4v4 - Quartets Discussion (Or other variants)

[Mr. Johan]

I assume this thread will also cover possible 3v3 competitive matches, so...

3v3 will boast a wider stage selection than 4v4, which can keep things fresh if the right stages are opened up.

 

[TheBuzzSaw]

I assume this thread will also cover possible 3v3 competitive matches, so...

3v3 will boast a wider stage selection than 4v4, which can keep things fresh if the right stages are opened up.

Oh man, this is fantastic news.

 

[PND]

T.O. here. When I run 4v4, I will do it with Stocks over Time 100% of the time. Time matches will drag on, regardless of how much of a steamroll the match is. Stock matches will end earlier and let me finish my event on time. Plus any hype comebacks will have even more significance due to their increased difficulty in executing. Less focus will be shifted on the bad player costing the team the match, and more emphasis will be put on the great player overcoming insurmountable odds and wining the match. From a spectator standpoint, that is a huge deal.

Plus Stock matches are better than Time matches for pretty much all of the reasons listed before me.

 

[TheBuzzSaw]

T.O. here. When I run 4v4, I will do it with Stocks over Time 100% of the time. Time matches will drag on, regardless of how much of a steamroll the match is. Stock matches will end earlier and let me finish my event on time. Plus any hype comebacks will have even more significance due to their increased difficulty in executing. Less focus will be shifted on the bad player costing the team the match, and more emphasis will be put on the great player overcoming insurmountable odds and wining the match. From a spectator standpoint, that is a huge deal.

Plus Stock matches are better than Time matches for pretty much all of the reasons listed before me.

I agree for tournaments. For casual play, people don't like to sit around waiting for the match to end.

 

[Piford]

Congo Jungle 64 is available for 8 player Smash

 

[Blue Warrior]

I want to see this be a thing, if only because it means we'll have a completely different meta on our hands. You could expect Ganondorf to be a common pick just because he can capitalize on the hectic environment.

 

[MajorMajora]

The most important part of this is that we make sure it happens on big stages, not small ones like battlefield. In a game like this, people are strongest in groups, so people will tend to make strong, 4-man clumps. A battle on, say, battlefield, would be far too chaotic. These battles will truly be a test of teamwork and skill, however, if space-control and large-scale team maneuvers are a large part of the game, which can only happen on stages like Palutena's temple and Hyrule Temple.

 

[Book Jacket]

The most important part of this is that we make sure it happens on big stages, not small ones like battlefield. In a game like this, people are strongest in groups, so people will tend to make strong, 4-man clumps. A battle on, say, battlefield, would be far too chaotic. These battles will truly be a test of teamwork and skill, however, if space-control and large-scale team maneuvers are a large part of the game, which can only happen on stages like Palutena's temple and Hyrule Temple.

you can't choose smaller stages in 8 player. It isn't an option to begin with, the game blacks 'em out.

 

[Piford]

you can't choose smaller stages in 8 player. It isn't an option to begin with, the game blacks 'em out.

You actually can choose a couple of stages on the smaller side like Battlefield and Castle Siege.

 

[Book Jacket]

You actually can choose a couple of stages on the smaller side like Battlefield and Castle Siege.

Shoot, you're right. I should've looked closer. In that case, yeah, banning may be necessary.

 

[Scoob]

I know Custom Stages are out for 8-players, but maybe for 6 player matches. Imagine the possibilities!

 

[Waluigi is too big]

After seeing squads at ktar. I gained some confidence in 4v4.
It seems like a whole different game, but not just randomness. It looks like planing ahead can beat out 1v1 skill. So, it seems like you have to plan a little bit of strats before you go all ham.

 

[Frostav]

Those Ktar squad matches were so goddamn hype we need to keep it going. That was a whole new level of controlled chaos and greatness.
I hope 4v4 becomes an at least decently popular side event at tournaments. It's good to pass up.

 

[MajorMajora]

I continue to say this all works best on big stages. Maybe I can see a tourney of Hyrule temple then Palu's Temple, and then maybe a tie breaker on Big battlefield?

Seriously though the MOBA jokes write themselves and it is glorious.

Edit: Actually I do think it could work on smaller stages, but I do think it works best on the large ones.

 

[Piford]

I think the best way to handle stages for 4v4 is to have all of them legal, and then ban them if problems occur.

 

[TheBuzzSaw]

Palutena's Temple and Great Cave Offensive are terrible stages and should be deleted in a patch.

