why is the timer 8 minutes?

[Hax]

most games are 2 minutes. timer should be 4 minutes imo

edit: 6 minutes

maybe 5

 

[Archangel]

Uh...not everybody plays Falcon.

 

[Battlecow]

plenty of games go 4+ minutes, it's not even rare.

plus if you lower the timer like that you change the objective in a lot of matchups from "win" to "keep a lead at all costs for four minutes"

which will lead to more camping, even if it's for a shorter duration

 

[EPsilon933]

A campy game of Jigglypuff vs Peach goes only up to 6 minutes on average (from my experience). It's 1 of the campiest matchups in this game among matchups among the top 8 characters, so I'd say 6 minutes is a fair limit. So what if this game gets a little campier when the time's lower. The winner will win because of skill, not just camping skill

 

[DerfMidWest]

6 minutes works, but 8 serves the purpose of keeping the matches running quickly, while, at the same time, being long enough so players don't usually go into the match trying to time the other player out.
I rarely have games over the 5 minute mark (usually 2-3 minutes), but it would be silly to lower the limit.

 

[Wake]

I think it'd be cool to experiment with. It'd also make GFs sets between Armada and Hbox much shorter.

 

[-ACE-]

4 would be fine for quite a few matchups imo, but def too short for all MU's considered.

 

[Wretched]

I think 7 minutes would be a nice.

Why does it have to be an even number?

 

[DerfMidWest]

because 7 is lame and 8 is the coolest number below 10.

 

[-ACE-]

I've been to quite a few tournaments where the rules stated 7 mins but almost every match was set to 8 mins lol.

6 might be interesting to try, ppl had a lot of opinions on RR vs bracket before FC, but after, I'm sure it influenced some ppl's views on the issue. Sometimes it's worth a try

 

[Naughty Pixel]

more deliberate timeouts would likely occur

 

[JPOBS]

if it became lower, more matchups would go to timeout imo , which would be really gay.

 

[Construct]

Eight minutes serves to make timing out a non-viable option. If you bring the time limit down to 4 minutes it becomes easier to camp people out since the timeframe is so much shorter. Additionally, tons of matches go way over four minutes; puff peach, yl puff, low tier a vs low tier b etc.

 

[Archangel]

I wouldn't mind 7 minutes. I could even see 6 minutes but 4 minutes is kind of silly tbh.

 

[Blistering Speed]

Hax is trolling.

 

[Teczer0]

Eight minutes serves to make timing out a non-viable option. If you bring the time limit down to 4 minutes it becomes easier to camp people out since the timeframe is so much shorter. Additionally, tons of matches go way over four minutes; puff peach, yl puff, low tier a vs low tier b etc.

Why are so many people so dedicated to make timing out a non-viable option?

I never understood that part tbh.

From experience I know I've played a LOT of sets that went to 4 mins and some change, so I think it'd be cool to have it be 5 or 6 minutes, personally I'd like 6.

8 minutes just takes forever.

 

[ShroudedOne]

Well, we kind of need to look at why we have a time limit in the first place, and why the community decided, after testing, to settle on a standard of eight minutes, and if tournament efficiency can be improved upon by changing the time.

A good question would be: Why should the timer be 7 minutes, or 6 minutes? What are objective reasons (do tournaments often run out of time because tourney matches are going to time more often now? Remember that just because Hbox/Armada happens in Grand Finals, doesn't mean that everyone is timing everyone out) that the timer should be reduced? If it's just, "Well, I don't want to spend 8 minutes playing a match," or something along those lines, that doesn't really say anything productive.

I will admit that it sucks going into a match not intending to time someone out (and them not intending to do the same to you), and having it go to time anyways, due to matchups/playstyles.

 

[Mahone]

not camping but just playing smart in like

puff vs doc
puff vs peach
puff vs marth

usually lasts like 5-6.5 minutes for me, so i think 8 is actually perfect

i guess 7 would be fine, its kinda arbitrary where the line is, but i think 4 minutes is clearly too short

 

[TheLake]

Hax is a ****ing genious

no reason for 8 freaking minutes wtf lol

4 is good, 6 would be fine too i guess

or like 30 seconds

OF DEATH

 

[DerfMidWest]

super sudden death should be the new tournament standard.

