Apex 2015 data & stage list considerations

[DanGR]

Data collected from stats posted on the Apex website on 1/13/2015. Link to the Apex 2015 ruleset.
It's likely the entrant totals and rules have changed slightly since I first copy-pasted them on the 13th. Keep this in mind.
----------
I began writing this post with the intent to support a few specific rules I've seen a lot of players take issue with in the Apex 2015 ruleset. I've changed view since then, so I've done away with most of my outline. I didn't want to scrap the few pages of notes I collected though, because I think it's important for the community to understand what kind of data the TOs consider during ruleset formation. I'll simply post the data, and point out a few things to look at as we go.

In the discussion section later on my goal isn't to convince you to agree with the ruleset's basic conservative ideology; I don't agree with a lot of the decisions myself. Rather, my goal is to elaborate on potential reasons for some of the decisions, and hopefully show that the ruleset has a logical backing.
----------


Tournament entrants tally as of 1/13/2015:

Spoiler: Apex 2015 Singles (Entrants)

Melee 1v1 Total: 1025
Brawl 1v1 Total: 170
Smash 4 1v1 Total: 804
Smash 64 1v1 Total: 181
Pokemon Omega Ruby & Alpha Sapphire VGC total: 82
Ultra Street Fighter IV 1v1 Total: 95
Guilty Gear Xrd 1v1 Total: 46
Killer Instinct 1v1 Total: 23
Ultimate Marvel vs. Capcom 1v1 Total: 37

(link to registration page w/ updated entrants numbers)

Next let's take a look at what titles were removed from and added to the event:

Spoiler: Game titles removed and added

Removed:
Project M Singles
Injustice
King of Fighters XIII
Tekken Tag Tournament 2
Soul Calibur V
BlazBlue
------------------------
Added:
Sm4sh Singles
Sm4sh Doubles
Smash64 Doubles

Next let's compare differences between entrant totals for tournaments at both events. For the Super Smash Bros. series I'm only reviewing Singles events because the entrant totals for this year's Doubles events weren't available on the Apex website at the time of the data collection. (link to registration page)

Spoiler: Entrant Totals

Sm4sh Singles: 0 to 804          =  +804
Melee Singles: 629 to 1025       =  +396
Brawl Singles: 370 to 171        =  -199
Project M Singles: 382 to 0      =  -382
Smash 64 Singles: 157 to 181     =  +24
Total                            =  +643
-----------------------------------------
Ultimate MvC: 85 to 37           =  -48
Injustice: 44 to 0               =  -44
Pokemon: 123 to 82               =  -41
Guilty Gear: 9 to 47             =  +38
King of Fighters XIII: 23 to 0   =  -23
Tekken Tag Tournament 2: 17 to 0 =  -17
BlazBlue: 15 to 0                =  -15
Soul Calibur V: 12 to 0          =  -12
Street Fighter IV: 100 to 96     =  -4
Killer Instinct (?) to 23        =  (?)
Total                            = -166

Next let's compare Apex 2014 and Apex 2015's schedules, and allotted time for the SSB tournaments:

Spoiler: Apex 2014 Schedule

Melee Singles
Friday: 10am-7pm, Crews 7-8:30pm
Saturday: 3-6pm
Sunday: 5:30-8:30pm

Melee Doubles
Saturday: 9am-3pm, 6-8pm

Brawl Singles
Friday: 10am-7pm, 8:30-10pm
Saturday: 3-6pm
Sunday: 2-5:30pm

Brawl Doubles
Saturday: 9am-3pm, 8-10pm

Project M Singles
Friday: 10am-10pm
Saturday: 9am-3pm

Smash64 Singles
Friday: 4-11pm
Saturday: 10am-1:30pm

Spoiler: Apex 2015 Schedule

Melee Singles
Friday: 9am-12pm
Saturday: 1-5pm, 7-9pm, Salty Suite 9-11pm
Sunday: 9-11pm

