3 Stock 8 Min Ruleset at Big House 4 Major

[sneakytako]

So, apparently Big House 4 is going to be 3 stock 8 min ruleset.

I figured before I started flipping out I just wanted to get everyone's opinion here, away from his thread.

So what does everyone think?

Are people going to run this ruleset to try it out?

Do people like this change?

How does this affect the meta?

I'm worried that such a major change is going to take place first at a National, please feel free to express your opinions here.

 

[The_Altrox]

Sounds like the battles would be pretty fast. Personally, I don't have a problem with the change, but it sounds like something that ought to be tested, and testing it at a tournament is one way to do that.

 

[Strong Badam]

Hey, so there are a decent number of reasons we're gonna run 3 stock at Big House 4 but here's the main gist of things.

The Big House will always treat Melee and Project M equally in terms of production quality, tournament format (given entrant counts allow it), promotion, etc.. In addition, at The Big House, we employ a large number of logistical time savers in order to run both games efficiently that quite frankly, other tournaments don't do. Despite this, Rob (Juggleguy) and I both had reservations regarding how efficiently we could run PM this year due to our projections on attendance for both games as well as our own monitoring of tournament completion time at other events. To put it simply, the average PM match takes longer than the average Melee match (the reasons for this aren't particularly relevant to us as TOs, we have to address it regardless), despite there being approximately 0 timeouts. To ensure that we're able to give Project M the treatment it deserves with regards to stream time, tournament format, Bo5 Sets, etc. etc., we've decided to run 3 stock. I ran 3 stock during pools at MELEE-FC Legacy in order to make up lost time, and had no complaints from any of the players at the event.
Please don't let the ruleset cloud your judgment on whether or not to attend. The Big House is the best Smash tournament series, and if you ask anyone who has attended a previous Big House they'll tell you the same. We're making this decision because with our experience and expertise in TOing we feel it's the best route to take. We hope you understand and have a great time at our event. As a high level Project M player myself, the stock # should definitely not prevent our ruleset from still determining the better player.

Thanks,
Strong Bad

 

[Mr.Random]

Hey, so there are a decent number of reasons we're gonna run 3 stock at Big House 4 but here's the main gist of things.

The Big House will always treat Melee and Project M equally in terms of production quality, tournament format (given entrant counts allow it), promotion, etc.. In addition, at The Big House, we employ a large number of logistical time savers in order to run both games efficiently that quite frankly, other tournaments don't do. Despite this, Rob (Juggleguy) and I both had reservations regarding how efficiently we could run PM this year due to our projections on attendance for both games as well as our own monitoring of tournament completion time at other events. To put it simply, the average PM match takes longer than the average Melee match (the reasons for this aren't particularly relevant to us as TOs, we have to address it regardless), despite there being approximately 0 timeouts. To ensure that we're able to give Project M the treatment it deserves with regards to stream time, tournament format, Bo5 Sets, etc. etc., we've decided to run 3 stock. I ran 3 stock during pools at MELEE-FC Legacy in order to make up lost time, and had no complaints from any of the players at the event.
Please don't let the ruleset cloud your judgment on whether or not to attend. The Big House is the best Smash tournament series, and if you ask anyone who has attended a previous Big House they'll tell you the same. We're making this decision because with our experience and expertise in TOing we feel it's the best route to take. We hope you understand and have a great time at our event. As a high level Project M player myself, the stock # should definitely not prevent our ruleset from still determining the better player.

Thanks,
Strong Bad

Dang are recoveries that broken lol. On a serious note it's fine.

 

[King of Hoboz]

Understandable, I still prefer the 4 stock format since it provides a good amount of time to enjoy each match effectively.

Honestly, I don't mind this. I'd go to Big House 4 still regardless.

 

[PMS | Tink-er]

How much longer is the average PM set compared to the average Melee set, @ Strong Badam ?

 

[820]

What a terrible knee jerk reaction if this is just from CEO. We saw 4 stocks at SKTAR and Apex no problem. This is detrimental to the game's development and hopefully doesn't become the standard. Certain characters like Lucario and Wario have certain traits that are better used in 4 stock games. I know you said this shouldn't cloud our decision, but I really feel like this is holding back the game, especially at a tournament that, in my eyes, was THE Project M tournament. I understand the reasoning, I guess, but I hope ultimately things can be reconsidered and Project M can be displayed at it's fullest potential in October.

 

[himemiya]

So, apparently Big House 4 is going to be 3 stock 8 min ruleset.

I figured before I started flipping out I just wanted to get everyone's opinion here, away from his thread.

So what does everyone think?

Are people going to run this ruleset to try it out?

Do people like this change?

How does this affect the meta?

I'm worried that such a major change is going to take place first at a National, please feel free to express your opinions here.

If brawl players can deal with it so can you, regardless of game speed.

 

[shairn]

I tried the 3-stock ruleset at our PM weekly last tuesday (Some of you might have seen our stream) and, overall, I think it went well. The reaction from players wasn't bad, as they understood we had time constraints(Which it didn't completely solve, but that's on us). My one problem with the 3-stock ruleset is that while it works well for some longer matchups, more traditional melee matches (Marth vs Falco for example) that would already last a reasonable amount of time end up being too short. I think this shows the difference between the abilities of Melee vets and PM-buffed characters rather than a flaw in the 3-stock ruleset though, and considering most people play the new characters I don't think it's wrong to keep it. I don't see this as a permanent solution though - I'm all for rebalancing characters with top tier recoveries so that we don't need to cut off a stock.

 

[krazyzyko]

I don't mind. I've always thought that 4 stocks and 8 minutes are too long.

