• Welcome to Smashboards, the world's largest Super Smash Brothers community! Over 250,000 Smash Bros. fans from around the world have come to discuss these great games in over 19 million posts!

    You are currently viewing our boards as a visitor. Click here to sign up right now and start on your path in the Smash community!

Official SWF Matchup Chart v2.0

Status
Not open for further replies.

infiniteV115

Smash Hero
Joined
Nov 14, 2010
Messages
6,445
Location
In the rain.
Ah kk
Well, back on topic, I don't really think switching to 2 stocks instead of 3 would change things up significantly. And I'm getting the feeling that a lot of people are thinking shorter matches = better and longer matches = worse, why is this?

1 stock I feel is drastically different than 3, but 2...not really. Then again, I've never really tried 2.
 

Claire Diviner

President
Joined
Oct 16, 2010
Messages
7,476
Location
Indian Orchard, MA
NNID
ClaireDiviner
1 stock I feel is drastically different than 3, but 2...not really. Then again, I've never really tried 2.
I've played 2-stock matches before. In fact, a group of friends I know hold small tourneys within the friend circle at their houses every year, and they're always 2-stock to help prevent the tourney from dragging on. It's not bad, but it doesn't really give much in the way of learning and making a comeback against the opponent in one match, unless said person is - say - Rain Man or something... or just very good at picking things up from their opponent.
 

Tesh

Smash Hero
Joined
Oct 28, 2008
Messages
9,737
Location
TX
Japan does tournaments that are Bo1 and/or single elimination. I'd think that leaves far less room for adaptation and learning your opponent.
 

MEOW1337KITTEH

Smash Lord
Joined
Nov 25, 2011
Messages
1,072
Location
Tucson, AZ
NNID
daniel7001
Yes, but this is Amurika. (and Canada and Mexico)

I still maintain that removing the time limit would shorten it more. Nobody will plank infinitely if they have a lead. That way there is no motivation to run away until the clock runs out and you win because of a stock lead.
 
Joined
Mar 17, 2009
Messages
6,345
Location
New York, NY
3DS FC
5429-7210-5657
Single elimination and/or Bo1 "sets" would make the tournament shorter, and that's definitely a viable "solution" to the problem (and there is a problem) with how long tournaments can run. I have been in tournaments where we were kicked out of the venue because we were there too late, forcing a grand finals split. LOL It's hard to say tourneys don't run too long.

I don't really prefer that route though, as I like the drama that comes with having a loser's bracket. I think any of these would really work:

1. BO1/3-stock, single-elimination
2. BO3/2-stock, single- or double-elimination
3. BO5/1-stock, double-elimination
 

Luigi player

Smash Master
Joined
Jul 29, 2004
Messages
4,106
Location
Austria
Supermodel From paris said:
I think any of these would really work:

1. BO1/3-stock, single-elimination
2. BO3/2-stock, single- or double-elimination
3. BO5/1-stock, double-elimination
:scared::scared::scared:

Hosts just need to be more strict with the time limit.

:phone:
 

Orion*

Smash Researcher
Joined
Jun 1, 2008
Messages
4,503
Location
Dexters Laboratory
No I'm a ****** I just talk random crap and just wait to get called out by your highness.

Happy now?

:059:
Im not happy, you're not ******** and you don't wait. You just consistently get called out for garbage LMAO.

2 stock would actually make me play even more campy since I can't make up for anything with only so few tries / not many allowed "mistakes"/take risks.
Go for it. If you play someone better than you, or good anyway you're going to camp like that regardless. If my friendlies with you already go to time, it's not going to be ANY different. However, now because there are less stocks the community and the viewers don't have to be bored ****less for like.... 8-10 minutes and instead just 6.

Also not camping, making a read and getting a reward while risky has a much bigger payoff. Getting the gimp/fart/falco cg whatever in 2 stocks is much more significant than in 1 stock. And if you have to play gay to evade them, that's the nature of the game, but it just takes less time.

sol diviner is pissed
clearly

And I'm getting the feeling that a lot of people are thinking shorter matches = better and longer matches = worse, why is this?

1 stock I feel is drastically different than 3, but 2...not really. Then again, I've never really tried 2.
Shorter doesn't necessarily mean better, but average brawl matches are wayyyy to long. 1 stock is a very big change, I think many in the community would have trouble reacting with it. 2 stock however in many ways is close enough to feel at home, but the pace of the matches is just sped up significantly.

