Enforcing Time Limits in Tournaments

[Sensei]

I think we should start enforcing the time limit rule for tournament matches, . Some of these matches last way too long and can delay tournaments and this should not happen especially where there are time and setup constraints in these nationals.

There should be timers at least for quarter, semis and finals where top players usually play and have good spacing/camping techniques that can create long matches. These players can also opt to enforce timers in earlier rounds or proceed at their own risk. We should have multiple portable timers (minimum of 2-4?) that players can set and place on top of the tv and if the match is being recorded we can place a digital timer within the video that is synced up to the other timer on the tv. These timers would have a buzzer when the timer approaches zero. Large stages, such as Hyrule, should have priority of use of timers as stages such as Dreamland do not promote such high use of camping.

I believe it should be 8 - 9 minutes. 10 minutes is too long. An additional option is to make matches 4 stock instead of 5. Please keep an open mind and see the consequences of the amount of stocks a match would have.

We have this timer on the rule-set but it is never enforced. It is time that we start getting serious as SSB is beginning to get more popular and the competition is getting higher.

Questions, comments, concerns? Post here

 

[KnitePhox]

I agree with enforcing time limits.

I like 5stocks more than 4 and personally vote for 5 stock @ 8 minutes.

 

[kys]

Completely agree. But this needs to be consistent. If you're going to implement timers into tournaments, then EVERY match needs a timer and EVERY stage needs a timer. Giving priority would just cause fights and disagreements.

 

[KeroKeroppi]

Personally I dont like the Idea. But If we do end up doing it, I agree with kys a hundred percent.

 

[SSB64-Jel]

Completely agree. But this needs to be consistent. If you're going to implement timers into tournaments, then EVERY match needs a timer and EVERY stage needs a timer. Giving priority would just cause fights and disagreements.

^This 100%. If it is to happen all matches have to be timed and it will be up to the TO on makeing sure it gets done with stop watches at everyones setup/match. Again this will be up to the TO if they want to put timers into their tournaments

 

[Nintendude]

I think that it might be time for us to switch to 4 stocks as the standard. The average length of a Melee match is somewhere around 4 to 4.5 minutes, with a common range of ~2 minutes to ~6 minutes. In 64, it seems like matches often last around 5 minutes with a range of ~3 minutes to ~7-9 minutes. I think switching to 4 stocks would make our matches more comparable in length to Melee matches.

 

[Sensei]

Completely agree. But this needs to be consistent. If you're going to implement timers into tournaments, then EVERY match needs a timer and EVERY stage needs a timer. Giving priority would just cause fights and disagreements.

The reason why I didn't say every match is because of resources. It may not be possible to have a timer for every single match being played. Apex had around 10 matches being played at once. Of course if it is possible, then every match should have a timer. If players agree to not have timers then there should be no disagreements and the match will be decided by KO. If players request a timer and there are no timers available then a judge or two will use their respective watches to time the match so discrepancies will be minimized, otherwise they elect to wait for a timer or proceed without one.

 

[KnitePhox]

I think that it might be time for us to switch to 4 stocks as the standard. The average length of a Melee match is somewhere around 4 to 4.5 minutes, with a common range of ~2 minutes to ~6 minutes. In 64, it seems like matches often last around 5 minutes with a range of ~3 minutes to ~7-9 minutes. I think switching to 4 stocks would make our matches more comparable in length to Melee matches.

For the most part, people lose stocks faster in this game than melee; imo.

Why do our rules need to be comparable with melee's?

 

[Nintendude]

That's true but only once people start hitting each other. As we saw this past weekend, sometimes there's droughts >30 seconds where nobody is getting hit. There's no particular reason that our rules need to be comparable to Melee's, but I think that Melee is a good standard to go by. Right now I think our matches take about as long as Brawl matches in general, and people always complain about how Brawl matches take forever.

 

[asianaussie]

I'm behind this 100%, it should be possible to put one timer (mechanical, kitchen or watch) next to every setup and have one/two judges wandering to press the timer whenever a match starts - surely there'll be people with watches, right?

Unless hbox etc is playing, Melee goes at a comparable speed to 64, even though one good touch can lead to a stock in 64, so 4 stocks isn't a bad idea. Either way is fine at the moment, I think the timer is by far a more urgent priority.

People complain about Brawl matches because they're long and not much happens (compared to their drunken FFAs), not just because they take forever.

 

[erbanez]

I think that it should come down to the players. Maybe, if someone is worried about the other person camping, etc. You could request a timer for the match. The standard has seemed to work somewhat, but maybe making a timer just an option would work great.

 

[asianaussie]

No, it should be standardised. That way no pointless complaints about the system can be made, nor will there be time-consuming disputes over needing a timer or not. It's too abusable if it's merely an option.

