SSB 3DS - What should the ruleset be?

[iLink]

http://smashboards.com/threads/blas...m-tourney-locators-invitation-tourney.368643/

Average 2 stock game length: 2:38
Average 3 stock game length: 4:27

Real data to support real claims.

You want to make it where matches are completed twice as fast as melee.

Wild Speculation does not beat Data. I am sorry.

Can we get data from more than just ONE tournament that was played within the first week?

Heck, the more recent Tournament Locator tournament said on stream that they had to run 2 stocks for pools because 3 was taking too long.

 

[TreK]

If custom moves are allowed, I'd go with 2 stocks 6mn
If not, I'd go with the Brawl standard, 3 stocks 8mn

Custom moves would also require some kind of "non gameplay stalling" rule.

 

[Suli Hyuga]

Can we get data from more than just ONE tournament that was played within the first week?

Heck, the more recent Tournament Locator tournament said on stream that they had to run 2 stocks for pools because 3 was taking too long.

How many tournaments do you think compiled data? :/
Also, I think the reason why it was 2 stocks for pools was because they didn't want the tournament going on for ages, not because of the game itself. FGC tournaments always last a long time which does annoy quite alot of people.
The data provided was good, I totally agree with menotyou135, 3 stocks is fine. Why play the game and super ultra turbo speed with 2 stocks? That isn't even much time to make a comeback (unless we talking Bo5, which sounds a little tedious to me). 3 stocks, 6-8 minutes, Bo3 sounds good. If it ain't broke, don't fix it.

 

[Gerpington]

I am honestly amazed people still believe FD is a neutral stage all around (if used as the only stage available) in a simpleton standpoint way, yes it is a stage that is completely flat. In a competitive stand point, not at all, sister. Flatness does not supply competitive neutrality.

Using fighting game logic for smash never goes over well. Smash is a fighting game, but it isn't a traditional fighting game and should not be treated as such.

I shall add in my two cents on the other matters as well (I won't comment on the stages because others have already made solid stage lists so no need to weigh in on that...or bicker about it as many seem to want to do).

I am more a fan of 3 stock 8 minutes, but I can see why time can be an issue, it all depends on how big the tournament is and how much so time will be an issue.

I am also in support of custom moves, but fully understand the difficulty of acquiring them as an issue. I don't see how they make the game unbalanced though....some balance the game better really. Some characters seem just flat better with their custom moves rather than without them. I think single over powered custom moves should be banned rather than custom moves in general.

Finally, and this barely needs to be said, equipment should not even be considered for competitive play (I'm looking at you giant thread arguing about it).

 

[Hipuru]

I really think the game should be 3 Stocks and 7 min with the option of being able to choose your customized specials because each and every characters customized specials are balanced in there own way so it doesn't make characters too broken it adds alittle twist to the fighting mechanics...

 

[DahremRuhar]

Allow custom specials as counterpick options. Game 2, counterpick a non-customized character, or change special moves for the match-up.

I want to confirm as someone who has the full game, that from what I've unlocked, none of the custom specials seem broken, and in fact most of them are far more situational than the default options.

 

[EdreesesPieces]

-3 Stocks, 6 min . Even 6 min is OK. People can't ledge stall so stalling won't be that much of an issue.
-Custom Move Sets On

Then the rules can be changed if these are proven to be an issue with real data and facts.

 

[Renji64]

2 stock when campy characters get matched up people might not even finish the game. It is gonna be alot of new players that won't know how to kill quickly yet.

 

[Zeppelin]

I think custom moves should be allowed, and for those who disagree, maybe meet in the middle and instead of rock paper scissors being for stage banning only, have the option to choose if you want to ban a stage, or if you want to customize your character. Just spitballin here haha.

 

[Suli Hyuga]

I am honestly amazed people still believe FD is a neutral stage all around (if used as the only stage available) in a simpleton standpoint way, yes it is a stage that is completely flat. In a competitive stand point, not at all, sister. Flatness does not supply competitive neutrality.

Uh, yes it does. Some characters have advantages over others in stages with platforms. Removing those platforms does bring competitive neutrality because no character has an advantage over the other in terms of environment.

