Counter-Picking

[System_1]

No Item Discussion in this topic. It is only about the Counter-Picking.

People might have noticed the counter-picking rule that is in the beta rules thread. This is a rule that is being shoehorned onto Brawl with really no explanation and replacing the Advanced Slob Picks method that’d been in use for years. I’d like to get some thoughts from people on that.

Evo Method

1. Winner must keep same character.
2. Loser Picks Character OR Stage. If stage is picked, loser must keep character. If character is picked, er, we have no idea as it’s not stated. Either a random stage is picked, Smashville is picked, or Winner picks stage? Clarification needed.

Advanced Slob Picks

1. Loser picks Stage.
2. Winner picks Character.
3. Loser Picks Character.

MrWizard did not make any public statement, but I did PM him and got this in reply. I hope he’s okay with it being made public as I think he replied to more than me with it.

In any tournament setting, your first goal is to make the first game almost seem even. When two players enter they are equal and someone should come out victorious. At that point the loser has the option to change up something to make the game into his or her advantage.

Here is where everyone gets it wrong. The second and future matches of a tournament set should not be as equal as possible. They should always favor the loser. By allowing the winner to adjust to what the loser does, it makes the advantage go away.

The whole set comes down to a first game head up, and to see if the players have any skill past that. If so they can overcome the obstacles put in front of them and proceed to the next round.

That is the true setup on the way a tournament should work.

My reply to that is this:
Yes, but you’ll notice the old way has it like that too, but keeps the notion of having the stage known before any character picks, which is something I think you realized was important when making the first stage of the set one standard stage.

Loser picks Stage (advantage -> loser).
Winner picks Character based on stage choice.
Loser picks Character to counter winner’s character and stage choice (advantage->loser)

It’s a good balance between flexibility, strategy, and loser advantage. I think you realize how big a part stage plays on Smash, which is why I think this method works better for Smash than the method used by other fighting games. The stage being made known before character choice is essential.

After all, Rumble Falls and stuff isn’t banned in these tournaments. It’s punishing people for using characters like Bowser because even if they win, they’re guaranteed a loss the next match due to having to keep their character. Letting them switch, although still putting them at a slight disadvantage, gives them a fighting chance.

It doesn’t make sense to try and give the loser an overwhelming advantage. Give them a slight one to help them make that comeback, but there’s nothing gained by forcing the match to go to Match 3. It takes up more time in the earlier rounds (and if there’s one thing Evo doesn’t have, it’s time) where nobody really cares about the match. People only watch the finals really, or matches of friends. Also, in the third match, the winner of the first match has that overwhelming advantage again anyway.

Advanced Slob Picks makes for more character variety, offers more flexibility for players, and is more familiar to the community. It also maintains that stage is an important factor in the game and lets players use their knowledge of the game’s stages to adjust as required.

I hope others will weigh in on the issue as well.

[System_1]

I’d love to weigh in, but it seems you have covered everything that needs to be said about advanced slob being the better option then slob. So in that case, this post is merely in support of your opinion.

[System_1]

I have hosted several tournaments, one of which was a Brawl tournament that happened around two weeks ago that was 64 people. Advanced slobs has never provided a problem and has always been a fair solution in counter picking throughout every tournament I’ve been in. It gives the loser an advantage, but not such an overly large one as not allowing the winner any choice in their character after the first match. A DK player will always lose his second match by these rules (assuming both players are playing optimally and are not bad at the game).

In terms of participating in tournaments with advanced slob picks, they have always helped me get an advantage on my opponent. They have always put me on a stage with a character I feel comfortable with. They have never been the sole reason I won a match. The stage did not matter if I had lost by a considerable amount in the first match. Advanced slob picks HAS helped me win when the matches were immensely close. They should not make me win against a far superior player to myself.

[Corner-Trap]

I’ve always supported advance slob, and I have made several posts like that to push for the advance slob system. But apparently SRK as a whole is against the idea and feels that it eliminates counter-picking despite how many times I’ve explained that it doesn’t.

[System_1]

The difference is that Evo’s allowing people to actually play on levels, rather than banning all the good ones. You can’t bring an Ike to Big Blue or a Bowser to Rumble Falls (at least, those are some of the worse levels for those characters, I would think, but I’m not sure). Levels are there to use. Allowing somebody to pick their character based on the level makes them worthless. Evo’s setup is better.

[System_1]

I should just ignore trolls, but humor me. How does it make counter picking those stages worthless? You picked the stage. It should still give your character an advantage (otherwise that’s a bad counterpick). Are you saying that it’s fair for me to counterpick a stage and automatically win on it because my opponent couldn’t change their character to one well suited for the stage? Ike’s limited mobility and recovery will cause him to always lose on Big Blue. So now you’re saying if I’m Ike, I should suck it up and automatically lose the second round, despite winning the first round? Counterpicks are supposed to give you an advantage. It isn’t supposed to give you a free win. The current counterpick system gives free wins. Especially with the current stage bans.