 

[Jolteon]

8 mins is too long :| that's the only reason people dislike time-outs. I think 5 minutes would be better.

 

[-ACE-]

Lol, 30 seconds, if the timer runs out both players are DQ'd.

 

[town913]

Lol, 30 seconds, if the timer runs out both players are DQ'd.

wow I actually really like that idea. I can just imagine both players SDing 3 times and then trying to get a combo off haha.

 

[-ACE-]

If only it was possible to end a match that quickly lmao, I think the fastest I've ever killed a cpu fox was on YS with marth in 21 secs, close to like TAS minimum.

But in general, the lowered-timer + both players DQ'd if the timer runs out rule would be pretty hilarious.

 

[DerfMidWest]

Or with puff on a computer in like 3 hits.
But realy people know how to not get rested as easily :/

 

[ph00tbag]

I agree with Teczero. The stigma against timeouts really needs to go. They're a part of every fighting game. Once we get over the stigma against timeouts, then it's pretty obvious 8 minutes is too long, and 6 minutes is much more reasonable.

 

[Kink-Link5]

The only sense I can see behind 7 minutes is that it gives one minute to each stock, which is kind of silly since even in SUPAH FAST REAL FIGHTERS, each life is allocated a minute and 39 seconds.

 

[ph00tbag]

The only sense I can see behind 7 minutes is that it gives one minute to each stock, which is kind of silly since even in SUPAH FAST REAL FIGHTERS, each life is allocated a minute and 39 seconds.

That's not a very good analogue, since the number of stocks taken in a match can vary between zero and seven, so the number of minutes per stock varies wildly. Plus, stocks in Smash overlap, whereas in most fighters, rounds reset damage, shield health, position, etc. Depending on the game, some of these elements carry over, but not to the degree they do in smash.

Meanwhile, a full match in other fighters lasts no longer than four minutes, and typically only goes on for two or so. In that light, a shorter clock seems to make sense, especially since 6 minutes is usually how long slower-paced matches end up lasting anyway.

 

[PB&J]

i say 6 minutes

 

[finalcloud13]

Screw it just do unlimited time.

 

[stelzig]

8 mins is too long :| that's the only reason people dislike time-outs.

You think? My impression has always been that, despite it being the standard mode, timed matches are actually less popular than stock matches even in the casual smash crowd. I know this was the case for for me and my friends in both 64 and melee anyway.

Obviously with the above in mind... People would prefer if time didn't play a role in their game at all. I dislike playing timed smash, therefore i dislike timeouts. Or I actually don't mind them so much when they take so long and are so rare, but would exactly start to dislike them if they became a common goal.

 

[ShrieK1295]

Obviously with the above in mind... People would prefer if time didn't play a role in their game at all. I dislike playing timed smash, therefore i dislike timeouts. Or I actually don't mind them so much when they take so long and are so rare, but would exactly start to dislike them if they became a common goal.

You like watching people time each other out currently??

 

[stelzig]

I think long matches can be tense and exciting to watch and was one of the people that did enjoy armada vs. hbox, yes.

But that wasn't really what I was getting at, lol. I even said that I disliked timing out as a goal >_> (that doesn't mean I won't go for it myself if it starts getting realistic to reach it)
It sounds a little like you're taking the spectators point of view here, while i'm trying to go for the players'.

But yes. The only positive outcome of lower timelimit would be that the player behind might not be as patient as he normally would be, and we would get to the super tense final minute a little faster. But idk. I prefer it to be a little rare as it is now. Going to the point that some matchups appearently last anyway seems really stupid - because if they get to that time now... People will time out eachother in these matchups EVERY time (because they WILL go for timeout when there's only 1 minute left and on fresh stocks). Effectively making their game a timed smash mode - which is exactly what my former post said is generally a less popular mode.

