Idea to add HYPE! to our tournaments

[Dabuz]

This won't cause more matches to go to time, the reduction of the timer is equivalent to the reduction of stocks, therefore with 1 less stock, take off 2/3 minutes, the LGL is then reduced by an equivalent amount to the timer, if its 5 minutes, cut the LGL by 3/8, if the timer is 6 minutes, cut the LGL by 1/4. Statistically, the ratio of time-outs won't change much because we keep the same time-stock-LGL ratio

 

[SaveMeJebus]

actually this punishes players for jumping since they are forced to approach when they are in the air more.

and MK is pretty much the only character that just flat out times people out. all other characters that run the timer will usually win off of punishing the aggro opponent.

It only punishes players for jumping if neither player intends to approach the other player. You give me a match in which a grounded character timed an aerial character out and I will match it with a time out that does not involve MK.

@Dabuz, lowering the timer will increase the amount of timeouts since it lowers the amount of time they are forced to play safe.

 

[CT Chia]

2 stock 5 min Bo3 sounds really good to me

I don't think a timer that low will be prone to a lot more time outs. Sure there are times where a stock isn't lost until 3-4 min in, but that's rare. Most of the time, if you see a stock finally being lost in the 5:xx mark (2-3 min), the match is progressing slow. If that happens, lets say there is 2 minutes left on the clock. Meaning the opponent who is up (2 stocks to 1) has to time out for 2+ more minutes, which is still a lot of time imo. It's not worth the risk to try and time out for that long when a single kill will put you that close to the opponent again (since there will never be a 3-1 stock lead). Fighting and confrontation will still happen.

And a 15 minute set? Sounds AMAZING compared to what it is now. Even if every match goes to time, it's still shorter than what the average is now with 8 min Bo3 not going to time lol.

 

[SaveMeJebus]

2 stocks 6 min Bo3 (finals Bo5)

The winner of a match gets two bans for the first win and an extra ban for each additional win. No DSR

winner of a time out is determined by:
1. least damage
2. least air time
3. least amount of ledge grabs

 

[Steam]

It only punishes players for jumping if neither player intends to approach the other player. You give me a match in which a grounded character timed an aerial character out and I will match it with a time out that does not involve MK.

@Dabuz, lowering the timer will increase the amount of timeouts since it lowers the amount of time they are forced to play safe.

it's not about that. it's that someone who has been in the air more will be forced to approach even if they're in the lead... and this is brawl. approaching is bad.

 

[SaveMeJebus]

it's not about that. it's that someone who has been in the air more will be forced to approach even if they're in the lead... and this is brawl. approaching is bad.

Not with this timeout rule

winner of a time out is determined by:
1. least damage
2. least air time
3. least amount of ledge grabs

If a grounded character wants to win a time out, he needs to make sure he has less air time and less damage than his opponent. If an aerial character wants to win the timeout, he needs to make sure he has less damage and less ledge grabs than the opponent.

 

[Dabuz]

Let me address something, do not derail this topic into timeouts. Timeouts are all theory-craft right now, i proposed 6 minutes because that makes getting a timeout even harder than it currently is due to the ratio of 1/3 stock reduction, 1/4th time reduction. But before you theory-craft this, let me say, what proof do you have that time-outs will become a bigger problem?


Also, if you want to debate the rules and conditions of what happens in the case of a time-out, bring it into another thread, specifically, this one: http://www.smashboards.com/showthread.php?t=304966

 

[Eddie G]

This is a pretty good proposal, but in all honesty...there is but only one step that needs to be taken: US needs to learn how to play high level matches and be entertaining at the same time like Europe. Leon, Mr.R, Kaos, Semifer, Staco, Kasper, Blub, Gluttony, Orion (post-Euro exposure), Izaw, Yami, Zudenka, and so many other players from over there know how put on a good ****ing show. I mean what I said with the deepest sincerity. Don't get me wrong...there are some US players who also put on a good show while still managing to push their character beyond its limits (Trela immediately comes to mind) but the majority of our metagame is excessive defensive play and abuse of a faulty counterpick system time and time again. So...how about we follow the aggressive/hype example set by Europe (or at least France) and start by banning either Rainbow or Brinstar if we're going to keep MK around. Those are immediate and utter hype killers, especially with players/MKs like M2K, Tearbear, etc. who have no shame in trying to abuse them to the fullest.

It's three years down the road people, clearly everyone realizes that despite them both being viable enough stages in themselves, with MK's presence they are simply too exploitable.

