3 stocks or 2?

[Jiggsbomb]

For what I've seen, some TOs use 2 stocks while some use 3 stocks. But what would be the best, 3 stocks or 2? I personally prefer 3 stocks.

 

[Deleted member]

Matches often go way too quickly with two stocks, on top of making it much harder to make a comeback. What's with this silly tradition of subtracting a stock every Smash game, anyway? I mean, it made sense in the other games to subtract a stock from the last one, but it seems really unnecessary to do it again this time.

 

[Clint Jaguar]

Matches go way too quickly with two stocks, on top of making it much harder to make a comeback. What's with this silly tradition of subtracting a stock every Smash game, anyway? I mean, it made sense in the other games to subtract a stock from the last one, but it seems really unnecessary to do it again this time.

Yeah I was hoping Smash 4 would return to the Melee standard of 4 stocks. That being said, it's still early days and Smash 4 players are still a little slow and unfamiliar with the game.

 

[JingleJangleJamil]

Honestly at this point I think 3 stocks is the way to go. Before I thought 2 stocks because matches would go on for too long with all the crazy recoveries in this game,but now we have learned more and we are much better at building damage and killing than before. Though sometimes I do still have matches where the match was kind of dragging and would be better if it was 2 stocks.

 

[Jiggsbomb]

Matches go way too quickly with two stocks, on top of making it much harder to make a comeback. What's with this silly tradition of subtracting a stock every Smash game, anyway? I mean, it made sense in the other games to subtract a stock from the last one, but it seems really unnecessary to do it again this time.

I 100 % agree with you. 4 Stocks might be a bit too much, but will see. There might be a groundbreaking tech discovered in the future that really increases the movement and pace of the game. But I think 3 stocks is the best

 

[mountain_tiger]

There definitely shouldn't be less than 3 stocks, that's for sure. 2 stocks just... doesn't feel right.

 

[Deleted member]

Matches that already drag on really long with 3 stocks would last forever with 4. Unless there ends up being some kind of unexpected change that makes the game faster (equipment being made legal, for example), 3 is probably the perfect amount of stocks.

 

[Sugistyle]

Three stocks is better, wouldn't mind four tho.

 

[Spak]

I think we need the three-stock matches because of the removal of vectoring. Also, a two-stock doesn't sound as impressive as a three\four-stock

 

[SirIanAsh]

3 Stocks give you a little bit of chance to win if you self destruct.
While 2 stocks is a fast match.

 

[RODO]

I like PLAYING 3 stocks more than 2 but I think for people watching that are more into melee or pm that 2 stocks makes the match more bearable.

 

[chainmaillekid]

I always played melee with 5. The 3 stock competitive convention was actually one of my most disliked aspects of playing competitive players.

It needs to be 3 stock though at least.
If the game is taking to0 long with two... well, then we need to simply find a way to make kills faster.

 

[SmashChu]

2 stock is better. This mirrors not only For Glory online, but it matches other fighting games in terms of numbers of rounds. I also alleviates the huge time problem Smash has since matches are max of 5 minutes rather than 8 minutes. The longest a set could be is 15 minutes rather than 24 minutes before, so tournaments will move a lot faster. Grand finals should still be 3 stock.

 

[Lozjam]

3 Stocks has to be the only choice here. 2 Stocks are way too fast for a competitive match, considering that this game is a lot faster than Brawl. Things like the removal of vectoring and short blast zones even make matches even faster. Also, if something happens and a person SD's, they still have a chance, and comebacks are very exciting in the competitive scene. We can probably even shorten the time limit to 6 too, due to the game's general speed as well. I don't about you guys, but since Ganondorf can KO at 60%, you guys are going to want that 3rd stock. Just saying from a Ganondorf main

 

[SuaveChaser]

2 stocks is good for it keeps my attention. 3 is fine for grand finals.

 

[RanserSSF4]

I didn't answer either qeustion because I do think both 3 stock and 2 stock works, even though i do prefer 3 stock more.

IMO, I think 2 stocks should be for pools, and 3 stocks should be for top 8 or grand finals.

 

[DavemanCozy]

I like both for singles. 2 stock feels more akin to the traditional fighting games, where you have to knock out your opponent twice to win the round. However, since Smash is no traditional fighting game, I like 3 stocks too.

For doubles though, I think it should be 3 stocks always. 2 stocks makes some team roles (like stock tanking) less prominent.