 

[MajorMajora]

Palutena's Temple and Great Cave Offensive are terrible stages and should be deleted in a patch.

…Why?

I think the best way to handle stages for 4v4 is to have all of them legal, and then ban them if problems occur.

As nice of an idea as this is, the game does change based on what stages are picked. Wile the philosophy that you are carrying over from previous discussions made sense, Here it's important to be more methodical in how pick stages in order to give it some sort of direction, since the game will change so wildly with different stage choices.

Not that we can't try all of the stages, but treating them all as equals is not the right and is more idealogical than logical.

 

[MajorMajora]

double post please ignore.

 

[Piford]

…Why?


As nice of an idea as this is, the game does change based on what stages are picked. Wile the philosophy that you are carrying over from previous discussions made sense, Here it's important to be more methodical in how pick stages in order to give it some sort of direction, since the game will change so wildly with different stage choices.

Not that we can't try all of the stages, but treating them all as equals is not the right and is more idealogical than logical.

I'm saying that at smaller local tournaments, start with all of them legal, so that all the problematic ones end up being taken out.
4v4 is completely new and we need tons of testing that needs to be done. I mean, if we run stock versus time matches then the stage list will likely be completely different. Stages like Temple problem won't work in the long run using stock, but it 4v4 use time then it will likely work.

 

[BBG|Scott-Spain]

My only request is the banning of Hyrule temple. The basement part of that stage is ridiculous.

 

[GdspdUblkprzdnt]

I played 4v4 smash and was surprises at how competitive it felt. It requires so much communication and team work, not to mention how big a factor your team composition is. The real issue I feel that needs to be tackled is whether friendly fire should be on or not. Friendly fire promotes discipline and negates projectile spam but could possibly make the game too hectic entirely.

 

[Malex]

I played 4v4 smash and was surprises at how competitive it felt. It requires so much communication and team work, not to mention how big a factor your team composition is. The real issue I feel that needs to be tackled is whether friendly fire should be on or not. Friendly fire promotes discipline and negates projectile spam but could possibly make the game too hectic entirely.

Friendly fire should never be on in teams. The whole point of team fights is the discipline of not killing your allies.

EDIT: meant to say always on

 

[GdspdUblkprzdnt]

Friendly fire should never be on in teams. The whole point of team fights is the discipline of not killing your allies.

In most tourneys friendly fire is on during team play. In doubles friendly fire has always been on. Players have always had to be more disciplined because of it by making sure to not hit their teammate.

 

[Jabejazz]

Friendly fire should never be on in teams. The whole point of team fights is the discipline of not killing your allies.

How is there any "discipline" involved when there's no risk of hurting your teammates at all?
Also, there's the issue of projectile camping shenanigans.

 

[GdspdUblkprzdnt]

How is there any "discipline" involved when there's no risk of hurting your teammates at all?
Also, there's the issue of projectile camping shenanigans.

One possibility I've felt is that maybe the metagame develips to the point where characters with projectilr reflection is necesarry on each team. I've seen one character with reflect nullify an entire teams wall of projectiles. There's a lot of weight on both ends of the debate though. My vote is for keeping friendly fire off. It doesn't break the game if both teams have characters that can deal with projectiles, doesn't flat out kill the fun for projectile characters and stops stuff like Pikachu G&W combos which just kill the fun of the game. With friendly fire off, the emphasis is more on working with your team and sticking together than having your shield up 80% of the time, evading stray attacks from your teammates.

 

[Piford]

One possibility I've felt is that maybe the metagame develips to the point where characters with projectilr reflection is necesarry on each team. I've seen one character with reflect nullify an entire teams wall of projectiles. There's a lot of weight on both ends of the debate though. My vote is for keeping friendly fire off. It doesn't break the game if both teams have characters that can deal with projectiles, doesn't flat out kill the fun for projectile characters and stops stuff like Pikachu G&W combos which just kill the fun of the game. With friendly fire off, the emphasis is more on working with your team and sticking together than having your shield up 80% of the time, evading stray attacks from your teammates.

Pikachu G&W combo doesn't exist anymore. If friendly fire is off you just have 3 projectile abusers like falco and Link and one other character. Every single team would be built the same and the person who dodges projectiles the best wins.

 

[Malex]

In most tourneys friendly fire is on during team play. In doubles friendly fire has always been on. Players have always had to be more disciplined because of it by making sure to not hit their teammate.