And if you don't believe me...just ask yourself how many times you've seen timeouts occur in European matches, or the general amount of time that most matches are finished by when compared to the states. I'm willing to bet that if they were over here instead of us, doing what they do, playing the way they play, and pumping out the high quality (visually and gameplay-wise) videos that they do...they'd already have this game on EVO's lineup.

I say this all with an objective mindset because I watch videos from all regions, mind you.

 

[SaveMeJebus]

Let me address something, do not derail this topic into timeouts. Timeouts are all theory-craft right now, i proposed 6 minutes because that makes getting a timeout even harder than it currently is due to the ratio of 1/3 stock reduction, 1/4th time reduction. But before you theory-craft this, let me say, what proof do you have that time-outs will become a bigger problem?


Also, if you want to debate the rules and conditions of what happens in the case of a time-out, bring it into another thread, specifically, this one: http://www.smashboards.com/showthread.php?t=304966

That might work

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

The only reason I can think of off the top of my head that 1-stock would be iffy is because of low-% gimps. In a 1 stock match, a low-% gimp is the end. In a 2 stock match, at least the opponent has a change to gimp the opponent back and make a small comeback. So, 1 stock Bo7 is actually closer to, say, Tekken (early ring outs could be considered analogous to low-% gimps).

The reason that low % gimps wouldn't be a problem is because you can still bring it back. Losing one "match" isn't the end of the world any more. In fact, this may even make low % gimps less effective, due to how much they normally impact a set; if I somehow score a low % gimp on a player of a similar level to me, he's not coming back and winning unless he was already pretty far in the lead, and the demoralizing aspect may very well cost him the set. Bo1? He loses the match and has 3-5 more to work with. No biggie.

2 stocks 6 min Bo3 (finals Bo5)

The winner of a match gets two bans for the first win and an extra ban for each additional win. No DSR

winner of a time out is determined by:
1. least damage
2. least air time
3. least amount of ledge grabs

Shut the **** up about air time limits, Jebus. Not even you are this thick.

 

[Eddie G]

Enough with twiddling your thumbs and trying to play around with stocks, air time rules, time limits, and all of that stuff people. Those are just temporary bandages trying to be applied to a deep sword slice.

Read my post.

 

[SaveMeJebus]

@BPC, even though neither of us like air time limits, it solves all the problems players have with matches being boring to watch. I don't like it since I like the way the game is currently being played but if you want both players to approach, air time limit is the best way to do it.

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

Jebus, that's like saying "if the game goes to time, Disqualify both players" is justified because it makes matches more exciting. >.>

 

[SaveMeJebus]

Jebus, that's like saying "if the game goes to time, Disqualify both players" is justified because it makes matches more exciting. >.>

Lowering the timer is just going to make timeouts go from 8 minutes to 5 minutes. I'm not saying it's a good rule but if you want matches to be more exciting/less boring, there is no rule better than the air time rule. Again, show me a match where a grounded character caused a match to go to time.

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

Lowering the timer is just going to make timeouts go from 8 minutes to 5 minutes. I'm not saying it's a good rule but if you want matches to be more exciting/less boring, there is no rule better than the air time rule.

Well, if we're going for the blind removal of time-outs without looking to see what effect it has on the metagame, then my rule (DQ both players in the event of a time-out) is muuuuch better. But here's the thing: we have to look at the metagame as a whole. Air time limits are stupid and unreasonable, and having them is just bad.

 

[Eddie G]

I'd appreciate it if my post were to be addressed by someone, thank you.

 

[Dabuz]

@BPC, even though neither of us like air time limits, it solves all the problems players have with matches being boring to watch. I don't like it since I like the way the game is currently being played but if you want both players to approach, air time limit is the best way to do it.

PLEASE! bring all this time-out/air time talk to another thread.


Back on topic, is anyone who is in support of this idea willing to run a FULL tournament with 2 stocks? Locals are very convenient for experimenting with. Im going to talk to a TO in my area and see what he says.

To anyone who is lurking, please post and say "agree" or "disagree", just to get an idea of how much support our community can get to bring back the HYPE!



@King Beef: The problem is, we have been conditioned to play defensively and to win, and with MK dominating the metagame, the problem is deeply rooted into certain players. We can't fix the whole game, but lowering the stocks in one step to fixing American problems. EU is lucky they have no MK problem :/

 

[Steam]

Lowering the timer is just going to make timeouts go from 8 minutes to 5 minutes. I'm not saying it's a good rule but if you want matches to be more exciting/less boring, there is no rule better than the air time rule. Again, show me a match where a grounded character caused a match to go to time.