 

[LightLV]

Matches often go way too quickly with two stocks, on top of making it much harder to make a comeback. What's with this silly tradition of subtracting a stock every Smash game, anyway? I mean, it made sense in the other games to subtract a stock from the last one, but it seems really unnecessary to do it again this time.

They keep subtracting stocks because KOing people has gotten progressively harder since Melee, where eating an Nair at 90% would potentially murder you, to getting smashed at 140% and surviving. This game feels like 3 stocks would work fine though.

 

[|RK|]

I think we need the three-stock matches because of the removal of vectoring. Also, a two-stock doesn't sound as impressive as a three\four-stock

Vectoring was the main reason that two stocks was considered standard, no? With vectoring, stocks took a pretty long time.

 

[LightLV]

Smaller blast zones and generally guaranteed ceiling KOs make games alot shorter imo.

 

[Lozjam]

They keep subtracting stocks because KOing people has gotten progressively harder since Melee, where eating an Nair at 90% would potentially murder you, to getting smashed at 140% and surviving. This game feels like 3 stocks would work fine though.

Except it's easier and faster to kill in Smash 4 than in Brawl....

 

[wmo_]

2 is so boring to watch

 

[#HBC | Red Ryu]

I'd prefer we go with 3 because it offer more to seoerate players on levels.

Also 2 seems to be pretty short and nothing is wrong with 4 minutes games which is about where 3 stock averages to.

 

[cardboardowl]

2 stock is too short and unforgiving

3 stock is perfect imo

 

[ninrok]

I'm personally still split on this, but so far with the Wii U version, stocks seem to drop much faster. At least from my small, personal experience and watching pre-Wii U footage a ton, the 3DS version took far longer for KOs, plus setting up matches for streaming purposes which seemed to drag things out as well, so 2-stock made sense. That doesn't seem to be the case on the console version, though.

In the end, I wouldn't mind 2-stock per say if it remained that way... but I feel like 3 stock is more entertaining on both sides.

 

[NairWizard]

if 2-stock, I would want best of 5 sets
That's a maximum of (3 stocks lost at most across all players) x (up to 5 matches) = 15 stocks

If 3-stock, I would want best of 3 sets
That's a maximum of (5 stocks lost at most across all players) x (up to 3 matches) = 15 stocks

15 stocks is a good number. Let's keep it that way imo.

 

[chipndip]

2 stock is better. This mirrors not only For Glory online, but it matches other fighting games in terms of numbers of rounds. I also alleviates the huge time problem Smash has since matches are max of 5 minutes rather than 8 minutes. The longest a set could be is 15 minutes rather than 24 minutes before, so tournaments will move a lot faster. Grand finals should still be 3 stock.

THANK YOU.

I'm going to be going to another tourney on the 6th of December (same place), but I don't want to be there by noon and leave by midnight because people want one more stock. It's already 2/3 anyway, so why make it a 3/5 stock count? It gets way too long getting everything done when you have larger scale tournaments.

At a certain point, they can be 3 stocks, but the preliminary stuff should be 2 stocks per until then. We need to speed things up.

Translation: For the sake of being timely, 2 stocks is good. If it's a small tourney and time isn't a concern, then 3 stock the whole thing. Otherwise, make top cuts the 3 stock matches.

 

[Gawain]

In general I think lower stocks should be enforced on ALL Smash games. The tournaments go on for way, way too long compared to other FG and it can be a problem for events like Evo where it's cutting into time set aside for the next game to come on stage. There is absolutely no reason for a best of 3 with six minutes per round. That's ridiculous, and its what happened at Evo14 Melee. I was there, and a lot of the people in the audience were really getting restless with the campy rounds from Hbox/Armada. And there's no reason for it, really. What difference does it make? Other games have 90 second rounds with the same number of rounds (Bo5 for finals and Bo3 for others). There is nothing fundamentally different here.

Now, that being said, if we want to keep things the same way they are, 3 stocks is more even with match times of current games of 64/Melee than 2. Matches with 2 stocks are over fairly quickly in comparison.

 

[LightLV]

Except it's easier and faster to kill in Smash 4 than in Brawl....

This game feels like 3 stocks would work fine though.

^

Again, this is something that's just going to have to evolve. I definitely understand 2 stock in 3DS version, but 3 should be fine for wii-U. We're just going to have to see if tournaments take 10 days to finish or not.