Also no custom movesets please. It could lead to arguments and such between participants and just over-complicates match analysis.

 

[Umaro]

Uh, yes it does. Some characters have advantages over others in stages with platforms. Removing those platforms does bring competitive neutrality because no character has an advantage over the other in terms of environment.

The same can be said for FD. Some characters (the ones with projectiles, for example) have advantages over others there too.

 

[Raiker845]

2 Stocks / 5 Minutes - 3DS Version
3 or 4 Stocks / 8 Minutes - Wii U Version

 

[Joe73191]

2 stock 5 min best of 3. Grand finals best of 5. 3 neutral stages 1 counter pick. custom moves allowed, equipment banned.

 

[Gerpington]

Uh, yes it does. Some characters have advantages over others in stages with platforms. Removing those platforms does bring competitive neutrality because no character has an advantage over the other in terms of environment.

Also no custom movesets please. It could lead to arguments and such between participants and just over-complicates match analysis.

That doesn't mean it has neutrality? The argument can be made for FD as well, as Umaro said. No stage is truly fair all around. That's why tournaments (good ones at least) do sets and counter picking became a thing.

Custom movesets are another thing entirely, but I ultimately don't see why they would cause any problems. Those that are going to complain and bicker about it will likely do so anyway.

 

[Radical Larry]

Custom moves are definitely to be a tournament viable option. They bring new life to certain characters, and they don't actually screw up with "tiers", but in fact, they could help factor in and develop the character in terms of tiers.

 

[menotyou135]

Can we get data from more than just ONE tournament that was played within the first week?

Heck, the more recent Tournament Locator tournament said on stream that they had to run 2 stocks for pools because 3 was taking too long.

I am not saying this data is the end all be all of data. Quite the opposite.

I am saying that when people are complaining about match length, they should get some real data. Not wild speculation. Currently, the only data we have on the subject shows the average match length being slightly shorter than brawls average match length (I believe a while ago someone said it was 4:45ish).

So if it takes less time and TOs can run the entire Winners Round 1 bracket at once by just pairing people off rather than waiting for setups, then what actual data is there to show that S4 on 3DS with 3 stock 8 min will take any longer than a Brawl tourney?

Right now, if you start both types of tourney side by side, it will take less time to run the 3DS tournament. Period (assuming everybody has their own 3DS and game which any tourney would do obviously).

Now your comment on Tourney locator saying the time thing is fair, but keep in mind that they were supplying the 3DSs meaning they couldn't just tell people to pair off for their matches like they would be able to in a real tourney when everybody has the game. 3DS tournies in the future will be able to be run really efficiently because you can run everybody in WR1 and LR1 at once rather than rotating people out on a set number of setups. Once that is the case, 3DS tournies will go by super fast compared to brawl. Also, TL saying that it is taking to long isn't data. It is just TOs saying that it is taking to long. Many factors can play into this: Bad TOs, complications with getting matches in, stupid competitors who don't report, people not knowing the stage list because it is a new game, ect... Automatically claiming it has to be because of gamespeed is turning correlation into causation without the time to review the theory.

 

[MiserableLie]

3 stock 8 minutes

Custom moves allowed but if you plan to use them you have to stick with that version of the character. So you can't switch between moves in the middle of a set or in the middle of the tournament.

I think custom move sets could allow more characters to be viable tournament options making for more variation but I also would want to make sure the opponents always know what they're up against.

 

[Suli Hyuga]

The same can be said for FD. Some characters (the ones with projectiles, for example) have advantages over others there too.

Yes but it's not because of the environment, that's purely just the matchup between the two characters.

That doesn't mean it has neutrality? The argument can be made for FD as well, as Umaro said. No stage is truly fair all around. That's why tournaments (good ones at least) do sets and counter picking became a thing.

Custom movesets are another thing entirely, but I ultimately don't see why they would cause any problems. Those that are going to complain and bicker about it will likely do so anyway.