And beat me, Pit vs. Ike, on 75m. I dare you. That’s already a hard matchup for Ike. Add in a time limit, hard maneuverability, and springs dropping from the air, and Ike dies… fast.

I don’t remember stages having as large of a factor in any other fighting game as it does in this game. When both stages and character matter, you need the option to change both. When stage largely doesn’t matter, this counterpick system works. That’s not the case with smash.

[TheDarkPhoenix]

I don’t understand why this is even a issue. Put the stages on random (out of the selected approved stages) and play it like every other fighter…Winners keeps characters loser can switch…whats the problem with that?

[SamuraiPanda001]

EDIT: Damn, beat by AZ

I don’t understand why this is even a issue. Put the stages on random (out of the selected approved stages) and play it like every other fighter…Winners keeps characters loser can switch…whats the problem with that?

Like Rebel explained, the current system will force most matches to go to 3 games (which I’m sure, in the interest of time, isn’t a good thing for EVO). In Smash, stage advantages/disadvantages can be so large that its nearly impossible to win with certain characters on certain stages without an incredible skill gap between the players. Not only that, but many characters have easily performed infinites on them by others. For example, any DK, Ness, or Lucas players will automatically lose the second game because there are simple infinites on all 3 of them. But with the current advanced slob system, you are not counterpicking a stage that is a disadvantage to your opponent, you are counterpicking a stage that is an advantage for yourself. This method allows for the most balanced matches possible, and allows many characters to become viable in Smash that wouldn’t be because they are so easily counterpicked by a stage or character.

In traditional fighters, the current system is an awesome system that works on many levels. But in Smash, that system simply does not work very well at all.

[System_1]

I should just ignore trolls, but humor me. How does it make counter picking those stages worthless? You picked the stage. It should still give your character an advantage (otherwise that’s a bad counterpick). Are you saying that it’s fair for me to counterpick a stage and automatically win on it because my opponent couldn’t change their character to one well suited for the stage? Ike’s limited mobility and recovery will cause him to always lose on Big Blue. So now you’re saying if I’m Ike, I should suck it up and automatically lose the second round, despite winning the first round? Counterpicks are supposed to give you an advantage. It isn’t supposed to give you a free win. The current counterpick system gives free wins. Especially with the current stage bans.

And beat me, Pit vs. Ike, on 75m. I dare you. That’s already a hard matchup for Ike. Add in a time limit, hard maneuverability, and springs dropping from the air, and Ike dies… fast.

I don’t remember stages having as large of a factor in any other fighting game as it does in this game. When both stages and character matter, you need the option to change both. When stage largely doesn’t matter, this counterpick system works. That’s not the case with smash.

It’s funny. Smashboards claims to be the best, but whenever something is a simple disadvantage, it’s “omg, i auto lose no fair!” Ike on Big Blue isn’t an auto-loss. It’s a tough win. There is no “free” anything in Brawl. You may as well start saying they can’t change character because going on FD with a character who has a good matchup vs. the opponent is a free win.

Anyway, Pit vs. Ike goes both ways. Unless the Pit somehow PLANNED to lose the first match in order to bring Ike on 75m, then there’s no guarantee that he’s going to be able to bring the Ike to a level that would exploit his immobility. And, obviously, if the Pit LOSES, then the Ike can bring him to one of the smaller levels where his mobility doesn’t matter. But then what? The Pit loses the first round, brings Ike to 75m, then Ike gets to bring him to whichever level he likes.

And levels don’t have an effect in other games?

Kids these days. Who was it from Smashboards that said Smash is not a typical fighting game, and shouldn’t be treated as such? Whoever it was, I agree. The Mexico stage doesn’t change KOF2002 compared to the Italy stage. But Smash isn’t like KOF2002. Levels effect gameplay. Just like in…well…most 3d fighting games.

Anyway, if any you wanted to make this case, you should’ve shown up to last night’s tourney and swept the whole damn thing by using the alleged exploits in the system.

[System_1]

Its not the exploits, its the LACK of exploits, in advanced slobs, the winner is simply tested to a higher standard because they have to deal with REALLY lopsided matches against them, or, at best, the same lopsided matches in your system.

That…doesn’t make much sense. Either way, me bringing Ike to Big Blue isn’t an exploit. It’s what the system is meant for.

[System_1]

You can only bring Ike to big blue if you lose the first match, in which case, the winner doesn’t really care, he gets to take your Ike right back in the third match to the level you lost on in the first match, and there isn’t anything you can do.

That’s true…assuming the Ike loses. And you lose again in the third round.

[System_1]

In other words, the EVO ruleset fully supports double jeopardy, thanks for making one of my points.

