Semi-Competitive Tournament concept

[Compass Rose]

I will come up front and say this now; I have usually avoided the smash tournament scene, mainly because the few players I met..shall we say 'out of hand' when it comes to simply sitting down and playing Smash Bros. One such experience was that I was literally punched in the face because I picked 'random' for a stage rather than Battlefield or Final Destination [keep in mind the others were older than me], and his buddy unplugged the console because we started a match with items on. But now that I took some steps back to see it from a more outside perspective than simply 'fun vs tournament', I learned to understand the mentality [somewhat].

I went off on a tangent, so I go back to the topic at hand; a semi-competitive smash tournament. Since the terms can be subjective, in this case it will mean mixing the chaotic fun of default smash bros rules and the skill-based intensity of the competitive scene.

I would *really* appreciate constructive criticism, suggestions, and advice to further go towards the goal of this; to create a tournament format the fun-lovers and the tournament players can all enjoy.


Ruleset and justifications:

Spoiler

General rules(revised): We all know the conflict between Stock and Time matches, so I figured I'd account for both.
Stock- 3 (7 minute time limit to prevent stalling, and I believe in the three strikes your out clause)
Time: 4 minutes (when no stock)


Item rulings: I don't know all the Smash 4 items yet, so this is more of an umbrella than anything else and a work in progress.

General- Items will be kept at a middle-low spawn rate, not too low, not too high. A major reason for this is to allow the Villager to make practical use of his Neutral special in the case of people counter-picking characters to ensure the Villager can't catch attacks from them [Little Mac vs Villager with no items makes the villager's B move a less useful move aside from invincibility frames].

Items are accepted/banned based on the amount of effort required to use them properly, whether opposing characters can defend against them in a practical manner, and the Risk vs Reward factor. A prime example of the latter is going to be the all or nothing weapon; Daybreak, which has a free-for-all conflict in assembling the parts, and if they get hit before they fire it, they are instantly K.O'd.

Among the accepted items, there will be a pool that is decided via round robin for the tournament. The pool of items that can be used determined by the amount of players in the match times 3 [P*3], but is also capped by the amount of approved items, 1v1 allows for six, 3 player free for all; nine, 4player FFA or 2v2; 12. This is to allow for players to think strategically against one another from the get go.

Accepted items and reasoning (wip):

Hammers: Approved due to the risk presented to the wielder. Not only do hammers have a chance of being useless [squeaky golden and headless normal], but characters can still strike them with ranged attacks and counter-specials work on them.

Home Run Bat: The telegraphing wind-up and the cooldown of the swing are two windows of opportunity the opponent has to punish the user.

Mushrooms: The Poison and regular mushrooms *must* be activated together, since the main risk is the knee-jerk reaction to going for the mushroom and getting the wrong one.

Trap items: Motion Sensors, Pitfalls, Blast Box; things that vanish once they are triggered.

Smash Balls: The main gimmick of SSBB is added to improve the move-pools of all characters. The sheer conflict to get the final smash is enough to warrant it, and serves as a comeback mechanic or a hilarious overkill finisher. Plus, there's always the fact that it is not always a guarantee, since it is possible to whif them.




Banned Items:
General criteria

Hazard items: To count as a hazard item, the item must be intended to trip up an opponent, be on the field for a prolonged period of time, and must be stationary unless otherwise influenced by the player.

RNG-AOE items: Random chance items with wide-scale effects, since the chance of them backfiring is slim, and even a few seconds of helplessness due to poor luck on a wide scale is enough to lose a chance to win.

Healing items
Grab-and-win; Smashball is exempt from this rule since its not as clear cut as simply picking up an item.


Lightning Bolts
Stopwatches
Starman:
Bumpers
Bananas
Uniras
Killer Eye
Pokeballs

Banned Stages: (to be worked on when the 4th game comes out)

Condensed List (will replace the original once it is finished)

 

[infomon]

I see the goal of a competition as being a test to determine who is the best at the game. For the test to be accurate, some excessively broken/random/degenerate parts of the game tend to be removed from competitive rulesets.

Many TO's (dare I say most?) pre-emptively ban things that they think are degenerate even though it's rarely adequately proven. For example, stages with hazards are often banned under the presumption that the more-skilled player could "randomly" hit the hazard and lose, even though they "would have" won the match otherwise. Often this assessment is correct IMO, and sometimes it is not, but far too often TOs (and competitive friendlies/smashfests) ban stuff before this has necessarily been proven.

There are several threads on smashboards discussing which stages should or should not be legal. I have the perspective that all the stages that permit a valid competition should be allowed, though not everyone takes that stance. Under my premise, there would be no difference between a "semi-competitive" tournament vs. a fully-competitive tournament. In neither case would it be appropriate to have a stage that allows an inferior player to (say) abuse an overpowered stage hazard to make the winner of the match effectively a coin-toss.

