Do you want Apex to be 5 or 4 stocks?

[SheerMadness]

Might as well bring this up now.

 

[mixa]

I've been a big proponent of 4-stocks and that's going to be a rule in all of my tournaments going forward.

 

[SheerMadness]

Exactly why I'm making this. If there's an overwhelming majority for 5 stock it's gonna be extremely tough for him to just overrule an entire community's opinion.

 

[Skrlx]

Sheer, quit being a baby.


jk

 

[RockinRudy]

4 is nice but Rudy would be winning too quickly.​

​

 

[Nintendude]

What I think would be more productive is for attendees of Thanks for Playing 3 to comment on what they thought of the 4-stock tournament. So far, everyone who has talked to me personally said they didn't really notice the change.

 

[Cobrevolution]

i'm using my experience at thanks for playing 2 as well as the 4 stock games i play online as my own criteria

i do not feel time is an issue (playing matches on time/finding players is the larger problem, and we should be able to find a solution to this by apex) nor do i feel that the fewer stocks there are, the better a matchup for certain characters

i didn't notice the change until i lost a game or two and was like "**** that was my last stock?"
and i'd appreciate it if proponents don't accuse that of being wholly my fault - when you lose that 4th stock you tense up and straighten your back and go into 'let's ****ing do this' mode

aaaand then i heard "GAME SET!"
and was sad

 

[SheerMadness]

What I think would be more productive is for attendees of Thanks for Playing 3 to comment on what they thought of the 4-stock tournament. So far, everyone who has talked to me personally said they didn't really notice the change.

Indeed you do. This is a very threatening poll to your iron-fisted plans. It's natural you wouldn't be a fan of it.

 

[prisonchild]

I've been trying out four stocks lately in light of the potential changes, it took me a couple games to get used to but honestly I don't even feel a difference now.


personally I voted for cool with either, I don't feel too strongly one way or other.

 

[Nintendude]

I'd like for people to not think of the time-savings being the primary focus. Much of the support I have heard for 4-stocks is it keeps the pace of the game fresh and helps prevent any matches from dragging on. Faster paced = more exciting.

 

[Maliki]

5 stocks will always be best!

 

[Deleted member]

Six stocks, since you can see Isai's low res Link stock six times :3

 

[Sensei]

Somebody disable the poll creating option.

 

[The Star King]

More stocks, less variance is obviously a good thing. The reason not to have it would be time constraints. However, 64 has been shown to not take longer than the other two games. So 5 stocks is the logical choice.

 

[clubbadubba]

Didn't like 4 stock at TFP 2 because I wasn't used to it. Been playing a fair amount of 4 stock since then, and now I'm used to it, so it felt normal at TFP 3. Pretty sure everyone would be used to it if they started playing 4 stock instead of 5 regularly. I would agree that 5 stock is better than 4 from a competitive standpoint if the time is allowed, but I think there is also something to be said about matches dragging on to the point where viewers lose excitement. Doesn't matter either way for me.

Cobr your last loss didn't go quickly because of 4 stock, it was because I thrashed you in falcon dittos so fast you didn't know what happened

 

[Karajan]

Voted for 4 because **** sheer

 

[Zenyore]

i feel like 4 really doesnt give a good chance for comeback if you get a bad start

#5ORDIE

 

[Cobrevolution]

Cobr your last loss didn't go quickly because of 4 stock, it was because I thrashed you in falcon dittos so fast you didn't know what happened

i was thinking more about samus/falcon when i lost my jump cuz i was DI'ing...twice

poof, half my stocks right there

also, if you do anything regularly enough you'll get used to it. we could play bo1 regularly, too.

 

[bloodpeach]

1 stock, bo1, single elimination

 

[Sensei]

This poll is biased to 4 or 5 stocks only.

 

[O.o-RITH-o.O]

Brawl have 6 min games with 3 stocks
Melee have 2~4 minute games with 4 stocks
64 have 3~5 minute games with 5 stocks
i fail to see a good reason to chance that... 64 is a game that a single mistake can take a stock away, so you need more stocks in order to have more chances to comeback (and comebacks are a good thing in my opinion)

 

[Nintendude]

We could also embrace the fact that our game is very unforgiving instead of seeing it as a flaw that should be corrected.

 

[O.o-RITH-o.O]

Then we could embrace *** rules and have an extremely boring tournament with very defencive games and very rare nice combos because people will do the easyest thing to not take the chance to miss. Not to mention the number of pikachu's and kirby's will grow even higher and we'll often see good players getting knocked out by ok players that will over absuse the unforgiviness of the game.

 

[SheerMadness]

Embrace 5 stocks instead of seeing it as a flaw that needs to be corrected. The less variance the better.

Plus it's pretty clear what the majority of the community wants.

Your renegade TO act isn't going to continue to be tolerated if you keep dismissing the community's opinions.