 

[Loken]

Three works nicer mechanically but matches do tend to drag on for quite a while in some match ups.

 

[Team Plasma N]

Personally I feel 3 stocks is just right. 2 feels a bit too short and 4 just feels a bit too long for this game.

 

[PND]

Honest question, how many have you have played in a serious Smash 4 Wii U tournament? By "Serious," I mean: Competitive players present, more than 30ish people, in an actual venue? Because I have. It was a 2 stock tournament.

It didn't finish.

Even with 2 stocks on the line, the matches were very drawn out and defensive. I ended up timing out 3 opponents -- and I didn't go into the match planning to time them out, by about the halfway mark of the match it was clear that it was my best path to victory. Beyond that, I had countless matches finish within a minute left on the timer. I was not an outlier, either, this was the general trend among the top players of the tournament. Conversely, I finished a couple matches in under a minute, too, but I play Jiggs/Mac. You give me a solid read and I will kill you early. High level players don't hand me those kinds of opportunities often.

By the time top 5 rolled around, the TO reduced it to 1-stock to try and speed things along. I ended up placing 5th. My best friend knocked me out and placed 4th. I'm pretty sure his set was the last set played in the tournament, it was an hour past the venue closing and we got kicked out. I'm pretty sure top 3 just split because they didn't feel like relocating to someone's basement. I'm not sure if they ended up playing it out afterall, it didn't sound like they wanted to, and I left after my friend got knocked out and we got kicked out of the venue.

Now, despite the tourney "only" being two stocks, there were still incredible comebacks. Hell, I staged two of them. In one, my Mac was down to kill percent against a Megaman player still on his first stock-- I had no idea what to do in this match up. My first stock was gimped early, and through a battle of attrition I managed to bring him to kill percent. A couple solid reads later and I took his stock, but was sitting at 120ish %. I read his grab attempt, spot dodge to jab racked up a few percent when I heard the *ding!* Ran in, read that he expected the punch and would roll back to avoid it, grabbed him and pummeled him into aerial grab release -> KO punch. The crow went wild. I carried the momentum into the next match and two stocked him.

By the second stock, I had time to adapt to his style and learn a matchup I was unfamiliar with. 2 stocks is plenty of time to learn a player.

True, Mac's KO punch may skew results about comebacks. I also had an incredible Jiggs comeback with a last minute Wall of Pain. I also saw an incredible Link comeback, a ZSS comeback, a Yoshi comeback, a Diddy comeback, and a DeDeDe comeback. 2 stocks doesn't decrease the chance of comebacks, I hate that sentiment getting thrown around here. I saw more comebacks at this tournament than I have ever seen at a Brawl tournament, with all three of its stocks.

With two stocks, there are less what I call "dead stocks". You're clearly going to lose this match due to a smart character pick / stage pick, you're down, and the battle is way too uphill. Now you're not dragging your feet for an extra stock only to lose anyway -- you're getting back to the match you want to play, quicker. With only two stocks, you also get to the "between match" moment quicker, where you can think over the match that just happened, get some quick coaching, and formulate a plot. It gives commentators time to catch up and talk about factors outside of the match, or give some better feedback as to things that happened during the match. It speeds up the set and keeps viewers interested. And maybe, just maybe, it will let an event finish on time.

Now I'm clearly on the 2-stock side of the fence. If you have been to a tournament that was 3 stock and ran smoothly, please, let me know how it went. If you haven't been to a serious tournament, go to one. Then report back with your findings. But most of all: please, please, PLEASE if you aren't competitive, if you haven't been to a Smash tournament or plan on going to one, do not try and influence tournament format.

[/anecdotalwallofrant]

 

[SmashChu]

THANK YOU.

I'm going to be going to another tourney on the 6th of December (same place), but I don't want to be there by noon and leave by midnight because people want one more stock. It's already 2/3 anyway, so why make it a 3/5 stock count? It gets way too long getting everything done when you have larger scale tournaments.

At a certain point, they can be 3 stocks, but the preliminary stuff should be 2 stocks per until then. We need to speed things up.

Translation: For the sake of being timely, 2 stocks is good. If it's a small tourney and time isn't a concern, then 3 stock the whole thing. Otherwise, make top cuts the 3 stock matches.