One possibility I've felt is that maybe the metagame develips to the point where characters with projectilr reflection is necesarry on each team. I've seen one character with reflect nullify an entire teams wall of projectiles. There's a lot of weight on both ends of the debate though. My vote is for keeping friendly fire off. It doesn't break the game if both teams have characters that can deal with projectiles, doesn't flat out kill the fun for projectile characters and stops stuff like Pikachu G&W combos which just kill the fun of the game. With friendly fire off, the emphasis is more on working with your team and sticking together than having your shield up 80% of the time, evading stray attacks from your teammates.

My bad, meant to say Friendly fire should ALWAYS be on.

 

[PND]

With Friendly Fire off, the optimum strategy will be two players approaching, one running up-smashing or dash attacking, the other dash grabbing. Behind them will be two projectile users.

All options covered, all the time. Projectiles cover the option of attacking, dash grab beats shield, dash usmash (potentialy charged) beats spot dodging or doing nothing. Sounds boring as hell to me.

 

[Road Death Wheel]

Does anyone else think 1 stock 4v4 would be neat and fast?
2v2 = 8 stocks in total
4v4 = 8 stocks in total

 

[Thirdkoopa]

Does anyone else think 1 stock 4v4 would be neat and fast?
2v2 = 8 stocks in total
4v4 = 8 stocks in total

Yeah, sure. I think that's worth a try. In-fact, I think we should be experimenting more.

I encourage any TO's who can to run 4v4. I'm dead serious right now; this is a real chance to do something really amazing with Smash (not that we haven't done things amazing but you all get what i mean)

 

[BBG|Scott-Spain]

Another reason to keep friendly fire on is the potential to save your teammates. Adds extra character utility.

 

[Zalak]

All of these incredible ideas need to happen.

 

[Blazing Ambition]

Watching 4v4 matches is about as coherent as watching a Basketball game with four balls.

 

[BBG|Scott-Spain]

Watching 4v4 matches is about as coherent as watching a Basketball game with four balls.

This is a good point that I've heard from multiple people. A few days ago, MIOM spoke on how the lack of a centralized objective/score may keep 4v4 from catching on. I can pretty much agree, but I still wish to push the format forward through more content and theory.

 

[Waluigi is too big]

I might sound crazy, but I think what is a normal stage for 1v1 or 2v2 just does not work in 4v4.

At KTAR XI The game seems must more coherent to observe, on stages that would usually be banned for being overly large. From my own personal experience they are a lot more fun to play as well.

I think the stage list of 4v4 should be vastly different then a normal stage list.
I might propose considering Gaur Plains, and Palutena's temple. These stages have issues, but they seem far better than big battle field or Omega stages in my opinion.

 

[Piford]

I might sound crazy, but I think what is a normal stage for 1v1 or 2v2 just does not work in 4v4.

At KTAR XI The game seems must more coherent to observe, on stages that would usually be banned for being overly large. From my own personal experience they are a lot more fun to play as well.

I think the stage list of 4v4 should be vastly different then a normal stage list.
I might propose considering Gaur Plains, and Palutena's temple. These stages have issues, but they seem far better than big battle field or Omega stages in my opinion.

Those stages seem to work if you do 4v4 in timed. However, if 4v4 are with stock, then it won't work because they will dwindle down to a 1v1. Making 4v4 timed really would solve most issues, especially since you can change SD to be -2 in this game.

 

[KingCowman]

Hey guys!

I'm hosting a smash 4 tournament Thursday and we are going to have a 4v4 event.
I've been keeping up with this thread and I'd like to pitch the idea for 4v4's me and my fellow TO are going to run on Thursday.

We call the mode VIP, but were open to suggestions on a better name if anyone has any ideas.

The rules are as follows.

1. 3 stocks 10 min
2. Team attack on
   
3. 1 player on each team is deemed the "VIP"
   This person is allowed to use ANY equipment available on the console (We will be using only 1 console for 4v4's, as we only have 4 teams entered and 2 hours to do it)
4. The first team to kill the enemy VIP once, wins.

Those are the gameplay rules and we think they are pretty cool, however to keep things dynamic, we made some special proceedings.