 

[SuPeRbOoM]

how about no hyrule pwn

Spoiler

or japan kirby dittos

 

[ballin4life]

what is this!?!?!? a ruleset discussion in the MAIN FORUM?

I would say move thread to backroom except that backroom is just SO busy with epic team tier list

 

[LLDL]

Yeah. I was kinda using my first match against Xaltis to warm up, and get used to the hori pad. He took a stock or two went straight to the right side of hyrule and wouldn't approach. I was tempted to put the controller down, but was the bigger man so I let him have his fun. Pretty sure he's the only one to do that ****, take it to that extreme. But I can see time limit being a problem in the case where both players want to be stubborn.

 

[Mahie]

Given the speed at which you lose stocks in this game sometimes, I feel like 4 stocks isn't enough to properly adapt. And it's not enough for "random" MUs like Falcon dittos.

 

[clubbadubba]

Yeah. I was kinda using my first match against Xaltis to warm up, and get used to the hori pad. He took a stock or two went straight to the right side of hyrule and wouldn't approach. I was tempted to put the controller down, but was the bigger man so I let him have his fun. Pretty sure he's the only one to do that ****, take it to that extreme. But I can see time limit being a problem in the case where both players want to be stubborn.

Funny story. So I played Xaltis second round (was expecting to play you actually). First round was my pika vs his fox on dl, gimp city he quits the game with 2 stocks left. counterpicks hyrule and goes dk, and proceeds to do the cargo hold chain on me whenever he can. I still beat him (rage quit with 1 life left), but before the second game started I had no idea I was about to be stalled. If someone had asked me before the game if I wanted to enforce time, I would've been chill and said naw. This is a reason why time limits, if enforced, should be enforced every game regardless of players wishes or not.

Overall though, I'm not so sure how much I like the idea, because it gives more incentive for the winning player to run away. Let's be real, on hyrule the winner could almost always run away from damage and we could end up with a result similar to the melee grand finals. Maybe in that case hyrule isn't a great competitive stage, i dunno. I really don't wanna see people get timed out is all, I think it takes away from the game.

 

[LLDL]

Yeah. Don't get me wrong, he was pretty nice in conversation and I liked him well enough. And he was 'playing to win'. Can't fault that.

This is about time limits though

I also don't agree with 4 stocks. The game DOES move too fast and sometimes your 5th stock will be where you have fully learned your opponent and can make a comeback. I've done it plenty of times. 7 minutes seems reasonable also.

This is just theoretical, but would it be possible to hack a timer and possibly (name tags) into 64? Has anything of that magnitude been done hack wise? I would imagine you could patch a rom and inject into a cartridge. of some sort to play on console.

 

[firo]

My thoughts:

-Stay at 5 stocks. In brawl, being down by two stocks is normally seen as pretty much unrecoverable. In melee, being down three stocks is similar. In 64, being down three stocks is not game ending. When you take into account quick stock ending stuff like easy gimps on link at 0% all 4 stocks will do is make people play even more cautious and will probably not save any time in the end.

-Get rid of hyrule, or at best make it a counterpick. Sets should begin on Dreamland and have congo/peaches as counterpick. I've been anti-hyrule for quite a while now and after seeing apex it just acts as reassurance. Sure, dreamland buffs pikachu and falcon and hurts fox and link, but the smaller blast zones on dreamland (the reason why Jaime counterpicked Samus on Dreamland against Pikachu) help.

-As for the timer, is it THAT ridiculous to consider using time mode and then just ending the game after 5 stocks as opposed to doing something whacky requiring gameshark that may not even be possible?

 

[Peek~]

Make this happen

Cellphones usually have a stopwatch on them

 

[clubbadubba]

The problem with using time mode and counting stocks is what happens if both players die one after the other on their last stocks and its disputable who died first? That's the reason 12 char battles are done by killing off chars instead of just ending the game after the appropriate amount of stocks. It is rare yes, but does happen occasionally. Of course, with someone manually timing, it could be disputable who was winning when the time ended. I suppose if the match is recorded there is always the option of watching the replay frame by frame to decide the winner.

 

[Sensei]

My thoughts:

-Stay at 5 stocks. In brawl, being down by two stocks is normally seen as pretty much unrecoverable. In melee, being down three stocks is similar. In 64, being down three stocks is not game ending. When you take into account quick stock ending stuff like easy gimps on link at 0% all 4 stocks will do is make people play even more cautious and will probably not save any time in the end.

-Get rid of hyrule, or at best make it a counterpick. Sets should begin on Dreamland and have congo/peaches as counterpick. I've been anti-hyrule for quite a while now and after seeing apex it just acts as reassurance. Sure, dreamland buffs pikachu and falcon and hurts fox and link, but the smaller blast zones on dreamland (the reason why Jaime counterpicked Samus on Dreamland against Pikachu) help.