Agreed, and I think it's the reason why we should go to two. CEO this year was held back 2 hours because Smash took so long. Marvel 3 and SF4 took their allotted hour with no problem and moved much quicker. If you're not a fan of Smash, you'll be sitting there so 5 hours before the other games come on for 2. And as you said, even if it's just Smash, it's going to take a while to finish and most people don't want to spend their entire day watching Smash for one more stock.

Even though a set only last 9 minutes less, that will quickly add up and save an hour off after only 6-7 sets.

 

[Lozjam]

True, Mac's KO punch may skew results about comebacks. I also had an incredible Jiggs comeback with a last minute Wall of Pain. I also saw an incredible Link comeback, a ZSS comeback, a Yoshi comeback, a Diddy comeback, and a DeDeDe comeback. 2 stocks doesn't decrease the chance of comebacks, I hate that sentiment getting thrown around here. I saw more comebacks at this tournament than I have ever seen at a Brawl tournament, with all three of its stocks.

With two stocks, there are less what I call "dead stocks". You're clearly going to lose this match due to a smart character pick / stage pick, you're down, and the battle is way too uphill. Now you're not dragging your feet for an extra stock only to lose anyway -- you're getting back to the match you want to play, quicker. With only two stocks, you also get to the "between match" moment quicker, where you can think over the match that just happened, get some quick coaching, and formulate a plot. It gives commentators time to catch up and talk about factors outside of the match, or give some better feedback as to things that happened during the match. It speeds up the set and keeps viewers interested. And maybe, just maybe, it will let an event finish on time.

100% false, and I will show you why, of which there is absolutely no debate that 2 Stocks does decrease the chance of comebacks. Mainly Mathematics. I am Ganondorf main, meaning I have of the characters most susceptible to Gimping, especially to characters like Sheik, but I digress. Let's say your character has an average kill percent of 100%, as does your opponent. Let's also say your opponent gimps you at while he is at 10% whilst you are at around 30. You need to make up an average of 190% in order to win over your opponent, and if you are players of equal skill and a 50-50 matchup, means that right now, you have a 1/4 chance of winning at that current time(1/2 chance of winning both stocks, is 1/2 X 1/2 = 1/4). This is a huge drawback within winning a set, and can very much create a one sided battle and causes you, the player, to play much more defensively due to Smash 4's mechanics. Let's take the same scenario with 3 stocks. With a gimp, you only need to make up an average of 150%, leaving your probability of winning at 1/3( 1/2 * 1/2 * 1/2 * 2(the chances, or number of stocks you have) = 2/6 = 1/3). While you as the player will play a little bit more defensively, they still have room for error. And not only that, but matches can be even more exciting, as comebacks can be bigger. For example, you lose 2 of your stocks and make a comeback from that. Nothing is more exciting in the community than that. Not only that, but it can cause greater character balance flaws if it is 2 stocks. Little Macs KO punch, is very terrible for 2 stocks, completely blocking the chance of a comeback with some specific characters. So. Fact 1 completely disproven.

What you are experiencing with your tournament is merely flaws within its organization. The TO needs to be prepared for the maximum amount of time a set can take, with no question about it. Not only that, but if you set the time to 6 minutes and 3 stocks, not only does this make players play more offensively, but it is only a single minute of time difference that makes a match more exciting to spectate.

What you are saying about polarizing matchups, with the "dead stock" is exactly what we do not want. That 3rd stock really means something when making a comeback, as I have proven above, and prevents characters from being too unbalanced. The competitors also need that extra time to understand the matchup as playing. Smash 4 is a game about matchups, no question about it, but there is little to no possible way to have played all of these matchups right now. There are 51 playable characters, each with 12 sets of custom moves, leaving us with 612 different variations of characters. That means that there are 374,544 total matchups you can have. With stages, using 13(that is a very conservative number) means that there are 4,869,072 total matchups overall, with stages and characters. Allowing players with an extra stock allows them to get more familiar with the matchup, and play to the best of their ability.

As a final note I would like to say that Smash 4's competitive scene is still in its infant stages. As time will progress, most matches will take a lot less time as they do now as we are still finding things out about the characters and what moves work best against certain characters. Also, excuse any grammatical errors I may have, I wrote this on mobile.

 

[HeroMystic]

What you are experiencing with your tournament is merely flaws within its organization. The TO needs to be prepared for the maximum amount of time a set can take, with no question about it. Not only that, but if you set the time to 6 minutes and 3 stocks, not only does this make players play more offensively, but it is only a single minute of time difference that makes a match more exciting to spectate.

