You select, breed and train a Pokemon for a specific purpose in a team, and unlike chess, it can't be rearranged in the middle of battle. A sweeper is a sweeper. It can't be switched to a support role like you can in chess, because that's just not how Pokemon works.

Obviously the analogy isn't perfect, but a Pokémon battle isn't quite as rigid as you might think - at least not in tourney play. Maybe on the ladder, idk.

The point was that you don't watch competitive Pokémon if you want to see all your favorites get representation, you watch the anime for that. You watch competitive Pokémon to enjoy the mind games and competition