I haven't seen planking being a problem.
bunn'd ermediately

Single elimination and/or Bo1 "sets" would make the tournament shorter, and that's definitely a viable "solution" to the problem (and there is a problem) with how long tournaments can run. I have been in tournaments where we were kicked out of the venue because we were there too late, forcing a grand finals split. LOL It's hard to say tourneys don't run too long.
I have had similar experiences, and agree
In EU i've never been kicked out the venue persay, but **** runs overboard even at nationals.

Hosts just need to be more strict with the time limit.
It's not that simple.

Efficiency could go up as an option, but past a certain point even with TO's that don't allow friendlies and run everything smoothly we have still seen problems. It's the nature of brawl to take long.

It's probably the most stressful competitive fighter out right now, not because it's so deep but because you essentially have to camp through garbage for 8 minutes soley to get a win, and losing is pain staking. Getting timed out, or losing in marvel or SF is not nearly as bad because it's not so ****ing dead in terms of gameplay half the time, and even then sets don't take 30 minutes. It's a short pain but it's over when it's over.

At the same point going to tournaments, especially as a mid level player and essentially being forced to do nothing and play only bracket matches with no friendlies is not appealing to new players or for the well being of the community.
 

da K.I.D.

Smash Hero
Joined
Aug 22, 2006
Messages
19,658
Location
Rochester, NY
So im going to ask again.

Are people just playing devils advocate, or is there any body out there that actually believes that3 stock is better for running a tournament than 2 stock?

So far the only reasons ive seen are:
3 stock makes tournaments more consistent. And 3 stock lends itself better to comebacks and adaptation.

First of all, those two things kind of contradict each other. Second. Both of those are pretty much myths two stock isnt really less consistent from what ive seen, and 2 stock is actually long enough to reward learning and the best form of adaptation. The fast kind. And lastly with that reasoning, theres no reason to not run 4 stock or more.

2 stock tests the same exact same skillset as 3 stock, minus the unnecessarily high levels of endurance, infavor of being a stronger test of everything else, while simutaneously being better logistically for tournaments

:phone:
 

~ Gheb ~

Life is just a party
Joined
Jun 27, 2008
Messages
16,916
Location
Europe
Most people just don't want to give up things they are used to, even if it means to be satisfied with an inferior option [not saying, that this is the case with 2 stock vs 3 stock, I think both have their merits].

:059:
 

infiniteV115

Smash Hero
Joined
Nov 14, 2010
Messages
6,445
Location
In the rain.
To make the claim that we should switch from 3-stock matches to 2-stock matches, you have to show that 2-stock is 'better' somehow.

Cause people aren't gonna stop doing what they've been doing for years just because someone says "Why not?"
 

~ Gheb ~

Life is just a party
Joined
Jun 27, 2008
Messages
16,916
Location
Europe
To make the claim that we should switch from 3-stock matches to 2-stock matches, you have to show that 2-stock is 'better' somehow.
Objectively speaking neither choice is better than the other. It's simply a different competition [which by itself is a reason d'être for a 2 stock competition] with a different paramter. From a strictly logical point of view both ways of competing have their merits and are viable choices.

What you argue is a conventional approach. People need to be convinced for it to happen, regardless of what the facts are. To make a switch from 3-stock to 2-stock happen you don't have to show it to be better, you simply have to convince enough people that it's better than 3 stock. Whether that is actually true is an entirely different question.

I really dislike the 'one or the other' mentality though. Just use both alongside 1 stock events at times instead of arguing which one is 'better' - a question that cannot correctly be answered.

:059:
 

-LzR-

Smash Hero
Joined
Jan 1, 2009
Messages
7,649
Location
Finland
I really dislike the 'one or the other' mentality though. Just use both alongside 1 stock events at times instead of arguing which one is 'better' - a question that cannot correctly be answered.

:059:
I agree with this. I would like it if tourneys had a little more variation for these things. It would keep things interesting and everyone should be pleased.
And the same people would still win, even if it was 1,2 or 3 stock.
 
