Last weekend, I had the good fortune of being able to go to APEX 2015. It was, simply put, awesome. Watching players from all around the world compete on the big screen with hundreds of other Smash fans is an experience I won't soon forget. Melee? Great. Smash 4? Amazing. Even 64 got its share of the limelight. But as some of the later Smash 4 matches rolled around, the event slowed to a crawl.
I bet you can guess why.
Far too much time is being spent on this menu during tournaments.
During Smash 4, there was nearly as much activity in between matches as there was during. People were running up and down the aisle, advising their friends on what to do versus their opponents. Players 'debated their counterpicks' while having full conversations about the last match, or what to do next. It was obvious, it was boring, and everyone but the players involved hated it. Coaching in Smash, especially Smash 4, needs to go - not just for the reasons above, but for the integrity of the game.
Why Is It A Problem?
Coaching has been a contentious issue in Smash for awhile now. At CEO 2014 last year, Project M was plagued by coaching, with mid-set coaching sessions taking longer than the matches themselves in some cases. Because the tournament took so long, several people suggested moving Project M sets from four stocks to three in order to save time - an effective idea that unfortunately did not address the true problem. At that point, Project M 3.0 was a relatively new game still. Compared to other Smash titles, Project M is considered the most matchup-based of the series; many characters have unique gameplay mechanics that must be taught or experienced to be understood. I'd go as far as to say there are situations in Project M where the player with more character knowledge can win over a stronger opponent. Because of this, knowledge of the game is a significant part of the game.
Smash 4 is even more heavily reliant on knowledge: matchups are unique, and situational understanding is a huge part of the game. This is exacerbated by the fact that Smash 4, compared to Melee or Project M, is not particularly technical. There are no useful techniques that are difficult to execute, so a player's technical skill, while important, pales in comparison to what they know. The most important attributes a Smash 4 player can have are situation awareness and adaptability. Giving players 'coaches' that can fill in knowledge gaps allows a second party to essentially adapt for them. So mid-set coaching, where a player is taught what to do in situation X, Y, or Z, gives that player an advantage over their opponent that they frankly have not earned, and do not deserve.
Thousands of people were watching matches during APEX 2015 weekend. Why should they have to watch three minutes of coaching in between?
Now, some of you may be saying to yourselves, "well who cares? Both players can have coaches, after all." This may be true, but it doesn't make it fair. Coaching becomes doubly problematic when you realize that the only players getting significant mileage out of coaching situations are top players. Regular player Joe Schmoe's friends don't have a lot of great advice to give him; an elite player's training partners, on the other hand, are likely able to tell them exactly what to watch for. As an example, take ZeRo. He is the undisputed best at Smash 4. Nobody doubts his talent, and he will likely be at the forefront of his game for years to come, coach or no. But let's say some new player appears out of nowhere, challenging him for his spot. Should that player have to play against ZeRo and the minds of his top-level friends? Or should he be afforded the opportunity to beat, or be beaten, by the best in the world in a true battle of wits?
So What Should We Do?
Don't get me wrong: this all makes sense. Smash 4 is a new game, and even the best players have a lot to learn before they can claim full mastery of it. Knowledge is far from uniform, and a Rosalina player may notice things about a certain matchup that a Diddy Kong player wouldn't. Everyone wants to share knowledge and help their friends win, and I'll admit that's a noble cause. But at the end of the day, once a set starts, it's a competition between two players - not their posses. Add in the amount of time it wastes throughout a tournament, and you have an issue that not only cheapens competition, but keeps tournaments from running at a consistent pace.
Part of the competitive meta right now is the amount of knowledge you bring into a match. Let's get rid of coaching once and for all, and treat game knowledge like the part of the competition it deserves to be.
This piece is purely the opinion of its author, and does not reflect the position of Smashboards or its affiliates.
I bet you can guess why.
Far too much time is being spent on this menu during tournaments.
During Smash 4, there was nearly as much activity in between matches as there was during. People were running up and down the aisle, advising their friends on what to do versus their opponents. Players 'debated their counterpicks' while having full conversations about the last match, or what to do next. It was obvious, it was boring, and everyone but the players involved hated it. Coaching in Smash, especially Smash 4, needs to go - not just for the reasons above, but for the integrity of the game.
Why Is It A Problem?
Coaching has been a contentious issue in Smash for awhile now. At CEO 2014 last year, Project M was plagued by coaching, with mid-set coaching sessions taking longer than the matches themselves in some cases. Because the tournament took so long, several people suggested moving Project M sets from four stocks to three in order to save time - an effective idea that unfortunately did not address the true problem. At that point, Project M 3.0 was a relatively new game still. Compared to other Smash titles, Project M is considered the most matchup-based of the series; many characters have unique gameplay mechanics that must be taught or experienced to be understood. I'd go as far as to say there are situations in Project M where the player with more character knowledge can win over a stronger opponent. Because of this, knowledge of the game is a significant part of the game.
Smash 4 is even more heavily reliant on knowledge: matchups are unique, and situational understanding is a huge part of the game. This is exacerbated by the fact that Smash 4, compared to Melee or Project M, is not particularly technical. There are no useful techniques that are difficult to execute, so a player's technical skill, while important, pales in comparison to what they know. The most important attributes a Smash 4 player can have are situation awareness and adaptability. Giving players 'coaches' that can fill in knowledge gaps allows a second party to essentially adapt for them. So mid-set coaching, where a player is taught what to do in situation X, Y, or Z, gives that player an advantage over their opponent that they frankly have not earned, and do not deserve.
Thousands of people were watching matches during APEX 2015 weekend. Why should they have to watch three minutes of coaching in between?
Now, some of you may be saying to yourselves, "well who cares? Both players can have coaches, after all." This may be true, but it doesn't make it fair. Coaching becomes doubly problematic when you realize that the only players getting significant mileage out of coaching situations are top players. Regular player Joe Schmoe's friends don't have a lot of great advice to give him; an elite player's training partners, on the other hand, are likely able to tell them exactly what to watch for. As an example, take ZeRo. He is the undisputed best at Smash 4. Nobody doubts his talent, and he will likely be at the forefront of his game for years to come, coach or no. But let's say some new player appears out of nowhere, challenging him for his spot. Should that player have to play against ZeRo and the minds of his top-level friends? Or should he be afforded the opportunity to beat, or be beaten, by the best in the world in a true battle of wits?
So What Should We Do?
Don't get me wrong: this all makes sense. Smash 4 is a new game, and even the best players have a lot to learn before they can claim full mastery of it. Knowledge is far from uniform, and a Rosalina player may notice things about a certain matchup that a Diddy Kong player wouldn't. Everyone wants to share knowledge and help their friends win, and I'll admit that's a noble cause. But at the end of the day, once a set starts, it's a competition between two players - not their posses. Add in the amount of time it wastes throughout a tournament, and you have an issue that not only cheapens competition, but keeps tournaments from running at a consistent pace.
Part of the competitive meta right now is the amount of knowledge you bring into a match. Let's get rid of coaching once and for all, and treat game knowledge like the part of the competition it deserves to be.
This piece is purely the opinion of its author, and does not reflect the position of Smashboards or its affiliates.
Last edited:
