Stock Time Limits in Smash 4

[Raijinken]

Haven't seen a recent thread specifically about this, correct me if I'm wrong.

What are your thoughts about the stock time limits with regards to Smash4? Timed Stock has been the standard for a long while in Melee and Brawl, but should it remain that way?

If I understand correctly, the time limit was put in place to prevent players from stalling and dragging out the tournament. However, the issue I've seen is that it can also be used for an otherwise-losing player to stall until sudden death. I've never seen a winning player stall eight minutes to win a fight they took first stock on, but I could be wrong. Perhaps my view is unusual, but I find both of these types of stalling victory to be unsportsmanlike and to be strictly a negative side effect of time limits. The tournament stalling, on the other hand, can be averted with tournament moderators penalizing players who deliberately stall an evident outcome. That said, at least on the 3DS version, having the option for far more setups at a tournament could reduce the time stress caused by stalling to begin with.

For the poll, I used the somewhat arbitrary value of 3 stocks for a match. Feel free to use other values in discussion.

 

[Big-Cat]

Stalling? You mean playing to win.

It's too early to talk about something like this.

 

[STiCKYBULL3TZ]

I like the 4-stocks because it leaves room for error and still a chance to win. I always thought 8 minutes was too long. If a best 2 out of 3 ever goes the distance, that's a max 24 minutes of play for one match. I would say 5 minutes max for a 4-stock

 

[Bladeviper]

i know the 3ds tourny at sdcc used 4 stock with 6 min

 

[IgnazS]

6 mins. should be fine in a 3-4 stock match, but that can change on how the game develops.

 

[Senario]

Haven't seen a recent thread specifically about this, correct me if I'm wrong.

What are your thoughts about the stock time limits with regards to Smash4? Timed Stock has been the standard for a long while in Melee and Brawl, but should it remain that way?

If I understand correctly, the time limit was put in place to prevent players from stalling and dragging out the tournament. However, the issue I've seen is that it can also be used for an otherwise-losing player to stall until sudden death. I've never seen a winning player stall eight minutes to win a fight they took first stock on, but I could be wrong. Perhaps my view is unusual, but I find both of these types of stalling victory to be unsportsmanlike and to be strictly a negative side effect of time limits. The tournament stalling, on the other hand, can be averted with tournament moderators penalizing players who deliberately stall an evident outcome. That said, at least on the 3DS version, having the option for far more setups at a tournament could reduce the time stress caused by stalling to begin with.

For the poll, I used the somewhat arbitrary value of 3 stocks for a match. Feel free to use other values in discussion.

Well firstly sudden death is never used. No real problems there. Secondly the large time limit is there so it is harder to gain a lead then just keep running until you win. Hence why things like rising pound are banned. The time limit will likely remain 7 to 8 minutes because TOs and others have tested it extensively.

 

[KaZe_DaRKWIND]

Id say 5-8 minutes for a 3-4 stock match. Any more and you'll get extreme camping, any less and you'll get reckless play.

 

[STiCKYBULL3TZ]

Id say 5-8 minutes for a 3-4 stock match. Any more and you'll get extreme camping, any less and you'll get reckless play.

I think shorter time limits would cause more camping. Shorter time limits would cause camping at the end of a game because the person leading could secure a victory as the time gets close to the end.

 

[Amazing Ampharos]

Id say 5-8 minutes for a 3-4 stock match. Any more and you'll get extreme camping, any less and you'll get reckless play.

This is backward. Lower time limits lead to more camping since actually running out the timer with a lead becomes more feasible. If I have a hardcore camping strategy I could deploy that on average deals 10% damage to you in a minute and takes 25% damage and I typically lose my stock at 120% while doing this while being unable to ever take yours, it's a pretty simple calculation to determine whether this strategy is worth deploying based on the size of my lead and the amount of time remaining. If there are 2 minutes left, we're both on last stock, and I am at 0% while you're at 80%, deploying this strategy would be prudent. If there were 5 minutes left, I'd be a fool to try this. If hardcore camping actually got me ahead on average, I'd always do it with any time limit (with a preference for the shorter ones since it affords me fewer opportunities to mess up while stalling you out), but only with a short time limit will I have reason to do it when it causes me to slowly fall behind.

