ORAS NU C&C Index 2.0

marilli

With you
is a Forum Moderator Alumnusis a Community Contributor Alumnusis a Tiering Contributor Alumnusis a Top Contributor Alumnusis a Past SPL Championis a Former Other Tournament Circuit Champion
Can i ask something

Why does the QC just like, ignore pokemon that they think are bad instead of just posting just that. Or if you think the skeleton is bad say that too. Thats literally the only reason why Cradily took 2 and a half years to get its first gen 6 analysis ever.
 

Punchshroom

FISHIOUS REND MEGA SHARPEDO
is a Community Contributoris a Tiering Contributoris a Top Contributor
I imagine it has something to do with QC's inexperience with said Pokemon rather than a bad skeleton. Plus some mons which require an analysis solely by being part of the tier would take even longer since it can't be outright QC rejected, and it takes both a lot of experimentation and dedication to come up with ideal sets.
 

erisia

Innovative new design!
is a Site Content Manager Alumnusis a Forum Moderator Alumnusis a Community Contributor Alumnusis a Top Contributor Alumnusis a Smogon Media Contributor Alumnus
I think transparency is something we could still work on in the future though. Like, we could tell people on their analysis page that we're waiting for a suspect test to reach a conclusion, if we were put in that situation again. I have to admit thought that no-one really had any experience with Misdreavus and now that it's more viable we'll be able to get a much better picture of what the best set is or sets are, so the delay was worth it, but the lack of transparency wasn't, imo.
 

marilli

With you
is a Forum Moderator Alumnusis a Community Contributor Alumnusis a Tiering Contributor Alumnusis a Top Contributor Alumnusis a Past SPL Championis a Former Other Tournament Circuit Champion
More communication is exactly what I meant. I understand why it's annoying to QC bad Pokemon. I've QCed before. Things like ampahros and altaria basically wasting the analysis writer's time which could have all been avoided by just qc rejecting the analysis or just saying "we have to put this in queue because that's the law but please don't take it because we want to qc reject it if not for being NU"
 
Last edited:

boltsandbombers

i'm sorry mr. man
is a Site Content Manager Alumnusis a Social Media Contributor Alumnusis a Forum Moderator Alumnusis a Community Contributor Alumnusis a Top Contributor Alumnus
I'm not going to delete the posts above because they raise valid points which I will address with the QC team, but for everyone else and in the future this is not the place for open questions and complaints. If you have a question or complaint, take it up in PM with myself or Hootie.
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 1, Guests: 0)

Top