The simpler a stage is, the more fair it is. If a character has an advantage over another where the environment can't help a character in anyway, then that's just the matchup. Custom movesets become problematic because they add too many layers to match analysis and tiers and just give people a hard time on that sort of stuff. Street Fighter x Tekken had a gem system that did the same and in tournaments they were either unused or the players knew what gems were used. If both players know each other's custom moves, then custom moves in tournament play is fine by me. But if it's hidden away, that just ruins the match as a whole. Players would have to slow down/speed up the game at random times purely because they don't know what moves their opponent has and that's totally unnecessary.

 

[Gerpington]

Yes but it's not because of the environment, that's purely just the matchup between the two characters.




The simpler a stage is, the more fair it is. If a character has an advantage over another where the environment can't help a character in anyway, then that's just the matchup. Custom movesets become problematic because they add too many layers to match analysis and tiers and just give people a hard time on that sort of stuff. Street Fighter x Tekken had a gem system that did the same and in tournaments they were either unused or the players knew what gems were used. If both players know each other's custom moves, then custom moves in tournament play is fine by me. But if it's hidden away, that just ruins the match as a whole. Players would have to slow down/speed up the game at random times purely because they don't know what moves their opponent has and that's totally unnecessary.

That's not how smash works at all. It is very well known that platforms do help some characters out and the lack of them can really screw them up, no matter who they are playing. Simplicity doesn't always bring about fair match ups.

As for custom moves, I don't mind if they are revealed before a match, but simply because they add too many layers is a stupid reason to ban them. If anything, the variety they bring about would be the key reason to allow them. Besides, after the game has been out for a while it will be easy to judge which character has what moves and how to deal with them.

 

[menotyou135]

Guys, ignore him. There is no way he could possibly understand the complexities of smash if he honestly thinks FD is a neutral stage.

 

[Djent]

So let me get this straight.

Everybody so far is saying that this game's pace is somewhere between brawl (3 stocks) and melee (4 stocks)

So Because it is faster than brawl, we should have less stocks than brawl?

I am getting that right, right?

I get the blastzone thing, but how about you actually test it before saying that it's going to make the game too slow. Do you have any data at all to support that claim? Any at all?

You're getting it right. Brawl took way too ****ing long, a fact which even Brawl players began to acknowledge toward the end of the game's lifetime. There's really no reason to repeat the same mistake if the new game's pacing looks at all comparable to Brawl's.

2-stock is nice. I like the fact that sets often take <10 minutes. There's no reason for a tournament set that isn't Finals of some sort to take >15. It's gratuitous, and whatever small gains you make in accurate skill testing are offset by the huge gains in ResidentSleeper-dom.

But if for some reason you still want things to take too long, I'd actually prefer 2-stock Bo5. Because of the way in which early-acquired momentum alters the flow of the match, increasing game count does more for reducing variance than stock count ever could.

 

[Gea]

A voice of reason? No!

 

[menotyou135]

You're getting it right. Brawl took way too ****ing long, a fact which even Brawl players began to acknowledge toward the end of the game's lifetime. There's really no reason to repeat the same mistake if the new game's pacing looks at all comparable to Brawl's.

2-stock is nice. I like the fact that sets often take <10 minutes. There's no reason for a tournament set that isn't Finals of some sort to take >15. It's gratuitous, and whatever small gains you make in accurate skill testing are offset by the huge gains in ResidentSleeper-dom.

But if for some reason you still want things to take too long, I'd actually prefer 2-stock Bo5. Because of the way in which early-acquired momentum alters the flow of the match, increasing game count does more for reducing variance than stock count ever could.

Finally someone countering my points with legitimate logic.

BTW, if you go to vgbootcamp and look up their average matches, melee and project M Bo3s almost always take between 10 and 15 minutes.

If 2 stock Bo3s take under 10 minutes, then it is going by much faster than melee or PM.

Also, keep in mind that unlike traditional tournaments, each round can be played all at once. Currently, the number of matches being played is limited to the number of setups. With 3DS, everybody has their own setups essentially. That means that the entire Winnners round 1 can be played at once rather than in waves. Then both WR2 and LR1 can be play at the same time all at once. Same with WR3 and LR2 and so on. This is something that is normally impossible in current tournaments.

