The specific game rules are up and available for viewing on evo2k.com.
RE: SSFIV Ruleset
If one of the players asks for a blind pick, then P1 must tell the judge his character and ultra selection. P2 then must pick his characters, and after that P1 must pick the characters he told the judge. Everything is blind pick.
As far as the winner switching ultras, since ultras can counter the other player’s ultras, the winner will NOT be allowed to switch up any ultra. There should be no advantages given to the player that already is up a game in the set.
A perfect example of ultras countering ultras, is Seth vs Chun Li, if Seth picks Ultra 1, Chun Li can punish Seth’s Ultra 1 when blocked from full screen away, even though in many player’s eyes, Ultra 2 is way better.
UPDATE We are thinking about letting the winner change ultra but they have to pick their ultra first in game 2 or 3. Thoughts??
I’m not sure if I can agree with that. In SF3 you were allowed to change your Super Art after you won a game, so why not this one?
Ultras combat other Ultras very, very little in this game, 90% or higher they are all pure utility choices. If you’re arguing that I shouldn’t be able to switch to Last Dread Dust with Cody if someone counterpicks with a fireball character… I’m willing to argue against that.
Selecting an ultra without even knowing what character the opponent is playing goes against the intentions of Capcom. You can tell just from the way blind pick works online. The whole point of having multiple ultras in the game is so you can select them depending on the situation.
Instead, you should do a blind pick on characters – THEN after both characters are chosen, do a blind pick on ultras. This way both players know what character the other player selected when picking his ultra, but not which ultra he has selected.
Also, I have to disagree with allowing the winner to change his ultra. He should be allowed to change ultras, but either player can request that it be chosen blindly (after the loser has chosen his character).
With regards to the ruling for SSF4, is this going to also apply in MB:AA to moons for characters when you win a set? The arcade version lets you switch moons between games.
Furthermore, the balance mode isn’t mentioned in the rule-set for MB:AA. I’m guessing that it’s Original and not Arcade, since a) every American MB:AA tournament is played on Original and b) Original is actually closer to the newest arcade version than Arcade is.
Please reconsider, sir.
By your same example, these rules could be exploited in reverse. A Chun may pick U1 vs Seth but then be stuck with U1 in a matchup where he would want U2. There are many characters with character or situation specific Ultras that do not imbalance or break the game. They just function as a different utility.
By the same logic a T.Hawk or Hakan would likely pick U2 in many match-ups such as Akuma, but then if Akuma switches to a guile that doesn’t jump well… You’re unnecessarily punishing the winner.
If anything this policy unfairly helps those characters with only one good ultra, such as Zangief, Fei long, or Cammy.
In the end like all the other rules or bans we need to stick to the policy of leaving the game to be what it is unless it is a clear and obvious broken feature. We let people switch supers in 3s, and we let people use all sorts of unintended mechanics because we judge them on a case by case basis. Also this policy encourages counter-picking, I may not want to counter pick against x character unless I know they have an extra hard time in x matchup without a certain ultra.
Thanks for your time.
Granting the player who has already won a set the ability to change their ultra is not giving them an advantage; it is preventing them from being at an unnecessary disadvantage due to counter-picking.
Also as far as blind picking, why not do two separate blind picks on characters and ultras (ala xbox live)? Then people can still choose the ultra that will be more helpful for them in the matchup (when relevant), while still not allowing players to counter each others ultras.
I mean, it’s nice and all that these rules would give me a relative advantage given that Cammy’s ultra choice is the same across the board, but this just doesn’t make any sense when you consider certain characters (rufus, dudley, chun, dhalsim, etc). The reason they put two ultras in the game was to give people the option of different utilities against different characters, and preventing them from doing so is only going to encourage counter-picking.
If the players request a blind pick on ultras, so be it… But not allowing any change just honestly doesn’t seem to coincide with what Capcom intended.
yes this needs to be considered some more. one thing about the street fighter community is that they take great pride in their arcade roots and playing the game that’s in front of them. in arcade mode in SSF4 if a new challenger arrives you are stuck with your character but you get a choice of ultra. also things shouldn’t be banned unless there is clear evidence that something is broken. there is no evidence that such is the case with allowing the winner to select their ultra and history in 3s also suggests that this is not broken therefore i think it’s your duty as a tournament organize to ensure that the game is as open at possible. it also makes the game less interesting competitively. you force people to play the ultra that is overall best and i think that really goes against the spirit of them. let’s also not forget that evo is also trying to expand its audience. how interesting will it be to an observer to see someone get a hard counter pick that renders the winner’s ultra useless?
the counter to this is that what if the game is dominated by characters that have two good ultras that can counter all the other characters and to that i say, show me the results. unless it’s proven something is broken then it should be allowed. to do otherwise is to go against the history of the competitive street fighter scene. at the very least, changing the ruleset to reduce the scope of the game without evidence that such options are broken should be decided upon by the community. especially considering how much influence evo has on the competitive ruleset for the entire country.
It seems to me this rule set unnecessarily penalizes characters who generally change out based on the match-up, and thus favors characters that have one go to ultra for pretty much all of their match-ups.
For example, with the proposed rules it becomes a lot easier to counter pick Dhalsim than, say, Ryu.
I dont get why people keep saying “We let people change supers in Third Strike”. Evo’s rules since the start of the series (Way way way back in 1997) has always not allowed the winner to switch any part of the winners modes or supers. This has been the rule when EVO had 3s back in 1999-2000, and from 2003-2009.
Also im calling BS on what Capcoms intentions are. You dont know, you didnt work on the game. Just because you see whats in ranked and endless mode on a online platform is a garbage argument. One of the people who sits on the Board of Directors for EVO actually works for Capcom. I think we have a better understand on what capcom intended then the public at large.
and the inverse is that allowing you to switch unfairly favors characters who can effectively negate a counterpick by switching ultras. either argument is equally valid except for the fact that counterpicking is supposed to give the loser an advantage so it makes sense to not allow the winner to switch.
If you want to be pedantic, then fine, I don’t know what Capcom’s intentions are. I think it’s clear that I am just stating what appears to be the design goal based on the limited information available to people who don’t work at Capcom. It is reasonable to assume the arcade release of SSF4 will allow the winner to change ultras, although I can’t know that until the arcade version is released.
But ultimately what it comes down to is this: what is the more interesting gameplay? In my opinion, by not allowing the winning player to switch ultras, I feel it would encourage most players to consistently use one ultra over the other all the time regardless of the situation (i.e., whichever ultra is the best against the most characters – or avoiding an ultra that can be countered, etc.). I understand that which ultra someone chooses isn’t going to make a huge difference overall, but anything that can add some variety to the game is a plus in my opinion.
I understand that you weren’t allowed to change supers in 3S. But this is a new game, and I don’t see any reason to carry over an old rule to a new game without first considering the consequences. If the rule is ever going to be changed, it seems like now would be the best time.
Arguing that we should select the alternative that gives the loser the most advantage is silly because there is always going to be another alternative that gives the loser an even bigger advantage than that. For instance, we could require the winner to always select Dan. Or to ban the winner from using an ultra during the next game. Or so on and so forth. Of course these are just exaggerations to prove a point.
Ultimately, either alternative will give the loser an advantage. It’s just a debate on how MUCH disadvantage is really appropriate, and is it worth the trade-off in how gameplay would be affected.
Ok, disregarding those elements of the argument I still believe some of the other posters and I have a point that you did not address.
This rule encourages counter picking because it enhances counter picking.
I could go on to explain or give examples but I think it would be redundant as it’s been said already.
What’s so terrible about counter picking? Also people saying that “being stuck” with an ultra is unfair… umm you know if you lose you’re still in right? Switch to the other ultra than if it gives that much of an advantage in a fight. It’s two out of three not “I can beat him once but if I lose once it’s over completely”.