 

[Fortress]

I say go for it. Keeping traditional rulesets just for the sake of tradition is becoming stale, and leads to nothing but arguments about why change can't happen in regards to tournament rulesets (be it about stage lists, banning rules, or match format). I wish more people out there would be willing to experiment with their rules and break out of the 13-year-old mold that the competitive scene has sadly become stuck in. I'm catching enough flak in my own series about turning off PS1, Skyloft, and Skyworld.

More power to you, @ Strong Badam . Hopefully we see more TO's out there follow suit, and experiment more freely with the game. About time we saw more of this kind of behavior in the scene.

 

[himemiya]

I say go for it. Keeping traditional rulesets just for the sake of tradition is becoming stale, and leads to nothing but arguments about why change can't happen in regards to tournament rulesets (be it about stage lists, banning rules, or match format). I wish more people out there would be willing to experiment with their rules and break out of the 13-year-old mold that the competitive scene has sadly become stuck in. I'm catching enough flak in my own series about turning off PS1, Skyloft, and Skyworld.

More power to you, @ Strong Badam . Hopefully we see more TO's out there follow suit, and experiment more freely with the game. About time we saw more of this kind of behavior in the scene.

This, Apex isn't the only tournament we should live by. Plus correct me if I'm wrong but aren't the ruleset/stagelist made by backroomers and not some national tourney?

 

[Kati]

I'm really happy with this ruleset as it brings attention to the possibility of recoveries being too good. This will be a very interesting test.

 

[Fortress]

This, Apex isn't the only tournament we should live by. Plus correct me if I'm wrong but aren't the ruleset/stagelist made by backroomers and not some national tourney?

I catch **** here any time I try and do something that's not-Apex. I can't begin to describe how strongly I hate Apex standard, with its fifty-two active stage list.

 

[Master WGS]

I wish they'd go to 2 stocks. Every Smash game match takes too long.

I am absolutely in favor of a big tournament stepping up and changing things up to test them. We need to stop letting our games take forever.

 

[Fortress]

I wish they'd go to 2 stocks. Every Smash game match takes too long.

I am absolutely in favor of a big tournament stepping up and changing things up to test them. We need to stop letting our games take forever.

The tournament series I'm running is now 3-stocks, 5-minutes. You know things start to get intense when the timer starts actually ticking down. On top of that, I've got a killer page 2 bottom two rows of stages that I'm planning on running at my next monthly.

 

[Master WGS]

Godspeed @ Fortress .

 

[Fortress]

I'm a goddamn pioneer. APEX rules can bite me. There are like thirty other stages in this game that go untouched, and a ton of new dynamics and fun times gone because of them. I want to discover this game, and glad that people like @ Strong Badam can encourage people to break the mold.

 

[MonkUnit]

3 stocks 5 mins sounds like it would encourage running the timer out

 

[Fortress]

3 stocks 5 mins sounds like it would encourage running the timer out

That's what I thought, too, but my event isn't for another week, and I might go back to six like I originally said I'd be running.

 

[trash?]

shouldn't we be thinking this less like "this ruleset is too long to fit this modifiable game" and more "this game is too long to fit this modifiable ruleset"?

if the game allows for longer time and life per-stock that tournament length becomes a problem, should this not be addressed as a flaw?

 

[Master WGS]

Well, I think Melee has the same flaw, so unless we're looking to make things even faster than Melee (which I'm also fine with), I think the ruleset is an easier point to argue modifying.

 

[Fortress]

That's kind of how I see it, too. I don't see the problem in the rules changing to accommodate the game. It's fast enough at 3 stocks, slow enough at 4. Just the shakes. Adjusting the game speed would present the same problem for other rulesets. "Now it's too fast for 3 stocks, but too slow for 5 stocks".

 

[trash?]

I make that point less because of what PM was based off of, but what it simply is; something that can be easily changed when well-justified. changing rulesets have always felt like a bandage on the problem in smash games, a way to attempt balance without mucking about with the internal game. it's a workaround, effectively, and while it can work, it doesn't fix core issues.

if there's issue with stage usefulness and inbalance (where one MU will ALWAYS win in an 8-2 fashion), we shouldn't need to ban stages, we should just change those stages. honestly, not doing this is why I hate the stage lists given currently, because they mostly give advantages for characters who like battlefield and nobody else

 

[Fortress]

Okay, I can see what you're saying. I definitely agree about the stage list, get sick and tired of seeing the same ones over, and over, and over, and over.

 

[Master WGS]

@ trash?
Right, I don't think you're wrong, as much as we just don't know when the next official version of PM will be released. Tournament rulesets can change/adapt quickly - we have to wait for patches for real changes in the game to occur.

I do agree that it's on the PMBR staff to adjust their game accordingly for obvious flaws that are being rectified by rule changes. I just think that nobody wants to wait for them, and changing rulesets is something any TO can do NOW.

 

[Fortress]

I think you're both right, to be honest.

 

[DrinkingFood]

Top 8's running long is a problem in all of smash. Melee is slightly faster than PM, but only slightly, and it's much slower than other fighters. But it's only an issue when you are trying to run a bunch of other non-smash events at the same time, or when you want to do a huge number of entrants over two days with round robin pools, like BH4 is.

 

[kaizo13]

thank you based DeepKong

 

[Fortress]

Top 8's running long is a problem in all of smash. Melee is slightly faster than PM, but only slightly, and it's much slower than other fighters. But it's only an issue when you are trying to run a bunch of other non-smash events at the same time, or when you want to do a huge number of entrants over two days with round robin pools, like BH4 is.

Perfect for me lol. I'm running Ultra and Skullgirls as well.