 

[chipndip]

You are overthinking this way too much, and you're still ignoring that there are characters that do well on FD and there are characters that don't do well on FD -- that is a fact, and no bull**** about the stage builder changes that.
To say that characters like Marth and Captain Falcon don't have an advantage on FD is ludicrous, and the same with Mac in the new game.
Then there are characters like Peach and Puff, who have bad ground games, and have a disadvantage on FD.
You can't ignore matchups, otherwise everything is just conjecture, and it's a fact that it's easier for some characters than others to do well on FD. Therefore, FD isn't a neutral stage.

Saying there are characters that do or don't do well in FD is like saying there's characters that do well in a flat stage in another 2D fighter. Just because there's stage select options, doesn't mean a stage with EXTRA stuff on top of the standard, required stuff to make a stage would be considered "neutral".

But seeing how this community has a different use for the word, I'll change the word choice from "neutral" to "default", since I'm not here to rewrite terminology or anything. The point still stands, but perhaps different wording would avoid clashing.

Regardless, "neutral" in stage design =/= neutral in match-ups. I'm obviously speaking of the former, not the latter. If someone has a bad match-up in vanilla stage with no extras, it just means it was a bad match-up from the start. Adding platforms and junk to the stage only gives the disadvantaged guy an edge, rather than the initial lack of them giving the initial advantaged character an edge.

Edit: To make sure I'm thorough with what I'm saying, I'm turning to the dictionary:

"not helping or supporting either side in a conflict, disagreement, etc.; impartial."

Now, this community defined the notion as "The most balanced/fair map where match-ups are 5:5 as much as possible". A noble notion, but framed differently from what one would expect. A neutral stage would be one that offers no help to anyone in their match-ups. FD offers nothing, and I mean literally nothing, to any character. Characters who thrive in a bare-bones environment do so, and those that don't simply don't. That's what I've been saying this whole time. Something isn't neutral if it adds things to the match for the benefit of one character or another.

 

[Umaro]

That's what I've been saying this whole time. Something isn't neutral if it adds things to the match for the benefit of one character or another.

That's debatable, for many reasons. Considering that the classic (default if you will) Smash Bros stage has always been Battlefield, the lack of platforms can be considered an extra, which actually benefits some characters. Also, as everyone's been saying in this thread, you can't really compare this game to standard fighting games.

 

[menotyou135]

snip

Listen man. This community has been evolving for more than 10 years and they have determined that FD is not a neutral stage.

You've been on these boards for a few months and have only posted 9 times. Your opinion on the subject will never trump theirs and the fact that you think you have some special insight on the subject that they don't is nothing but ignorance on your part.

I get what you are saying. FD is the most blank stage. The problem with this philosophy is that smash is inherently designed with platform play in mind. Many fundamental mechanics of smash are lost when there are no platforms. The first smash doesn't even have a platformless map to choose.

 

[Gea]

Also, keep in mind that unlike traditional tournaments, each round can be played all at once.

I hate to beat a dead horse here, but remember that for the most part, the 3DS ruleset and the WiiU ruleset will be similar. 3DS can obviously do things like have faster rounds or run swiss easily, but things like match timer and stock count will likely be the same between versions. Keeping this in mind is imperative when making and discussing the ruleset.

Edit: And while all data is a good thing, variance is going to be at an all time high. Some matches will see characters fumbling and bumbling, while others will see a higher frequency of SDs. Socal's stuff that was streamed this weekend showed off both really quick matches (Fow vs just about anyone who hadn't had a lot of time with the game & matches with high SD rates) to really slow matches that didn't have much camping (lots of fumbling and bumbling along with defensive play). Obviously using what data is currently present is a good thing and much better than guessing. At the same time, it's important to remember that there are external factors affecting the data.

The socal tournament is a really good set of data because they ran 2 stock 6 minutes, which provided for the longest time per stock of any ruleset I've seen thus far.