I was unaware we had a timeout problem with characters not named MK. I for one don't watch GFs because I'm tired of MK all the time.

 

[Ghostbone]

Lucario wouldn't be affected that much from changing from 3 stocks to 2 stocks would he? ZSS would be the most heavily affected, she'd probably jump up a few spots on the tier list.

 

[stingers]

im running tourneys 2 stock 5 min from now on. too goof

 

[Dabuz]

im running tourneys 2 stock 5 min from now on. Too goof

thank you! ^_^

 

[kid craft 24/sonic master]

Adding too many rules is only going to make things worse not better, btw
But not I'm just going to state my own personal honest opinion on how to fix our games hype problem.

The rules we've implemented have hindered the game. Like most of the SF ppl always take us for a joke because of how we're always taking out things from the game with rules.

I know most smashers who go to tourneys think of items as a thing to be used with a bunch of friends but that imho is what tourneys need to add hype, to add that unpredictable upset and allow ppl to turn matches around.

Now reducing the stock count to 2 and making timer 5 mins sounds nice and all but it's not really going to change how ppl watching see the game. I doubt taking away a stock is going to make anyone play more aggressive, in fact it would make them play more defensive knowing they have less lives and have to use them wisely.

I suggested score matches in an earlier post because it help eliminate that factor of having to play so defensively when you have unlimited lives and the only thing to worry about it having more kills by the end of the match. This would also guarantee matches don't last too long each set if the timer were say 3 minutes lasting no longer then 10 minutes. Having items paired with 2 or 3 minute score matches would almost indefinitely force players to play more aggressive if only for the factor of not getting killed by any items out on the field. I know most ppl here probably despise items and would rather do stocks but there a problem with using stocks and items together that I've found at least through my current Item-Brawl project and that's you'd have to implement rules to limit item usage.

The more we limit the game the less hype we can in the end see for matches. Also the way we play makes it hard for newcomers to jump into the scene. I know i probably sound like a complete and utter idiot for trying to explain these things but If your trying to add hype to a tourney you need to add things and change things so that you keep the players always guessing and keep each game unique and fresh for ppl to watch and for the players to play.


Although I'll gladly support this but i just felt I'd voice my opinion while I'm at it.

 

[SaveMeJebus]

Time out rule

Well, if we're going for the blind removal of time-outs without looking to see what effect it has on the metagame, then my rule (DQ both players in the event of a time-out) is muuuuch better. But here's the thing: we have to look at the metagame as a whole. Air time limits are stupid and unreasonable, and having them is just bad.

This rule will only come into effect if both players have the same amount of stocks and neither of them have gone over the ledge grab limit

In the event of a time out, a 1 stock 3 min rematch will be played. If that match goes to time, both players will unplug their controllers and let the game determine the winner (sudden death bombs)

 

[stingers]

np. the way I see it, theres no use talking on smashboards about it, because there will be people who just troll the whole time, people who are too against change to agree to something new, etc. the only way to get radical changes like this to work are to just go out and do them. so thats what imma do

 

[san.]

This is a pretty good proposal, but in all honesty...there is but only one step that needs to be taken: US needs to learn how to play high level matches and be entertaining at the same time like Europe. Leon, Mr.R, Kaos, Semifer, Staco, Kasper, Blub, Gluttony, Orion (post-Euro exposure), Izaw, Yami, Zudenka, and so many other players from over there know how put on a good ****ing show. I mean what I said with the deepest sincerity. Don't get me wrong...there are some US players who also put on a good show while still managing to push their character beyond its limits (Trela immediately comes to mind) but the majority of our metagame is excessive defensive play and abuse of a faulty counterpick system time and time again.

We can't just change the mentality of our player base, so the next best thing is to tweak our current ruleset in an objective manner such that we aren't forcing people to play any differently than they already are, yet make it more interesting.

Something like food on low, there's nothing too much wrong with this and may improve some things, but it has a very direct influence on the match. Players are rarely able to come back from a 3 to 1 stock deficit. I have read that the person who gets the other player to 1 stock without being revenge killed wins a vast majority of matches. In many ways, the third stock just prolongs everything.

In melee, gimps, edgeguards, and low percent kills are much more common, and it's harder to survive if you get caught in a bad situation. Even more so in smash64. Brawl doesn't have a lot of these things, or at least to that extent.