Melee Doubles
Friday: 5-12pm
Saturday: 9am-1pm

Brawl Singles
Friday: 3-11pm
Saturday: 9am-1pm

Brawl Doubles
Friday: 9am-3pm

Sm4sh Singles
Friday: 9am-12pm
Saturday: 9am-1pm, 5-7pm
Sunday: 6-9pm

Sm4sh Doubles
Friday: 9am-5pm
Saturday: 1-5pm

Smash64 Singles
Saturday: 11am-3pm, 5-7pm

Smash64 Doubles
Friday: 11am-5pm

Spoiler: Apex 2014 Hour totals

Melee
Singles: 15 hours
Doubles: 8 hours
Crews: 1.5 hours

Brawl
Singles: 15.5 hours
Doubles: 8 hours
Crews: 1.5 hours

Project M
Singles: 18 hours

Smash 64
Singles: 7 hours

Spoiler: Apex 2015 Hour totals

Melee
Singles: 23 hours
Doubles: 11 hours
Salty Suite: 3 hours

Brawl
Singles: 12 hours
Doubles: 6 hours

Sm4sh
Singles: 24 hours
Doubles: 12 hours

Smash64
Singles: 9 hours
Doubles: 6 hours

Note: Apex 2015's tournaments on Friday begin 1 hour sooner and end 1 hour later than during Apex 2014's Friday tournaments. Perhaps this extra time on Friday served the purpose of allowing players lunch/dinner breaks on Saturday.


Total differences in allotted time (in hours) for Smash tournaments between Apex 2014 and Apex 2015:

Spoiler: Time allotment differences between Apex 2014 and Apex 2015

Melee 
Singles: 15 to 23     = +8
Doubles: 8 to 11      = +3
Crews: 1.5 to 0       = -1.5
Salty Suite: 0 to 3   = +3
Total                 = +12.5 hours

Brawl
Singles: 15.5 to 12   = -3.5
Doubles: 8 to 6       = -2
Crews: 1.5 to 0       = -1.5
Total                 = -7 hours

Sm4sh
Singles: 0 to 24      = +24
Doubles: 0 to 12      = +12
Total                 = +36 hours

Project M
Singles: 18 to 0      = -18
Total                 = -18 hours

Smash64
Singles: 7 to 9       = +2
Doubles: 0 to 6       = +6
Total                 = +8 hours

Note: Consider time allotment from last year's tournaments that were removed this year. I didn't compile the schedule data for those tournaments but it's still important to consider them in analyzing potential time constraint issues.

Spoiler: More time constraint considerations

• Players holding back tournaments from advancing by playing in multiple smash games. There are 5 different smash events happening at the same time on Friday. For a 5 hour timespan on Saturday, 3-4 Smash events are happening at the same time. Sunday is the only day where there's no overlap in SSB scheduling.
• Some players might pull out new strategies they've been developing that have the side effect of lengthening tournaments. In Brawl, examples include air-camping with MK, ledge camping, scrooging, etc. These kinds of strategies are more likely to make their first appearance at the first international tournament in a game's lifetime- less so afterwards. Overall, this is unlikely, but I think it's still important to consider.
• With such a condensed schedule, there's little to no room for error.
• Logistical considerations: How big is the venue, and can word about upcoming matches be spread quickly? How long could disputes take to settle?
• Sonic's existence.

Spoiler: Reasoning for 2 Stock

The 2 stock count may have been a response to potential time constraint issues. It's the first international tournament at the beginning of one of most popular Wii-U games' lifespan. Melee is more popular than ever and other game titles will be featured as well. The TOs know the total number entrants for all of Apex 2015's tournaments now, but a ruleset had to be posted well in advance for players to prepare themselves.

At the time the ruleset was created, it was likely Apex 2015 will be the largest Smash tournament in the history of the entire series. It's not easy for the TOs to fit in another potentially (at the time) 1,000-man tournament into the schedule. What happens when you take that 1,000-man tournament and shave a stock from every match. Regardless of whether or not 3-stocks is better or worse competitively, time constraint issues exist at large tournaments, and it's important to consider the trade-offs. But we're not running the tournament, so we don't know if there are or aren't.


Any quality tournament organization's main goal is to accommodate the players that support them. In this case, that includes the international community. The Japanese community is an example of a major subset of players that play with 2 stocks. It's important for TOs of international tournaments to consider rulesets from all regions in order to appeal to all players- not just those of its own region.


"It's silly for Brawl to have more stocks than a faster paced Sm4sh; therefore, Sm4sh should have at least the same amount of stocks(3), or Brawl's should be set to 2."

Regardless of whether Brawl should originally have had 2 or 3 stocks, you'll find much more resistance in changing Brawl's 6 year tradition of 3-stock count to 2, than in setting the stock count at 2 for a game 3~4 months into its life. Part of forming a ruleset for any tournament includes dealing with backlash from the community. Backlash of any sort is more likely to happen for a tournament with thousands of dollars on the line, and it's reasonable for TOs to choose the path of least resistance.

It's not an irreversible decision to set it to 2, either. This tournament is early in the game's life, and I think it helps to look at the tournament more as a testing ground for international competition and game balance than a step towards standardizing a ruleset that includes 2-stock matches. Also, adjusting stock count is much more flexible than banning something outright, even though a lot of people seem to be comparing the two.

Stages:

Spoiler: Stage List Overview: Conservative or Liberal?

In trying to appeal to an international audience, it's easier for TOs to use a conservative stage list rather than a liberal stage list. The primary risk in using a stage list that's too conservative for many players is that you simply bore players that are used to or want more dynamic stages. On the other hand, the risk in using too liberal stage lists for more conservative players is that a hazard or stage transition contributes to the loss of a stock (especially early on in a game's lifespan). Yes, it's technically the player's fault for not learning the stages well enough after being told ahead of time what stages to learn. Ignorance is a poor excuse.

Regardless, from a TO's perspective dealing with these sorts of incidents can be a headache, and typically players don't get very bored traveling from all around the world to play at international tournaments. In other words, the risk:reward ratio from a TOs perspective favors using a conservative stage list, opinions aside.

Additionally, it's not as cut and dry as "just learn the stages." There are many regions that would not change their conservative stage lists to match a liberal Apex stage list. Most players are not traveling to Apex, so it makes sense for TOs to continue supporting their local scenes with rulesets they enjoy. Because TOs keep with their conservative stage lists, it can be difficult in conservative regions to find local practice with players that are willing to play on liberal stages because they have no personal reason to play on these stages. This presents a problem to players that are planning on going to Apex. They may have difficulties finding relevant practice. TOs of international tournaments know it's much less likely players will attend their tournament if regional stage list ideology doesn't change in anticipation of Apex.

On the other hand, it's much easier for players in regions with more liberal stage list preferences to get suitable practice for Apex using a conservative stage list. They practice on all of those stages anyways.

Spoiler: Counterpick Stage Discussion

Counterpick Stages
● Castle Siege
● Delfino Plaza
● Duck Hunt
● Halberd
● Kongo Jungle 64 (Doubles only)
● Lylat Cruise
● Town & City
● Omega Stages*

* Treated as Final Destination in banning phase. If Final Destination is banned,
Omega Stages are banned and vice versa.

At first glance, we see Town and City, Duck Hunt, and Lylat pushed out of the starter group into the counterpicks. These are the more obvious counterpick options to include in a stage list with only 3 starters.

The more contested picks here are Halberd/Delfino/Castle Siege, and Skyloft/Wuhu's exclusion. However, in looking at the stage list from a more conservative perspective, it makes sense.

Halberd's stage transitions are very easy to maneuver- moreso than Skyloft/Wuhu. It takes less mental power to pay attention to the laser/claw and its subtle stage transitions than Skyloft/Wuhu's much more dynamic design. While the claw's presence makes the stage's inclusion inconsistent with conservative stage list ideology in a vacuum, players have several years of Brawl experience in playing around it, unlike with Skyloft/Wuhu. Also, I don't think general player inexperience with stages is a worthless consideration when you're trying to form a stage list everyone can be comfortable using. Delphino and Castle siege are two other stages the Brawl community overall has plenty of experience in playing on. And walk-offs aren't as big an issue as they were in Brawl too, considering players don't have to play around chain-grabs anymore.

 

[<π]

Still not happy...

I am so disappointed in the smash 4 ruleset. Even with this 11 stage long list we are only going to see 3 stages.

The logic for choosing stages and stock times makes me sad... the objective isn't to get japan to come to apex. they represent less than a percent of the total attendants and an even smaller percent than that of the spectators. At an event this big the objective should have been to appeal to the people watching the game even more so than the players.

when 1000s of dollars are on the line the most prepare players are going to come out on top regardless of how liberal the stage list is.

 

[webbedspace]

There are many regions that would not change their conservative stage lists to match a liberal Apex stage list. Most players are not traveling to Apex, so it makes sense for TOs to continue supporting their local scenes with rulesets they enjoy.

Hmm, I feel like the opposite seems to have happened: many liberal regions have changed to match a conservative Apex list. Specifically, the banning of Kongo has been accepted without question by many regions, even ones that had fine Kongo matches without complaint in December.

While the claw's presence makes the stage's inclusion inconsistent with conservative stage list ideology in a vacuum, players have several years of Brawl experience in playing around it, unlike with Skyloft/Wuhu.

Brawl, Brawl, Brawl. What I'm wondering is: isn't this biased in favour of Brawl alumni, and against Smash 4 newcomers? These newcomers could select Skyloft to ensure that the opponent, even with Brawl experience, is on an even keel with regards to stage familiarity. With only Brawl touring stages legal, the newcomer must, and will, play against years of experience with that particular stage.