 

[chipndip]

That's debatable, for many reasons. Considering that the classic (default if you will) Smash Bros stage has always been Battlefield, the lack of platforms can be considered an extra, which actually benefits some characters. Also, as everyone's been saying in this thread, you can't really compare this game to standard fighting games.

It's not debatable. It's objectively in the dictionary.

-Is it a "fair" or balanced stage? Depends. But that's not my point.

-Is it the neutral stage of the franchise? This SHOULD have been a no-brainer. I bet I could go at least 5:5 with a martial arts legend if I had a gun, but that's not NEUTRAL now is it?

That's not how smash works at all. It is very well known that platforms do help some characters out and the lack of them can really screw them up, no matter who they are playing. Simplicity doesn't always bring about fair match ups.

Using the stage to balance out match-ups with platforms is exactly what a non-neutral stage is. You're punishing the character that does better without distractions by putting platforms, hazards, moving obstacles, and/or pitfalls to help out the other guy. You're confusing "match-ups" with "the freaking stage".

Guys, ignore him. There is no way he could possibly understand the complexities of smash if he honestly thinks FD is a neutral stage.

And I guess you wouldn't understand the complexities of the English language if that's how you define a neutral stage.

 

[chipndip]

Separate from the above post I made, addressing the topic of custom moves (so as to not muddle it up with the previous debate/argument/conversation), I...am not entirely sure. Some characters will obviously love it, but I don't know if custom moves and equipment were intended for hard-core competitive play. I'm already turned way off from the idea of Mii fighters, anyway, although this is a bit more agreeable. A bit, anyway...

If it does rock with custom moves, I just hope there won't be complex bans, like banning a specific move or two in one person's arsenal or another. That's what I want avoided more than anything. I still think the ideal would just be For Glory style, but custom moves (outside of Mii fighters)...eh...can't hurt to try it once or twice, right?

 

[Gerpington]

Listen man. This community has been evolving for more than 10 years and they have determined that FD is not a neutral stage.

You've been on these boards for a few months and have only posted 9 times. Your opinion on the subject will never trump theirs and the fact that you think you have some special insight on the subject that they don't is nothing but ignorance on your part.

I get what you are saying. FD is the most blank stage. The problem with this philosophy is that smash is inherently designed with platform play in mind. Many fundamental mechanics of smash are lost when there are no platforms. The first smash doesn't even have a platformless map to choose.

I honestly don't think any of us can counter his argument better than this.

So I agree with menotyou, Lets ignore him. (always go with the yandere over the no face).

 

[chipndip]

I honestly don't think any of us can counter his argument better than this.

So I agree with menotyou, Lets ignore him. (always go with the yandere over the no face).

1) That didn't "counter" anything. No one's been "countering" anything I've said. I understand the notion of what this board's saying, but you're confusing "fair" with "neutral", which are two blatantly different definitions. If you think you can "counter" the English dictionary, I'll definitely sit back and watch you attempt that.

2) Until then, I believe the topic's been bled dry anyhow.

 

[menotyou135]

Marth's vB is OP.

 

[smartguyc1089]

neutral means nobody has an advantage.
neutral roughly equals fair

 

[DJCrinkleCut]

What the **** are you even arguing? That FD has nothing on it? Congratulations, you won that argument.
The initial point was that FD shouldn't be the only stage allowed because it's not a neutral stage in regards to matchups -- which in the context of Smash should be the only neutral we're talking about.
Then you start pulling out some bull about how it's neutral in some completely irrelevant fashion. Congratulations on FD being neutral in some completely different parameters that no one gives a **** about.

 

[menotyou135]

What the **** are you even arguing? That FD has nothing on it? Congratulations, you won that argument.
The initial point was that FD shouldn't be the only stage allowed because it's not a neutral stage in regards to matchups -- which in the context of Smash should be the only neutral we're talking about.
Then you start pulling out some bull about how it's neutral in some completely irrelevant fashion. Congratulations on FD being neutral in some completely different parameters that no one gives a **** about.

I think that smash means breaking things. The dictionary says that to. Therefore, the winner of smash events should be the guy who breaks the most things while there.