Switching up the number of stocks decreases total set time, and makes those long finals sets much less of a chore. There are more indirect changes that may provide benefits. If we use more 3/5 sets, that may be more of a direct change, but Genesis 2/MLG champs showed us that more 3/5 sets aren't too bad anyways.

So...how about we follow the aggressive/hype example set by Europe (or at least France) and start by banning either Rainbow or Brinstar if we're going to keep MK around. Those are immediate and utter hype killers, especially with players/MKs like M2K, Tearbear, etc. who have no shame in trying to abuse them to the fullest.

It's three years down the road people, clearly everyone realizes that despite them both being viable enough stages in themselves, with MK's presence they are simply too exploitable.

And if you don't believe me...just ask yourself how many times you've seen timeouts occur in European matches, or the general amount of time that most matches are finished by when compared to the states. I'm willing to bet that if they were over here instead of us, doing what they do, playing the way they play, and pumping out the high quality (visually and gameplay-wise) videos that they do...they'd already have this game on EVO's lineup.

I say this all with an objective mindset because I watch videos from all regions, mind you.

Who's to say MK's dominance will decrease? NY/NJ has had conservative rulesets forever, and it's still MK land. It usally points to MK being the same. MK is no worse on those other stages, it's just that the other characters do better. Isolate other characters' best stages and ban their bad stages, and maybe, just maybe, they may be able to compete. -_-


I think there's a region that MLG had such varied results when the stage list was increased, but that's for later.

 

[Tesh]

--->

warms the bench.

Pokemon Trainer for upper mid tier

Seems like its not a big deal to switch from 3 to 2 stocks. If you decease the timer, people are still gonna camp their ***** off and time out. @ 2 stock/5 minutes I would time out probably 50% of the time (hell i don't get bored of camping til the 2 minute mark).


Honestly, the game is what it is. I watched ALOT of the starcraft stream this past MLG weekend and those games can take 8-30 minutes (one match even took an hour) and there was a MASSIVE crowd, cheering at every play. The commentary was hugely informative of what was going on as well. The solution isn't just to shorten the game. I don't wanna watch grass grow for 8 minutes, and if you reduce it by 1/3 I still don't wanna stand around and watch grass grow.

 

[kid craft 24/sonic master]

San i under stage what your trying to explain my not trying to change our players mentality i think that is what needs to be done in order to help make the game better. As only further adding rules is only going to make things more complicated for ppl and further make this game unappealing to new player.

 

[Steam]

Lucario wouldn't be affected that much from changing from 3 stocks to 2 stocks would he? ZSS would be the most heavily affected, she'd probably jump up a few spots on the tier list.

only in teams

 

[san.]

San i under stage what your trying to explain my not trying to change our players mentality i think that is what needs to be done in order to help make the game better. As only further adding rules is only going to make things more complicated for ppl and further make this game unappealing to new player.

Tweaking rules aren't going to be any more complicated than they were before. ADDING rules makes it more complic-- *gets bombarded by LGL scrooging rule IDC etc*


It would take much more direct intervention in the ruleset to change a lot of our players' mentalities by discouraging a lot of those strategies.

Ban RC and brinstar, and chances are, it'll be much harder to make them legal again.

Even so, we still see platform camping on all of our starters anyways.

 

[Dabuz]

Honestly, the game is what it is. I watched ALOT of the starcraft stream this past MLG weekend and those games can take 8-30 minutes (one match even took an hour) and there was a MASSIVE crowd, cheering at every play. The commentary was hugely informative of what was going on as well. The solution isn't just to shorten the game. I don't wanna watch grass grow for 8 minutes, and if you reduce it by 1/3 I still don't wanna stand around and watch grass grow.

Woah, color that isn't camouflaged with background @_@ thanks.


The difference is the genre of game, StarCraft 2 is an RTS, those types of games are meant to be long and attract people BECAUSE they are long, it comes with the RTS territory. Even so, an average brawl set is anywhere from 8-24 minutes, with finals being longer and GFs possibly taking forever (I was once in a 45 minute GF -_-). The thing is, fighting game communities are vastly different from RTS communities, the difference that matters here is, the community favors quick and fast paced matches. Think about what RTS stands for.

Real. Time. Strategy. It has the word time in the description, of course it will be long.

Brawl is a fighting game, a genre of game about quick matches that are never over until they are over, with players going back and forth at dizzying speeds, knowing one mistake=losing a match. Thats the genre we are in, thats why shorter matches=more HYPE!