-As for the timer, is it THAT ridiculous to consider using time mode and then just ending the game after 5 stocks as opposed to doing something whacky requiring gameshark that may not even be possible?

I can agree with your first point.

Hyrule should not be banned, maybe a counterpick, it is still a fairly balanced stage except for camping and "competitive" tornadoes for team combos. Timers should make games go by faster though there is always a possibility of a forced timeout by a player. (see hungrybox)

Using timer and ending after 5 stocks have been lost seems viable. Though there needs to be a judge to keep track of stock. I am not sure if there is a code for gameshark that would allow a timed stock match, though I would imagine it would not be too hard to create one. However, not everyone has gameshark.

In either case I am leaning more towards a standardized procedure for all matches to prevent complaints and promote fairness.

 

[Spyro]

Sorry if I’m being a noob that has no idea what he’s talking about but I think having a timer would actually encourage camping instead of discouraging it because it probably would not be that hard to time someone out on hyrule with a fast character.

 

[Sempiternity]

Sorry if I’m being a noob that has no idea what he’s talking about but I think having a timer would actually encourage camping instead of discouraging it because it probably would not be that hard to time someone out on hyrule with a fast character.

This is certainly a valid point. Pikachu and his goddamn Up+B could easily go an entire 8 minutes on Hyrule without getting hit at all.

 

[Sensei]

This is certainly a valid point. Pikachu and his goddamn Up+B could easily go an entire 8 minutes on Hyrule without getting hit at all.

I have considered that. This would fall under the category of Extreme stalling. It is somewhat difficult to enforce as it is somewhat subjective. There has to be some standardardized enforcement such as no 2-3 quick attacks (pikas up b) in a row.

 

[ciaza]

The problem with using time mode and counting stocks is what happens if both players die one after the other on their last stocks and its disputable who died first? That's the reason 12 char battles are done by killing off chars instead of just ending the game after the appropriate amount of stocks. It is rare yes, but does happen occasionally. Of course, with someone manually timing, it could be disputable who was winning when the time ended. I suppose if the match is recorded there is always the option of watching the replay frame by frame to decide the winner.

i think i pointed it out a while ago that you can look at who respawned on what spawn cloud. for example i'm sure you noticed that after you die on hyrule the cloud will always spawn you directly over the top platform. if 2 players die at roughly the same time, whoever spawns over the top platform died first. this works on every stage too.

on the topic at hand, i don't like the idea of timers because of cases like: "omg i'm a stock up and there's one minute left imma run away til the game ends".

 

[clubbadubba]

good point ciaza, i must've missed it before. But I am definitely of the opinion that a strict time limit encourages camping if you are winning, especially on hyrule, and I don't think anyone wants 64 to be like brawl.

Melee is a much faster game than brawl and 64, which allows them to have a timer without many matches timing out (except special situations like young link vs puff). The characters in that game are fast enough to close space and force the action. Whereas in 64, it is pretty easy for a character to get away if they want to. It seems like the optimal strategy would be to get up a stock, and then camp and make your opponent put himself in a bad position, which just seems wrong and not fun.

 

[asianaussie]

There needs to be some enforcement of camping in general. Maybe if it's the winning player who does it for more than, say, one minute total, then they're called out on it.

This seems incredibly hard to implement. I think some sort of subjective judgement from a TO or third party is the most practical solution, but of course people will argue to and fro about this.

 

[Battlecow]

A timer is probably necessary, but 10 minutes sounds good to me. I agree, 10 minutes is a long time to watch/play a boring match, but anything less lends itself to poke->timeouts.

Really, the problem here is hyrule. If we get rid of hyrule, which we should already be doing because of the nadoes, this nonsense goes away except for maybe in a couple wacky matchups. There's just no excuse for keeping that stage; it's a major problem at every tournament.

I'm 100% against changing to 4 stocks. 4 is way too quick-the 5 stock match has a nice flow, you have time to adjust, etc. 4 stock matches would be over almost before you could really get into the groove.

The subjective rule against camping is quite possibly the worst idea ever. Flies in the face of everything a competitive game should be to have a random guy sitting there and deciding that X hasn't been approaching Y hard enough and that he needs to go kill himself. The fact that you'd consider actual subjective anti-camping rules before simple banning of the broken stage is boggle-minding.

 

[Sensei]

The subjective rule against camping is quite possibly the worst idea ever. Flies in the face of everything a competitive game should be to have a random guy sitting there and deciding that X hasn't been approaching Y hard enough and that he needs to go kill himself. The fact that you'd consider actual subjective anti-camping rules before simple banning of the broken stage is boggle-minding.

I never said that a person should kill themselves if they are stalling. They would get a warning and if they continue, additionals measures would be taken. This isn't all that different from rules against peach or jigglypuff stalling underneath a stage. Keep an open mind.