 

[DanGR]

Hmm, I feel like the opposite seems to have happened: many liberal regions have changed to match a conservative Apex list. Specifically, the banning of Kongo has been accepted without question by many regions, even ones that had fine Kongo matches without complaint in December.

As you've said, liberal regions have adopted conservative stage lists in anticipation of Apex. The point I try to make in the OP is that if Apex had a very liberal ruleset, I think conservative regions would be much less likely to match rulesets than vice versa. This is because it's more intrusive to force conservative pIayers to learn stages than force liberal players to take away stages. I understand that's debatable.

I wish there was an easy way to look back at regional response to Apex 2009/2010 and see if this is really the case.

Brawl, Brawl, Brawl. What I'm wondering is: isn't this biased in favour of Brawl alumni, and against Smash 4 newcomers? These newcomers could select Skyloft to ensure that the opponent, even with Brawl experience, is on an even keel with regards to stage familiarity. With only Brawl touring stages legal, the newcomer must, and will, play against years of experience with that particular stage.

New players are battling years of experience anyways, whether or not the stage list in particular caters to Brawl players. They're battling years of experience of Brawl spacing, juggling, footsies yomi, counterpicking, etc. Brawl is just very similar to Sm4sh, mechanically.

Anyways, I wouldn't say the stage list is "good" simply because it caters to Brawl players. However, I would argue that part of being a good stage list for an international tournament is that it's "comfortable" for most players attending the tournament. And I'm guessing that most players that are entering Sm4sh at Apex played Brawl. Also, I think it's important for Apex to not be a testing ground for new stages- I think it's more a showcase of what players have learned up until now. To that end, I'd say it's better to start with a conservative list and add stages as the community understands more dynamic stages more readily. This is opposite to how I think local tournaments should approach the stage list.

 

[Nidtendofreak]

"Playing it safe" shouldn't come at the cost of effectively trashing 3 characters (The Miis), arguably a fourth (Palutena).

It also shouldn't come at the cost of making SSB4 seem like the same old, same old. We had Brawl for how many years? We're bored to death of that stage list. There is no good excuse for only adding one stage to singles and two to doubles. It hurts the stream views (people sick of watching every match start on Smashville), it hurts the tournament itself, and hurts the SSB4 scene as a whole. TOs WILL mimic APEX and not change after APEX has come and gone. It an easy way to set things up, just copy + paste the ruleset everybody knows.

Fair or not, APEX is going to set the default standard for SSB4 tournaments. Playing it safe with their tournament is actively hurting the entire scene. For the good of SSB4 as a whole... they don't really have a choice. They need to change to a more liberal list (SSB games ALWAYS end up cutting down the list. Let's not start with a tiny one to begin with.), they need to to change SSB4 to 3 stocks and Brawl to 2 (I can appreciate the time concerns... but Brawl has far less people than SSB4. Let SSB4 be played at its most optimal, let the least liked SSB game take the hit. Realistically the best time saver would be to cut a stock out of Melee but we all know that won't happen.), they need to use AA's system for customs as they greatly improve the balance of the game (And, ya know, let an extra 4 characters actually be usable...).

They decided one way or another to be the first big SSB4. They need to take the "risk" and fully embrace what SSB4 has to offer instead of trying to shoehorn it into a Brawl 2.0 role. The SSB community as a whole is more than willing to chop things out of the game, but very rarely if ever add things to the standard. The amount of things included must start off as high as possible, not comparable to Brawl's end point. I have no other way to say this: not making changes for the better and for the sake of SSB4's future is highly irresponsible. This is not just about the tournament, but something that eclipses APEX itself.

 

[Octagon]

More stages omg! There are so many great ones that should be used for Apex.

 

[Plain Yogurt]

To that end, I'd say it's better to start with a conservative list and add stages as the community understands more dynamic stages more readily. This is opposite to how I think local tournaments should approach the stage list.

I understand this sentiment, but from what I've seen the more likely scenario is that people are just gonna default to Apex's rules because "if that's what the biggest Smash tournament is running it must be good right?" Besides, from the streams I've been watching the commentators aren't saying stuff like "Oh we'll bring this stage back when we understand it better." I've been hearing more stuff like "why would this stage ever be legal it's big and campy and it kills you." Heck during Smash Worldwide I saw a sick Halberd combo kill utilizing the cannonball and half the chat was ******** about how the stage should be banned and why is the stage legal and stuff. And then what happens when someone gets carried off by T&C's platforms in winner's finals of a major tournament? Or gets left behind by Delfino/Castle Siege?

I mean, i haven't been at this tournament business for very long, but from what I've seen/heard from these tournaments, if anything the list is gonna get smaller, not bigger.