I think 3 stock 8 minutes is well tested to be an adequate amount of time for a 3 stock game. 3 stock 7 minutes is very likely to work for this game as well, and it's something definitely worth testing. I feel going down to 6 or fewer minutes is extremely likely to be a mistake. Even in Melee with a variety of ways to take nearly fresh stocks, the 1 stock to 2 minute ratio is barely enough for slower paced match-ups like Young Link vs Jigglypuff, and we definitely do want to encourage all players, even those of projectile based characters with poor kill moves, to fully play out the game instead of etch out an early lead and then instantly start counting down the timer and just minimizing damage. The need for more time is probably more obvious to people who were Brawl touranment players since timeouts were so common in Brawl and the feeling of "I can't win because there's not enough time" happened a lot more often; it was not one of the more enjoyable dynamics of competitive Brawl, and if smash 4 doesn't natively have it, I don't want to introduce it with too short time controls.

 

[Renji64]

3 stock 8 mins.

 

[strawhatninja]

I hate being timed so none.

 

[ferioku]

5 Minutes is too low, I say 6 minutes 7 at most.

 

[mario123007]

This is backward. Lower time limits lead to more camping since actually running out the timer with a lead becomes more feasible. If I have a hardcore camping strategy I could deploy that on average deals 10% damage to you in a minute and takes 25% damage and I typically lose my stock at 120% while doing this while being unable to ever take yours, it's a pretty simple calculation to determine whether this strategy is worth deploying based on the size of my lead and the amount of time remaining. If there are 2 minutes left, we're both on last stock, and I am at 0% while you're at 80%, deploying this strategy would be prudent. If there were 5 minutes left, I'd be a fool to try this. If hardcore camping actually got me ahead on average, I'd always do it with any time limit (with a preference for the shorter ones since it affords me fewer opportunities to mess up while stalling you out), but only with a short time limit will I have reason to do it when it causes me to slowly fall behind.

I think 3 stock 8 minutes is well tested to be an adequate amount of time for a 3 stock game. 3 stock 7 minutes is very likely to work for this game as well, and it's something definitely worth testing. I feel going down to 6 or fewer minutes is extremely likely to be a mistake. Even in Melee with a variety of ways to take nearly fresh stocks, the 1 stock to 2 minute ratio is barely enough for slower paced match-ups like Young Link vs Jigglypuff, and we definitely do want to encourage all players, even those of projectile based characters with poor kill moves, to fully play out the game instead of etch out an early lead and then instantly start counting down the timer and just minimizing damage. The need for more time is probably more obvious to people who were Brawl touranment players since timeouts were so common in Brawl and the feeling of "I can't win because there's not enough time" happened a lot more often; it was not one of the more enjoyable dynamics of competitive Brawl, and if smash 4 doesn't natively have it, I don't want to introduce it with too short time controls.

I often seen many of the stock matches can be proceed for 10 minutes, so having a time limit can more competitive and more exciting because you never know who will win at the end.

 

[Dr. James Rustles]

This is backward. Lower time limits lead to more camping since actually running out the timer with a lead becomes more feasible. If I have a hardcore camping strategy I could deploy that on average deals 10% damage to you in a minute and takes 25% damage and I typically lose my stock at 120% while doing this while being unable to ever take yours, it's a pretty simple calculation to determine whether this strategy is worth deploying based on the size of my lead and the amount of time remaining. If there are 2 minutes left, we're both on last stock, and I am at 0% while you're at 80%, deploying this strategy would be prudent. If there were 5 minutes left, I'd be a fool to try this. If hardcore camping actually got me ahead on average, I'd always do it with any time limit (with a preference for the shorter ones since it affords me fewer opportunities to mess up while stalling you out), but only with a short time limit will I have reason to do it when it causes me to slowly fall behind.

I think 3 stock 8 minutes is well tested to be an adequate amount of time for a 3 stock game. 3 stock 7 minutes is very likely to work for this game as well, and it's something definitely worth testing. I feel going down to 6 or fewer minutes is extremely likely to be a mistake. Even in Melee with a variety of ways to take nearly fresh stocks, the 1 stock to 2 minute ratio is barely enough for slower paced match-ups like Young Link vs Jigglypuff, and we definitely do want to encourage all players, even those of projectile based characters with poor kill moves, to fully play out the game instead of etch out an early lead and then instantly start counting down the timer and just minimizing damage. The need for more time is probably more obvious to people who were Brawl touranment players since timeouts were so common in Brawl and the feeling of "I can't win because there's not enough time" happened a lot more often; it was not one of the more enjoyable dynamics of competitive Brawl, and if smash 4 doesn't natively have it, I don't want to introduce it with too short time controls.

I don't even know why this has to be explained. I don't know why people think 5-6 minutes is beneficial to the game. I can only conjecture it's the result of an underdeveloped ability to reason.

 

[κomıc]

While at tournaments or even friendlies where friends and strangers set the rules, I forget I'm even being timed. But the 5-6 minute thing I get why people are against it.

Leave it at 7-8 minutes. As was said, it is adequate time.