 

[kid craft 24/sonic master]

i just don't think 2 stocks and 5 min timer is going to make matches fast paced tbh.

 

[stingers]

http://www.smashboards.com/showthread.php?t=308200

my new tournament series
=]

 

[Tesh]

Most other fighting games don't give you more than 1 life in a match. In the types of games that do give you more than 1 life bar in a match (like mvc and other tag team games), its accompanied my hugely damaging combos that allow you to take our half a life bar quickly. Simple changes like time limits or stock limits won't instantly change those things.

M2K circle camping on RC isn't going to be more interesting if you chop off 1/3 of the agony imo.

Also, while I'm on the subject of RC, I support an LGL of 5 per for each time the stage loops (I believe it takes about 2 minutes). I believe this stage REALLY needs to be reevaluated to make sure people are actually fighting during the boat phase of the stage.

 

[Dabuz]

I want to end all discussion about time-outs, so here is my final post on the issue. mathematically, time-outs won't occur much more frequently. If we take 1 stock away, thats 1/3 of the match. If we take 3 minutes of the match away to coincide with 1 less stock, we take away 3/8 of the match.

1/3 x 8= 8/24 (stocks)
3/8 x 3= 9/24 (time)

2.5 minutes per stock, 1/24 difference in ratio.

If you look at both these numbers, you see they are very close, thats because the ratio is barely being altered, how many matches go to time anyway? I wanna say, 1 match per tourney. The only exceptions being when tearbear or m2k play, but thats because of their characters and playstyle, and we cannot create a rule to cater against a strategy only they use. Also, most of the time, that time-out occurs on RC/ brinstar.

Now, lets say we make the matches 6 minutes, meaning 1/4 less time.
1/3 x 4= 4/12 x 2= 8/24
1/4 x 3= 3/12 x 2= 6/24

If you look here, with a 6 minute timer, the ratio actually creates more time per stock, making timing out even HARDER! Time-outs are a legitimate strategy, they are rare, no-one likes them, but they are rare, my goal here is not to solve the problem of time-outs, it will always be a problem, but it needs to be understood how much everyone is overreacting.

Shorter matches=more HYPE!, timing out will not become a bigger problem. Please, try this out, run a tournament, and tell me if you honestly see that time-outs have become even more noticeable.




Everyone who says this won't make matches more HYPE!, Look at it the reverse way, its more HYPE! because we will have to agonize less. Its more HYPE! because, instead of knowing a match is over after a player stalling for 4 minutes, but realizing we have another 4 minutes to go, if we realize the match is over by that 4 minutes, there is only 1 less minute to go. Please admit to me thats a very very fortunate trade-off. Its HYPE! because with less stocks, players must play harder, faster, more intelligent, and adapt better. Its hype because a comeback can always happen, and every hit, mindgame, error, all create more suspense. The beauty of this game is, we created the ruleset from scratch, so we can change it.

 

[B.A.M.]

I could see this giving better quality sets. You take out Brinstar, add commentators that are actually insightful, and give me 2 stock matches? that would be awesome. Gimmicks and hard reads would have more value, comeback factor ( which is the love of all fighting gamers) would solidly exist, as well as more intelligent play overall. I would love to see this done.

 

[V]

I didn't realize this threads exists but I made a thread with a new idea for the singles format if you wanna go check it out.

 

[Tesh]

Also, the commentary needs to be insightful AND entertaining. 2 of the worst commentaries I've heard were
A)Some guy going on and on about how top players could have capitalized better and how you can buffer a power shield from a roflzomg waffle copter
and
B)2 people cracking the same tired jokes about rolling and imperfect DI.

That way the lower level and higher level spectators get something out of it.

Its also about time custom stages were implemented. Sure they are fugly, but I'm sure hackers can make em pretty.

 

[B.A.M.]

Tesh. You are of my blood now.

@ everyone. I concur with everything this man says. Except custom stages. We need insightful commentators so it just doesnt look like ' o top tier spam aslkdfaslkj kthey won the end.'

 

[t3h Icy]

If you get enough hype going, Brawl might get more Melee players to play too. =)

I think 2 stocks is a great idea. :D

 

[Player-1]

Personally, I don't think trying to reduce timeouts is the problem when dealing with hyped matches. I've seen some really hyped matches that went to time actually. The two biggest hype killers I see are MK dittos and camping in general. Reducing stocks by one isn't going to make people play any less campy, it might even make people play even MORE campy.