 

[smashmachine]

How many tournaments do you think compiled data? :/
Also, I think the reason why it was 2 stocks for pools was because they didn't want the tournament going on for ages, not because of the game itself. FGC tournaments always last a long time which does annoy quite alot of people.
The data provided was good, I totally agree with menotyou135, 3 stocks is fine. Why play the game and super ultra turbo speed with 2 stocks? That isn't even much time to make a comeback (unless we talking Bo5, which sounds a little tedious to me). 3 stocks, 6-8 minutes, Bo3 sounds good. If it ain't broke, don't fix it.

yeah, and we when got data from a later tournament it turned out that it was much longer (of course someone tried to pull a "but this data shouldn't count" on it when it didn't fit their opinion)

 

[Suli Hyuga]

Since I'm starting to see this whole neutral stage argument as absolute crap, could someone please give me an example of wtf a 'neutral stage' is? If FD has been regarded as a 'neutral stage' since Melee and suddenly everyone thinks that's garbage, I would love someone to tell me what a real 'neutral stage' is please.

 

[Gerpington]

Since I'm starting to see this whole neutral stage argument as absolute crap, could someone please give me an example of wtf a 'neutral stage' is? If FD has been regarded as a 'neutral stage' since Melee and suddenly everyone thinks that's garbage, I would love someone to tell me what a real 'neutral stage' is please.

There isn't one. There is no stage where some character won't have some kind of advantage.

But battle field along with FD would at least provide a better balance to for glory just have one of the two formations chosen at random.

This is why the whole banning and counter picking and multiple games to a set rules have been added into smash. It makes the game a lot more balanced if in order to win a person must prove their medal multiple times (on different stages)

 

[chipndip]

What the **** are you even arguing? That FD has nothing on it? Congratulations, you won that argument.
The initial point was that FD shouldn't be the only stage allowed because it's not a neutral stage in regards to matchups -- which in the context of Smash should be the only neutral we're talking about.
Then you start pulling out some bull about how it's neutral in some completely irrelevant fashion. Congratulations on FD being neutral in some completely different parameters that no one gives a **** about.

No one but other fighting game players. Neutrality in match-ups via handicaps from the stage isn't a neutral worth arguing for, in my honest opinion. Any game's gonna have strong and weak characters, and using stage picks to boost your odds in a match-up for the sake of forcing 5:5 match-ups isn't ideal to me, which is what I'm arguing.

For the sake of the ACTUAL match-up, a truly neutral stage is needed, which is what FD is. In a competitive environment, players learn to deal with lop-sided match-ups without outside factors being thrown in. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't. If someone's too strong on a neutral stage, it just means they're too strong. If they are "with platforms and other junk", it just means that without the extra crap, they might not be. Thank you.

 

[Dr_Falchion]

At least 3 Stocks. The typical rules for Melee / PM is 8 Minutes, 4 Stocks each. That's 2 minutes per life - and I can definitely get 1 kill in a 2 minute timed match in the demo. I say three, however, because A) they are somewhat longer than previously, B) Have to take Respawn Time into account, C) Some people definitely stall more than I do, and D) I'm not all that fond of 8 Minute Matches.

Also, as far as custom moves go, I think they should be supported, but there should be an "official" list (Back Room) of banned custom moves - I have a feeling some of them will be unbalanced. This also gives chances to rebalance top-tier characters, because you can help to balance out their moveset by replacing their base specials with one that may be less effective. Just imagine if we had this mechanic for Brawl - you could rebalance Meta Knight by switching out his specials for less-OP choices.

Also, Battlefield is more than / as balanced as Final Destination. Just think of it this way - Mew2King says that if FD was the only stage in Melee, Marth would be the best character. That would be fine by me - but I'm not sure how the Fox fans would react to that. I also really like PM's Pokemon Stadium 2 - its boring, yes, but its possibly the most balanced stage yet.

One last thing - Nintendo, why did you not give us the option to turn off stage hazards? Get rid of Yellow Devil on Wily Castle, and that stage could easily be one of the best in the game. Even as much as New Character / Stage DLC, I'd like to see DLC for more options (more detailed custom controls, item frequency, Online Smash Run, etc).