1. Team Captains flip for first pick.(NOTE: No two players can play the same character in any one game)
   
2. Winner of coin toss can defer first pick, henceforth referred to as FP, second pick as SP.
3. SP bans 1 character
4. FP picks their VIP and loadout.
5. FP bans 1 character
6. SP picks their VIP and loadout.
7. SP bans 1 character
8. FP picks 1 character
9. FP bans 1 character
10. SP picks 1 character
11. SP bans 1 character
12. FP picks 1 character
13. FP bans 1 character
14. SP picks 1 character
15. SP bans 2 characters
16. FP picks 1 character
17. FP bans 2 characters
18. SP picks 1 character

Then to stage select, where FP will always strike last. If there is an odd number of legal stages, then SP strikes first, if even, FP strikes first.

The winner then becomes SP, and instead of stage striking they get 1 or 2 bans.
The lose becomes FP and gets to pick the stage out of not banned stages.

Matches are best 2 out of 3.

Its a little complicated of a ruleset for a special game mode, but the banning was added in to create more variability in our test setting and allow general target banning of enemy mains, great teamwork characters, and to shutdown your VIP's weaknesses.

As of right now we cant decide on 10, 8, or 6 bans. But we're sticking with 10 because it has created a lot of variability in our test games.


So what do you guys think of the mode? What do you think of the crazy overbearing and complicated rules?

Again this is going to be run in a tournament on thrursday, so im open to input, and I'll report back as to how it goes!

 

[BBG|Scott-Spain]

Hey guys!

I'm hosting a smash 4 tournament Thursday and we are going to have a 4v4 event.
I've been keeping up with this thread and I'd like to pitch the idea for 4v4's me and my fellow TO are going to run on Thursday.

We call the mode VIP, but were open to suggestions on a better name if anyone has any ideas.

The rules are as follows.

1. 3 stocks 10 min
2. Team attack on
   
3. 1 player on each team is deemed the "VIP"
   This person is allowed to use ANY equipment available on the console (We will be using only 1 console for 4v4's, as we only have 4 teams entered and 2 hours to do it)
4. The first team to kill the enemy VIP once, wins.

Those are the gameplay rules and we think they are pretty cool, however to keep things dynamic, we made some special proceedings.

1. Team Captains flip for first pick.(NOTE: No two players can play the same character in any one game)
   
2. Winner of coin toss can defer first pick, henceforth referred to as FP, second pick as SP.
3. SP bans 1 character
4. FP picks their VIP and loadout.
5. FP bans 1 character
6. SP picks their VIP and loadout.
7. SP bans 1 character
8. FP picks 1 character
9. FP bans 1 character
10. SP picks 1 character
11. SP bans 1 character
12. FP picks 1 character
13. FP bans 1 character
14. SP picks 1 character
15. SP bans 2 characters
16. FP picks 1 character
17. FP bans 2 characters
18. SP picks 1 character

Then to stage select, where FP will always strike last. If there is an odd number of legal stages, then SP strikes first, if even, FP strikes first.

The winner then becomes SP, and instead of stage striking they get 1 or 2 bans.
The lose becomes FP and gets to pick the stage out of not banned stages.

Matches are best 2 out of 3.

Its a little complicated of a ruleset for a special game mode, but the banning was added in to create more variability in our test setting and allow general target banning of enemy mains, great teamwork characters, and to shutdown your VIP's weaknesses.

As of right now we cant decide on 10, 8, or 6 bans. But we're sticking with 10 because it has created a lot of variability in our test games.


So what do you guys think of the mode? What do you think of the crazy overbearing and complicated rules?

Again this is going to be run in a tournament on thrursday, so im open to input, and I'll report back as to how it goes!

That sounds nuts. I hope it worked out for you.

 

[smashmachine]

Palutena's Temple and Great Cave Offensive are terrible stages and should be deleted in a patch.

but then how will we enjoy Viridi throwing shade at everyone

 

[John12346]

I'd just like to throw this idea out there: 99 stocks, 4 minutes.

The main reason I see a format like this working is due to the fact that, in the event a match comes down to a 1v1 in a normal scenario, suddenly you're playing that 1v1 on some of the largest stages in Smash history. It could really drone on, or better yet, the winning player may just decide to run out the clock since evasion is reasonably simple under those circumstances.

This doesn't usually happen in 2v2s since all matches are played on reasonably sized stages, but for 4v4s, if all players are present for the ENTIRE game, it's not possible for a match to degenerate into a large scale game of tag. There are too many players to simply just run away.