But items are an interesting point that you've brought up. It is reasonable to consider what an "items-on" ruleset would be; i.e. we remove the extremely strong/degenerate items (just like we remove extremely inappropriate stages), but keep on the ones that allow a fair competition. With a modest items ruleset, the better player will be the one that wins the match; the randomness need not detract from that.

Although there's more randomness with items on, if it's not overbearing then there's no reason to consider this much less "competitive" than items-off rules. So I'm hesitant to call it "semi-competitive". Let's just say it's an items-enabled competitive ruleset.

There are many who would like to play with items on, and some TOs have/are considering it. Items-enabled tourneys have been a thing in Smash's past. But mostly they're disabled in tournaments. Partly because most people don't like the randomness, partly because it takes more time and effort to evaluate all the items and figure out which ones are appropriate for competitive play, than to just turn them off. It's simpler, less controversial, and honestly a lot of people just prefer it that way.

By the way, Villager's pocket is extremely useful even with items disabled, because there are many pocketable objects even without items. Also I believe it has some invincibility frames so it may be useful even in the absense of pocketing an item.

Also, 7-stock 15 minutes is an extremely long time for a single match. If you've ever played back-to-back matches at a tournament, it gets really exhausting to play at your best over and over again, even on 3-stock battles. Not to mention tournaments often go way overtime. This is why most rulesets have at most an 8-minute timer, and 2-stock 5-mins is a popular option for smash4.

 

[Compass Rose]

By the way, Villager's pocket is extremely useful even with items disabled, because there are many pocketable objects even without items. Also I believe it has some invincibility frames so it may be useful even in the absense of pocketing an item.

I probably should have pointed out I only had experience from the demo, so I didn't get to see all the tricks. But I'll keep that in mind.

Also, 7-stock 15 minutes is an extremely long time for a single match. If you've ever played back-to-back matches at a tournament, it gets really exhausting to play at your best over and over again, even on 3-stock battles. Not to mention tournaments often go way overtime. This is why most rulesets have at most an 8-minute timer, and 2-stock 5-mins is a popular option for smash4.

I actually never had that experience; usually smash-fests my friends and I [not the face punchers >.>], even with items off, tend to be short. But thanks for the advice ^^

 

[infomon]

Yeah just my impressions. Ideally, competitive tournaments would be for everyone. I mean, noone should feel disenfranchised by a ruleset that does its proper job -- that lets us all play smash bros in a way that lets us determine how we rank up against one another.

I think the problems you (and many others) have faced has more to do with the attitudes of the people in that local tourney scene. Glad you're able to find some smashfests/tournaments where people know how to play for serious while also having fun and being friendly

 

[MrJeff]

I'm interested in what people have to say about this. I will be hosting a tournament that will incorporate random elements like items and most (if not all) stages. I recognize the value of finding out where you rank in the local Smash scene, but there comes a point where you realize there's only a limit to how far you will go. That disenfranchises some people after the first tournament or so. Randomness gives people hope that luck may sway in their favor, and while it isn't right for every tournament or competitive style, I believe it still has a place in some. I've been calling them professional vs amateur styles (to myself, anyways).

 

[nintyplayer]

Any player who's good without items should also be good with items.
Like it or not, they're part of the game. You can't say you're good at Smash if a few items ruins the game for you.
All stages should be allowed. I can't think of a single stage which is absolutely unplayable. And I can't think of a single stage hazard which makes competitive play impossible. Using the stage to your advantage is part of strategy, too.
Keep items a a low spawn rate.

 

[Thor]

Any player who's good without items should also be good with items.
Like it or not, they're part of the game. You can't say you're good at Smash if a few items ruins the game for you.
All stages should be allowed. I can't think of a single stage which is absolutely unplayable. And I can't think of a single stage hazard which makes competitive play impossible. Using the stage to your advantage is part of strategy, too.
Keep items a a low spawn rate.

3/4 well-placed bob-ombs while I'm comboing them (hitbox out) at 120% when they've only got me to 50% on every stock actually does ruin the game for me - I lose a stock and they escape because I got KO'd, and the last one causes me to lose a match thanks to RNG completely screwing me over in a way I can't react to. Similar things can happen with Pokeballs and the like, but they're not as easy to explain as that example.

Item control is a very important skill not all high-level players have [or had at some point], but it doesn't make them bad. Old Diddy Kong matches for instance.

75M - try fighting a smart Falco or Fox there. Same applies to Temple and Spear Pillar actually [Temple is the most hilarious example of this].

Bridge of Eldin/that stage with the Mario Karts (the two that come to mind) - if you have ever fought a King Dedede as Lucario (your apparent main) or anyone somewhat heavy, you'll just rage-quit and/or pick Meta Knight/Falco/other very lightweight character. If you don't understand what I mean and you have Wi-Fi, I'd love to ask anyone here who plays a shadow of a Dedede to show you for me (I don't have my Wii right now ) or I'd do it myself. The same also applies on Shadow Moses Island and the custom stage Bath.

I wouldn't mind an items-legal format, but stating that anyone who plays in no-items, neutral (non-intrusive) stage list isn't good at the game or isn't playing it fully doesn't understand the abuse some of this generates.