How is me saying that you can’t guarantee that a player is going to win, regardless of what character they’re playing on what level against what other character, is somehow related to bringing somebody into court on the same charge twice? Unless you actually thought I was serious in my last post. In which case, I laugh.

[COUM]

How’s this?

First stage is picked at random from all stages, then players pick their characters (double blind).
Loser may choose ‘character’ or ‘stage’.
If loser chooses ‘character’, stage is re-picked at random from all stages, then winner picks their character, then loser picks their character.
If loser chooses ‘stage’, loser picks stage, then both players pick characters (double blind).

Seems to me like this allows the maximum stage variety while still allowing counterpicks reasonable power and preventing people getting screwed by random stages.

Advanced slob system is really fine, though.

[System_1]

If advanced slobs is not agreed on, would SRKers have any problem with a compromise between the two counterpicking systems?

Basically you can make it so the loser can opt to pick both character AND stage, but in doing so, he allows the winner to change his character. If the loser chooses to pick either character OR stage, but not both, the winner must stay.

[SamuraiPanda001]

How’s this?

First stage is picked at random from all stages, then players pick their characters (double blind).
Loser may choose ‘character’ or ‘stage’.
If loser chooses ‘character’, stage is re-picked at random from all stages, then winner picks their character, then loser picks their character.
If loser chooses ‘stage’, loser picks stage, then both players pick characters (double blind).

Seems to me like this allows the maximum stage variety while still allowing counterpicks reasonable power and preventing people getting screwed by random stages.

Advanced slob system is really fine, though.

That system has a few flaws in it here and there, but I don’t really think its necessary to point them out.

I still believe the advanced slob would still allow maximum stage and character variety. That seems to be something that SRK members often forget, is character balance. They’re used to just playing a game where the balance is evident and straightforward, but Smash’s balance is all over the place. There is different balance for FFA, certain stages, etc. and the game is much more complicated than the average fighter to somehow allow 2 players the most fair matches possible.

And as for the current system, as AZ is pointing out, without even bothering to factor in one-sided character counterpicks, the system does not allow for very much variety in stages. Using the prior examples, Ike wins against Pit in a fairly one-sided match on Smashville because Ike has the advantage in that match-up due to the small stage. Pit takes Ike to 75m, where Ike WILL lose unless there is a huge gap in skill between the players (as I said before, some characters have ENORMOUS disadvantages on certain stages that will nearly guarantee the player will lose that match). And then Ike just brings Pit back to Smashville and wins again.

You saw 2 stages and 2 characters there. The Pit player pretty much automatically lost the set because he chose to counterpick a stage instead of a character. The loser is at a disadvantage, which should NOT happen.

Please, instead of arguing the finer details of the example (i.e. OMG Ike totally doesn’t have an advantage on SV vs Pit) try to see the bigger picture. And also, I have a question for those who prefer this current system over the advanced slob system: How does the current system favor a greater diversity in stages and characters than the advanced slob system?

[TheDarkPhoenix]

how about the stages always being random…Whats the problem with that?

[System_1]

how about the stages always being random…Whats the problem with that?

Some characters are terrible on certain stages but great on other stages. It becomes a big gamble, especially if you are playing someone like Bowser and you end up on Rumble Falls.

[System_1]

snip.

I repeat, your point is invalid unless working under the inherently incorrect assumption that you can completely guarantee who will win a given match. And again, advanced slobbery removes levels as a factor in gameplay.

[TheDarkPhoenix]

Some characters are terrible on certain stages but great on other stages. It becomes a big gamble, especially if you are playing someone like Bowser and you end up on Rumble Falls.

yeah i understand that perfectly, but there has to be some give and take. If you get a sucky stage then yeah that sucks. But at some point you gotta say enough is enough and roll with one of these 3 options its not much else you can do or come up with at this point. Random for every stage is as fair as you can get with out doing it the “regular” way. either of the other ways it seems the loser (or whoever) is going to complain.

I look at it like you going up against someone and they pick a counter character randomly. Sucks but its random and it happens.

[SamuraiPanda001]

I repeat, your point is invalid unless working under the inherently incorrect assumption that you can completely guarantee who will win a given match. And again, advanced slobbery removes levels as a factor in gameplay.

Yet, we’ve explained exactly how the system that removes levels as a factor is the one currently in place.

And where are you getting that from? How does advanced slob remove levels as a factor? Hell, AZ already provided you with an example of how the level is STILL a huge factor in gameplay, AND in character choice. You sir are wrong.

yeah i understand that perfectly, but there has to be some give and take. If you get a sucky stage then yeah that sucks. But at some point you gotta say enough is enough random for every stage is as fair as you can get with out doing it the “regular” way. either other way it seems the loser (or whoever) is going to complain.

I look at it like you going up against someone and they pick a counter character randomly. Sucks but its random and it happens.

Why don’t you like the advanced slob system? I’ve seen you post a few potential alternatives, but no real reasons. I’m just curious to understand where you’re coming from.