Edit: And yeah, i've been going close to that 6-minute mark in friendlies before as well. I'd much prefer at least 7 mins if we were to change it from 8

 

[Armada]

The important thing to understand here is what comes out if we change the timer.
A timer that is lower gives a higher chance for timeouts (at least if we drop it to 6min or lower).

If the timer is 6min or lower pretty much all the floaty MUs actually benefit in A LOT of cases to play on time out. A stage like PS should be removed if the timer is way to short because of those stupid changes the stage has.

If the timer is even lower then that (4min for example) it will ALWAYS (not always but in a very high % of the cases) be timeouts. This will be the case because close to the end of all matches the timer will not have much time left. The question then is WHY you should approach.

The ONLY for most people with this new rule would be that me/Hbox only play around 70% of what we played last time.

The cons for this is way worse and people that don't wanna see timeouts will see it so much more often and the game will become even more deffensive/based on timeouts.

To all of those people that say they hate to play/see 8min matches can you give me a honest answer on how many matches that in the end is a timeout?

 

[Froggy]

The important thing to understand here is what comes out if we change the timer.
A timer that is lower gives a higher chance for timeouts (at least if we drop it to 6min or lower).

If the timer is 6min or lower pretty much all the floaty MUs actually benefit in A LOT of cases to play on time out. A stage like PS should be removed if the timer is way to short because of those stupid changes the stage has.

If the timer is even lower then that (4min for example) it will ALWAYS (not always but in a very high % of the cases) be timeouts. This will be the case because close to the end of all matches the timer will not have much time left. The question then is WHY you should approach.

The ONLY for most people with this new rule would be that me/Hbox only play around 70% of what we played last time.

The cons for this is way worse and people that don't wanna see timeouts will see it so much more often and the game will become even more deffensive/based on timeouts.

To all of those people that say they hate to play/see 8min matches can you give me a honest answer on how many matches that in the end is a timeout?

I actually can't remember the last time a melee match went to time other than Armada vs Hungrybox.

 

[Armada]

That was kind of my point =)
Except for my sets against Hbox and a VERY few matches the matches end before the timer is running out. That means timeouts is not a problem.

If we change the timer it will be easier to time people out and a lot of MU takes a lot of time so we will only have more timeouts. People that wanna see more timeouts should vote for 4min exc.

 

[tm]

What Armada said. Unless you want to change the meta to become more campy / stally, then timeouts are currently rare enough that the 8min timer isn't a problem. Don't have the patience, don't watch.

 

[DerfMidWest]

Didn't fuzzyness (or some other euro falcon) time some peach out at some point?
Oh well, unimportant.
Timer needs no change.
Lowering the timer increases the amount of gay this game becomes.
At least when armada/hbox play its kinda hype and pree funny... At least for the first game.
Other people are just gonna be... Gay.

 

[Armada]

I can't remember Fuzzyness beeing involved in a match like that (might be wrong).
The only matches I can remember that have been timeouts in Europe EVER is

Tero vs Pepito Puff vs Fox ( Tero hold the edge for 8 min - 2010)
Smasher89 vs VJ (from 2010 I think and it was on Kongo)
Smasher89 vs Samochan Puff vs Peach (2011 on Kongo)
WMK vs Niam Samus vs Link (Corneria 2007)
Smasher89 vs Rocky **** vs CF (I think they had one timeout once in 2011 or something)
Lootic vs Eagle Link vs Samus (2011)
Lootic against someone too

So in 7 years we have around 7 matches and 3 of them was on stupid stages that is not allowed anymore. And a pattern is possible to see from the characters (and also a pattern with a very few players involved). So yeah timeouts pretty much never happens

 

[lordvaati]

I actually can't remember the last time a melee match went to time other than Armada vs Hungrybox.

well there is a certain Pink Shinobi match that is best left forgotten, but yeah they are rare.

also the time limit was always suggested, so you can test it out if you want, OP. though I think the lowest we would ever go is 7 minutes.