 

[O.o-RITH-o.O]

that been said, the change from 5 to 4 stocks will not chance the world... you could do as a test, if people don't like it, change it back !

 

[clubbadubba]

Very few people who have participated in 4 stock tournaments have responded so far to that poll, of the ones that have it is split 50/50 between 5 stock and 4 stock/ don't care

 

[prisonchild]

I played a couple five stock matches after playing with four for a while and it felt like a marathon. I think I might be leaning towards four stocks.

 

[MrMarbles]

Then we could embrace *** rules and have an extremely boring tournament with very defencive games and very rare nice combos because people will do the easyest thing to not take the chance to miss. Not to mention the number of pikachu's and kirby's will grow even higher and we'll often see good players getting knocked out by ok players that will over absuse the unforgiviness of the game.

i think we are overestimating the impact that one stock has here. The best players will win the most matches no matter the stock count

 

[SheerMadness]

Marbles, my Yoshi want his 5 stocks. He needs them vs all the b tier Kirbies and Pikas running around.

In order for my mid-tier character to overcome the poor match ups I need more time to outplay my opponent.

 

[Nintendude]

What you actually need is less time for the opponent to make a comeback after you pull off one of your cool Fair combos.

 

[SheerMadness]

That's definitely not the case. I can almost guarantee you Frogles' Ness, Jaime's Samus (both of whom agreed in the skype chat) or any other top mid/low tier main feel the same way.

We want less variance. Were not worried about blowing a lead. We just need more time to make a comeback in awful match ups if we get down.

 

[SheerMadness]

A$ appears to be an exception though. Not sure why a Link main of all chars would want less stocks lol.

And yah sorry for double post it wouldnt let me edit.

 

[clubbadubba]

insert confused gandolf with the caption "Link main?"

 

[meowmeowrainbowkitty]

If you look at votes, Isai says 5 :O

teemo.


Edit: And personally, I'd wait to also hear what the 4-stock tourney people say.
That, and maybe we can do 5 stocks, but change some other thing so that matches don't take 15min. ... or even 10 min. I think the time/camping aspect was the biggest (explicit) problem.

 

[bloodpeach]

4 stock vs 5 stock isn't really that big of a difference one you get used to playing it. 4 stock tourney felt fine.

Also, the high-variance argument is dumb. If high variance is so much better, we should switch to japanese format. Think of the time savings!

Low-variance argument is also dumb. It boils down to "I like low variance matches and I don't care how long it takes," which of course means we should all be playing 99 stock matches. Coincidentally, no one in this camp seems to have ever been involved in running a tournament in any capacity.

 

[DMoogle]

A$ appears to be an exception though. Not sure why a Link main of all chars would want less stocks lol.

And yah sorry for double post it wouldnt let me edit.

If I have a main, it's Link, but I don't consider myself a Link main. I play all characters regularly, except Yoshi. I just tend to play Link a little more than everyone else, and I think it's a lot of fun to use him in tournaments, since it's, well, difficult to win with him.

As for the variance issue: less variance is NOT, I repeat, NOT always better. This is a common debate in the poker world as well. If variance is too low, then it will discourage inferior players from playing and entering tournaments. People like the excitement of wondering where they'll place in a tournament, and higher variance can add to that excitement. Of course, on the flip side, too high variance will never let anyone paint an accurate picture that represents who is the most skillful. I personally believe the sweetspot is 4 stocks, not 5.

Oh, and clubba's correct that higher variance favors inferior players and characters.

 

[SheerMadness]

Oh, and clubba's correct that higher variance favors inferior players and characters.

We already went over this in the other thread. Higher variance favors lesser skilled players. Not always inferior characters. You can't just blindly make that statement.

My Yoshi wants less variance and more time to outplay a b tier Kirby player. I want/need those extra stocks to overcome the god awful match up.

But I'll agree less variance isn't ALWAYS better. Obviously no one wants 10 stock matches.

Anyway for anyone wondering A$ has been playing on 4 stock ever since I can remember (so back to like 2008). So his opinion on this issue likely wasn't influenced by Nintendude's recent 4 stock tourneys.

 

[DMoogle]

My Yoshi wants less variance and more time to outplay a b tier Kirby player. I want/need those extra stocks to overcome the god awful match up.

By this, do you mean more time (stocks) to figure out your opponent's weaknesses and exploit them?

 

[SheerMadness]

Exactly. Me being the higher skilled player I want less variance (despite playing the inferior character). Because longer games are going to favor me.

Same with your Link vs some b tier Pika/Kirby.

 

[The Star King]

Low-variance argument is also dumb. It boils down to "I like low variance matches and I don't care how long it takes," which of course means we should all be playing 99 stock matches. Coincidentally, no one in this camp seems to have ever been involved in running a tournament in any capacity.

No ur dum. Obviously due to time constraints we can't do 99 stock matches. But as I pointed out, 64 has been shown to not take too long of a time with 5 stock matches, so THAT level of lower variance is retainable. Read my post.