I don't know what games you've been watching, but I can tell you from experience that lowering the timer will just make players force timeouts. It will in no way force people to become more offensive. You'll be encouraging the opposite of what you want.

What you are saying about polarizing matchups, with the "dead stock" is exactly what we do not want. That 3rd stock really means something when making a comeback, as I have proven above, and prevents characters from being too unbalanced. The competitors also need that extra time to understand the matchup as playing. Smash 4 is a game about matchups, no question about it, but there is little to no possible way to have played all of these matchups right now. There are 51 playable characters, each with 12 sets of custom moves, leaving us with 612 different variations of characters. That means that there are 374,544 total matchups you can have. With stages, using 13(that is a very conservative number) means that there are 4,869,072 total matchups overall, with stages and characters. Allowing players with an extra stock allows them to get more familiar with the matchup, and play to the best of their ability.

That is what friendlies and the Bo3 set are for. In tournaments, you're expected to know your match-up before you play it, not after it.

I really want to understand all this talk about "Too unforgiving in case a character SDs." type of stuff. It's unfortunate that it happens, but we shouldn't be setting our tournament format around it.

 

[Lozjam]

I don't know what games you've been watching, but I can tell you from experience that lowering the timer will just make players force timeouts. It will in no way force people to become more offensive. You'll be encouraging the opposite of what you want

Again it depends on the matchup, but on average(from all competitive matches I have seen and played). 3 stock matches take around 4 minutes at a high level. 6 minutes is plenty of time within Smash 4's engine.

That is what friendlies and the Bo3 set are for. In tournaments, you're expected to know your match-up before you play it, not after it.

I really want to understand all this talk about "Too unforgiving in case a character SDs." type of stuff. It's unfortunate that it happens, but we shouldn't be setting our tournament format around it.

What you are asking is literally impossible. As I have stated there are 4,869,072 matchups with stages and characters. Say you have a single 4 minute match to familiarize with yourself with all of them,(which still isn't enough to know the matchup) that will take over 46 years of total playtime((the amount of matchups X 4)/(60*24*365). It is literally impossible at this time to know all the matchups. Also, I am not talking about SD's, but gimping and early KOs. Ganondorf can KO most characters at 0% with aerial wizard kick, whilst Sheik can gimp you off the stage. There is also needed time to understand your specific matchup(as I have stated, is impossible due to the sheer amount of them). It creates better character balance for attacks that kill early/gimp, especially for the case of characters like Little Mac.

 

[Cornstalk]

It's so hard to judge the match time right now. It's easy to say 2 stock is too fast when you get a Diddy mirror match and a match is done in under 3 minutes. But what happens if you get two characters that are more defensively oriented, like Rob vs Robin? 2 stock from that combo could easily push the 6 minute mark...

Tournaments will also see a decent tournament of not-so-pro level players. With that in mind, if two of them get put against each other in pools, you're going to see a very clumsy match up with a lot of rolls and a whole lot of nothing happening on a regular basis. Those players will really eat up the tournament's time.

So really, 2 and 3 stock are both great options. You have to know your turnout to really capitalize on either set up. Start with 2 stock to thin out the herd a little faster and bring in the 3 stock when you get closer to the finals, assuming time permits.


I find one of the biggest headaches comes more from a lack of small stages more than the stock limit. Wario Ware (without transforming) was a wonderful stage if you had trouble with a camper/staller. As it is now, Smashville is probably the smallest legal stage in the game. And I sure as heck wouldn't want to fight a super campy player there...

 

[lijero13ss]

3 stocks for sure

 

[HeroMystic]

Again it depends on the matchup, but on average(from all competitive matches I have seen and played). 3 stock matches take around 4 minutes at a high level. 6 minutes is plenty of time within Smash 4's engine.

I'll rephrase by saying if your intent on lowering the timer is to encourage more exciting matches, it's going to do the opposite. If your intent is to save time per match then that's a different story. I am not inherently against lowering the timer (I believe 8 minutes is far too long at the moment, even with three stocks), but my point is the conscious decision to time an opponent out should be expected.

What you are asking is literally impossible. As I have stated there are 4,869,072 matchups with stages and characters. Say you have a single 4 minute match to familiarize with yourself with all of them,(which still isn't enough to know the matchup) that will take over 46 years of total playtime((the amount of matchups X 4)/(60*24*365). It is literally impossible at this time to know all the matchups. Also, I am not talking about SD's, but gimping and early KOs. Ganondorf can KO most characters at 0% with aerial wizard kick, whilst Sheik can gimp you off the stage. There is also needed time to understand your specific matchup(as I have stated, is impossible due to the sheer amount of them). It creates better character balance for attacks that kill early/gimp, especially for the case of characters like Little Mac.