I will come up front and say this now; I have usually avoided the smash tournament scene, mainly because the few players I met..shall we say 'out of hand' when it comes to simply sitting down and playing Smash Bros. One such experience was that I was literally punched in the face because I picked 'random' for a stage rather than Battlefield or Final Destination [keep in mind the others were older than me], and his buddy unplugged the console because we started a match with items on. But now that I took some steps back to see it from a more outside perspective than simply 'fun vs tournament', I learned to understand the mentality [somewhat].

I went off on a tangent, so I go back to the topic at hand; a semi-competitive smash tournament. Since the terms can be subjective, in this case it will mean mixing the chaotic fun of default smash bros rules and the skill-based intensity of the competitive scene.

I would *really* appreciate constructive criticism, suggestions, and advice to further go towards the goal of this; to create a tournament format the fun-lovers and the tournament players can all enjoy.

General rules(revised): We all know the conflict between Stock and Time matches, so I figured I'd account for both.
Stock- 4 (8 minute time limit to prevent stalling)
Time: 4 minutes (when no stock)


Item rulings: I don't know all the Smash 4 items yet, so this is more of an umbrella than anything else and a work in progress.

General- Items will be kept at a medium spawn rate, not too low, not too high. A major reason for this is to allow the Villager to make practical use of his Neutral special in the case of people counter-picking characters to ensure the Villager can't catch attacks from them [Little Mac vs Villager with no items makes the villager's B move a less useful move aside from invincibility frames].

Items are accepted/banned based on the amount of effort required to use them properly, whether opposing characters can defend against them in a practical manner, and the Risk vs Reward factor. A prime example of the latter is going to be the all or nothing weapon; Daybreak, which has a free-for-all conflict in assembling the parts, and if they get hit before they fire it, they are instantly K.O'd.

Banned Items: Healing items and Assist Trophies.
Pure benefit with almost zero effort, as such, banned.

Banned Stages: (to be worked on when the 4th game comes out)

Someone who literally punches you in the face for choosing random or unplugged their own console for having items on is moronic/massive anger management issues on a variety of levels - they could have set random stage select to only be stages they liked, quit out of the match via LRStart, or even just SD'd out and told you not to pick Random. They seem to have forgotten that while it is a game that can be played very competitively, it IS a game.

This ruleset could be extended to more than Smash 4 (especially Brawl if you like that - might generate some excitement for it for new players and expand the scene, and Brawl needs it most right now).

Pokeballs are also the same idea as Assist Trophies [as are Smash balls], but I wonder - does friendly fire alter how they act? That is, can they hit teammates? If so, then these items may not be such a bad idea... This may be a reason to have separate item lists for 1v1s compared to teams (team healers are fine in teams I think - you'd have to throw them at your ally, and an opponent can catch it and heal their teammate instead, but you have no reason to ever turn it on in singles). So in singles I'd ban Pokeballs, Assists, and Smash balls for sure (and all explosive items), but in doubles I'd only for sure ban explosive item (and if fans are still as annoying, those two). And banning bumpers/baseball bats might be a good choice too. But beam swords would be a good item for this format (as an example).

There was a thread on this elsewhere with respect to Brawl, and the most interesting idea came in the form of counterpicking items, i.e., the losing team may turn an item on or off (from an approved list), the winning team may do the same (including turning off the just turned-on item), then the losing team does so once more (including re-turning on a turned-off item).

Just some basic input from me.

 

[infomon]

I can't think of a single stage which is absolutely unplayable. And I can't think of a single stage hazard which makes competitive play impossible. Using the stage to your advantage is part of strategy, too.

Have you heard of "circle-camping"? I don't have a video example right now, but basically, stages like Hyrule Temple (melee/brawl) allow a fast character to circle-camp. All it takes is Fox to hit you with a single laser shot, then spend the entire rest of the match running on the opposite side of the big rock in the middle. It's like two kids playing tag around a car: you go one way, he goes the other way (ie. in a circle) to stay at the opposite side from you. There's virtually nothing you can do. The match will go to time, and the fox will win. Two foxes? Same problem: now your match is basically just 50-50 over who gets the laser shots first, and will go to time.

Think people won't do that? I've seen it happen in tournament. Play to win. People enjoy winning.

Perhaps none of the smash4 stages allow for circle-camping, but there might be other "degenerate" strategies on them. It still needs to be explored. For now, by all means allow all the stages, but over time we'll probably discover problems with many of the stages.

 

[Compass Rose]

First; I wanna thank you all for all the feedback and advice! It's really making things go smoothly with the theory-building and figuring out the practicality of this potential format.

Second: Once I get my hands on the game, I will be testing and experimenting, hopefully I can allow for skype chats and online matches to get some help with analyzing performance. After all, theory is nothing without practice to figure out whether or not it works. I look forward to being able to test out the format and host a tournament with it.

 

[Deleted member]

Hot dayum, someone punched you in the face? I'm sorry, the ruleset is nice, but that comment stood out the most to me lmao