 

[asianaussie]

the broken part about hyrule is how it facilitates camping and maybe the tornado on the elevated center platform, every other tornado can be dealt with

getting rid of camping through other means is a reasonable solution, you're just so fixated on banning a stage that you don't seem to recognise this

also, don't try to dismiss things by applying absurdist logic to it, there's simply no objective way to measure camping, so i use the word 'subjective': sitting in the tent and not moving is obviously camping etc

 

[Battlecow]

I never said that a person should kill themselves if they are stalling. They would get a warning and if they continue, additionals measures would be taken. This isn't all that different from rules against peach or jigglypuff stalling underneath a stage. Keep an open mind.

I was responding to AA, not to you. The melee anti-stalling rules are totally different because they're unbeatable, they were never a part of the metagame, and they're not subjectively judged. If pika could up-B on the ledge infinitely, invincibly, and unbeatably, we should ban that, but banning a runaway pika to keep hyrule is exactly the same as banning a runaway fox to keep melee hyrule legal.

the broken part about hyrule is how it facilitates camping and maybe the tornado on the elevated center platform, every other tornado can be dealt with

getting rid of camping through other means is a reasonable solution, you're just so fixated on banning a stage that you don't seem to recognise this

also, don't try to dismiss things by applying absurdist logic to it, there's simply no objective way to measure camping, so i use the word 'subjective': sitting in the tent and not moving is obviously camping etc

there's simply no objective way to measure camping, so i use the word 'subjective'

there's simply no objective way to measure camping

no objective way to measure camping

And we have a winner. You want to make a bold step forward, to make a new page in fighting game-hell, in gaming-history by making sure there are unbiased officials at every tournament match (easy to implement on a smash tourney budget), so that you can take a broken stage and making it legal by forcing players to bend their games around an ironclad rule, skirting it for as long as possible and abusing it as best they can.

sitting in the tent and not moving is obviously camping etc

So, if the person the onus is on short hops every thirty seconds and uairs, is that still camping? If they do a full hop Fair and go a little out of the tent? Maybe they have to actively attack their opponent-real judgement call there, but OK, we've got hypothetical referees-how far away from the tent do they have to chase them? maybe they have to deal damage, meaning that we have them attacking an impenetrable position and either losing the lead or falling further behind, depending on who you put the onus on. And now the youtube comments are all focused on the bad calls the ref made, because X was totally attacking Y at 7:32, look at how close that bair came.

I could go on for pages about the many reasons why subjective and official-dependent rules are the worst idea ever, and why banning camping, even were it easily enforceable, would be a bad idea, but I'm gonna wait for sane people to wake up and post first.

 

[asianaussie]

If you think that someone will honestly say 'Oh, but he short hopped while in the tent, he can't be camping', then I'm justified in laughing at you...

Banning Hyrule is another topic entirely, and I'm all for trying it out based on the responses of some Apex attendees, but I still think it's at least something for the CP list.

There need to be anti-camping rules anyway.

Respond to this post in the Hyrule should be CP thread, if at all.

Back on topic and away from Battlecow's florid and repetitive (and weaker for it) arguments, timing isn't hard to do at all: the setup to participant ratio should stay around a fixed amount or lower, meaning there will basically always be somebody with a cellphone or watch in the crowd who can set it and count down from 5 if need be.

 

[Sempiternity]

Why don't we just say the winning player isn't allowed to be in the tent area unless he's engaging his opponent?

or something

 

[Gea]

Because that is a rule that is difficult to enforce cleanly.

 

[Sempiternity]

It's pretty easy to enforce if both players are stationary for extended periods of time (see: Gerson v Isai)

 

[clubbadubba]

Why don't we just say the winning player isn't allowed to be in the tent area unless he's engaging his opponent?

or something

Well in general, it is the duty of the loser to approach the winner, not the other way around. Plus that sort of rule gives the losing player more stage to work with than the winner, giving him a clear advantage. That or anything like it is not a good solution.

 

[asianaussie]

With a timer, the losing player should be constantly approaching or else they'll just lose on time

banning certain parts of a stage is impractical, especially if you just get hit into it: you'll have no choice but to come out straightaway or be penalised somehow, which isn't fair at all

 

[Olikus]

sitting in the tent and not moving is obviously camping etc

Your known for trolling so I hope your trolling now. Just sitting and wait in the tent is stalling if you do it for a longer period.

Battlecow got a good point. The reason the timer might not work so good is because of guess which stage? HYrule again! You get another problem with that stage. Some caracthers can just run away easily wiythout getting hit if its getting close to a timeout.

Im actually really wanthing a timer. But hyrule kinds of ruin it.

 

[asianaussie]

your just tempting me with you're grammar, aren't you

do you honestly think i meant anything other than for an extended period of time?

theorycraft all day every day