The issue with your mathematical expression is that it is scientifically unsound, because you treat all variation of each match-up of equal value, which is the wrong thing to do. I'll break it down.

Neutral A
Tiltx3
Aerialx5
Specialx4

All characters have 13 possible actions within their moveset, excluding getup attacks, rolling, and ledge options. Custom specials only possibly change 4 out of that 13, thus lowering the threshold of familiarization. Stages as a whole are also not nearly equal to amount of value than an entire character, far less in fact. Positional play is applied to all stages, it's just a matter of which character has the position advantage or not. Again, this all depends on the character's moveset.

When you apply this, learning the variance of each match-up doesn't take nearly as long as one would mathematically believe. This is of course, disregarding the fact that the reality of the situation is not as you describe. Players tend to use top tiers, top tiers will be trained against more. Trends/Cookie Cutter builds with Custom Specials are also expected, thus lowering the importance of knowing of other customs, whether it's because they suck or are never used. We also have this forum. Learning is not a binary thing.

I know you weren't talking about SDs, that was to posters above who mentioned that stocks should be three in case a player accidentally SDs. If a character gets gimped or KO'd early, then it sucks to be them. They'll have to try harder to win in that case. If they can't, then they can make a comeback in the next match.

 

[Lozjam]

I'll rephrase by saying if your intent on lowering the timer is to encourage more exciting matches, it's going to do the opposite. If your intent is to save time per match then that's a different story. I am not inherently against lowering the timer (I believe 8 minutes is far too long at the moment, even with three stocks), but my point is the conscious decision to time an opponent out should be expected.



The issue with your mathematical expression is that it is scientifically unsound, because you treat all variation of each match-up of equal value, which is the wrong thing to do. I'll break it down.

Neutral A
Tiltx3
Aerialx5
Specialx4

All characters have 13 possible actions within their moveset, excluding getup attacks, rolling, and ledge options. Custom specials only possibly change 4 out of that 13, thus lowering the threshold of familiarization. Stages as a whole are also not nearly equal to amount of value than an entire character, far less in fact. Positional play is applied to all stages, it's just a matter of which character has the position advantage or not. Again, this all depends on the character's moveset.

When you apply this, learning the variance of each match-up doesn't take nearly as long as one would mathematically believe. This is of course, disregarding the fact that the reality of the situation is not as you describe. Players tend to use top tiers, top tiers will be trained against more. Trends/Cookie Cutter builds with Custom Specials are also expected, thus lowering the importance of knowing of other customs, whether it's because they suck or are never used. We also have this forum. Learning is not a binary thing.

I know you weren't talking about SDs, that was to posters above who mentioned that stocks should be three in case a player accidentally SDs. If a character gets gimped or KO'd early, then it sucks to be them. They'll have to try harder to win in that case. If they can't, then they can make a comeback in the next match.

Actually, the variance is as I would mathematically believe, as custom moves, more often than not, changes your opponents play style, combos, and the entire matchup itself. Take Ganondorf, for example, and take a look at 2 of his custom moves. The default Wizard Kick is a very viable option for Ganondorf, giving Ganondorf on of the best anti-air options when above the opponent, in the game. This Ganondorf, works more on reads, on is less combo heavy and more power heavy. Now WDK Ganondorf is more suited to deal with projectiles, and is more combo heavy due to the better speed., and has a terrific horizontal recovery. In place of that, Ganondorf has an extremely hard time when he is juggled this time around, and needs an entirely different strategy around the character. Essentially creating 2 different characters, and that's only a single custom variant! It is much like Melee clones are different despite being so alike in design and moveset.

As for time, the conscious decision to time out an opponent is going to be there regardless. Why not speed that up with 3 stocks? It's the same with 2 stocks nonetheless as well. Which the time has you take a stock every 2.5 minutes, 3 stocks in six minutes requires 2 minutes per stock, which is plenty of time for most matchups. So there isn't that big of a difference when it comes stock to stock. So why have it 8 minutes anyway, it is only 30 seconds different, and quite justified due to the lack of vectoring and the use of the rage effect balancing out Stale moves.