Joined
Mar 17, 2009
Messages
6,345
Location
New York, NY
3DS FC
5429-7210-5657
The Brawl community is so obsessed with making sure the same people win over and over again. Anything that might change that outcome is considered anti-competitive. I can't tell how you bizarre other communities probably think that is, and how fallacious it is.

Our concern shouldn't be ensuring top players get to stay on their thrones, it should be ensuring that we have a fair, balanced, efficient rule set.

It's ridiculous that we still use skill-based seeding instead of location-based seeding. I mean if we already know who the best players are, why have the tournament at all? :urg:

With all that said a 2-stock Brawl isn't going to change results significantly.
 

infiniteV115

Smash Hero
Joined
Nov 14, 2010
Messages
6,445
Location
In the rain.
I really dislike the 'one or the other' mentality though. Just use both alongside 1 stock events at times instead of arguing which one is 'better' - a question that cannot correctly be answered.
This is actually something I agree with entirely and I've more or less been saying this for quite a while about the whole item vs no-items debate, I just meant that if the argument is that we should only have 1 unified ruleset AND we should switch to 2-stock rather than 3, then an argument that 2>3 (lol) needs to be made to support that.
 

-LzR-

Smash Hero
Joined
Jan 1, 2009
Messages
7,649
Location
Finland
It's ridiculous that we still use skill-based seeding instead of location-based seeding. I mean if we already know who the best players are, why have the tournament at all? :urg:

With all that said a 2-stock Brawl isn't going to change results significantly.
This is why I changed to Pools Only format. Skillbased seeding is basically staging the whole tournament so the people you want to place are given an advantage. Brawl is just good because of the huge variation of things it offers. Fighters don't usually give you much choice like this. Why not allow variation? Why always the same 3 stocks, 8/10 minutes and less and less stages all the time?


Squirtle and ZSS would like to have a word with you.
They still wouldn't be a huge threat. Sure, they might be better, buffed by the new ruleset, but so are several characters in our current one. Nothing wrong with that imo, especially when those characters still won't be better than the current toptier.
 
Joined
Mar 17, 2009
Messages
6,345
Location
New York, NY
3DS FC
5429-7210-5657
This is why I changed to Pools Only format. Skillbased seeding is basically staging the whole tournament so the people you want to place are given an advantage. Brawl is just good because of the huge variation of things it offers. Fighters don't usually give you much choice like this. Why not allow variation? Why always the same 3 stocks, 8/10 minutes and less and less stages all the time?



They still wouldn't be a huge threat. Sure, they might be better, buffed by the new ruleset, but so are several characters in our current one. Nothing wrong with that imo, especially when those characters still won't be better than the current toptier.
The fact that you said the first thing here and then the second thing here makes me sad :(
 

Claire Diviner

President
Joined
Oct 16, 2010
Messages
7,476
Location
Indian Orchard, MA
NNID
ClaireDiviner
Why not have an event where two types of tourneys are being held at once? a 2-stock and 3-stock tourney? With enough time, we can figure out the standard to use here in the U.S.? If not, we can always just alternate between 2 and 3-stock tourneys throughout the year, if that makes sense.
 

Maharba the Mystic

Smash Master
Joined
Dec 5, 2009
Messages
4,403
Location
Houston, Texas
Why not have an event where two types of tourneys are being held at once? a 2-stock and 3-stock tourney? With enough time, we can figure out the standard to use here in the U.S.? If not, we can always just alternate between 2 and 3-stock tourneys throughout the year, if that makes sense.
this poor guy... i really think he doesn't know exactly how obvious he is.................... BAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAADDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD
 

TheReflexWonder

Wonderful!
BRoomer
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
13,704
Location
Atlanta, GA
NNID
TheReflexWonder
3DS FC
2492-4449-2771
It's weird to see that PT's only even matchup is against Sonic--Not because it's Sonic, but because it's just one character.

Kind of miffed about Ike and Lucario being -2. I wonder when this thing will be updated again.
 

Claire Diviner

President
Joined
Oct 16, 2010
Messages
7,476
Location
Indian Orchard, MA
NNID
ClaireDiviner
I wonder when this thing will be updated again.
Either by the time the next tier list is established, or maybe when all the character boards start doing MU discussions again. Also, it's not that bad if PT has a good amount of good MUs, albeit against lower tiers.

You are woman, you dominate men.
Quit whining and smack him with your bra or something.
I'm more of a lover than a fighter.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom