time or stock?

[royandmarth]

Which do you prefer? I love using stock because anything can happen for you to win. But on the other hand, time is an honest contest of skill and proves who's the better smasher.

 

[Heretic_789]

Stock works for me.

 

[MrSilver]

No, time is a contest of who is better at suiciding when they get to a high percentage to prevent the opponent from getting a kill. And if you up the suicide rate to 2 you're basicly playing a messed up version of stock. The only place where time is a valid format is in free for all matches. And even then only when it's just for fun and the players aren't to serious about winning.

 

[OmegaWeapon]

Stock works best because its all skill involved. I play to win and i don't want someone like my little sister winning cause she ran around the whole match then pulled out a lucky shot in sudden death.

 

[Coen]

No, time is a contest of who is better at suiciding when they get to a high percentage to prevent the opponent from getting a kill. And if you up the suicide rate to 2 you're basicly playing a messed up version of stock. The only place where time is a valid format is in free for all matches. And even then only when it's just for fun and the players aren't to serious about winning.

Also remember players can evade their opponent to prevent themselves from being killed until time runs out.

Je hebt gelijk

 

[The Immortal Flame]

*Sigh* There has been another thread like this for months now.

Oh well, like I said before, fix the suicide problem and make the resulting change in the score the same regardless of how a player is taken out, and time is the way to go. I'm sick and tired of having to play stock!! There is absolutely no skill involved in stock whatsoever. Players can be as laid back or cowardly as they want and still have a shot at winning from playing the opportunist. This is especially true in team battles, where one can actually use the other players as a distraction while they hang out on safe turf. With time, players actually have to earn it and score kills, assuming that no one suicides. The key to winning a battle is not just staying alive, but defeating your opponents. Stock completely disregards this principle.

Of course, as long as they keep the flawed scoring system that they currently have in time, Mr. Silver is correct. They just need to adjust it, and I have the answer. Here's how time really needs to be set up. Whenever a player KO's an opponent, that player should be given one point, but the score of the player who gets KO'd should not be affected at all. This would, of course, still put the player who made the kill ahead in the score. A point should be subtracted only when a player dies by other means besides being killed by his/her opponent, and in this case, the score of the other player will again not be affected. Under this system, it would essentially be a valid test of skill among the players because it would be a battle between who can score the most kills. Suiciding would not help a player because they would lose a point for doing so. It's just that simple. Timed matches are not essentially bad - they are simply screwed up because of the score system. Stock, however,
is just a mindless contest between who is the last person alive, regardless of the cause.

Lastly, since most of the stages that contain particularly hazardous obstacles or secluded areas have been banned, skilled and patient players should not have a problem nailing a player who is playing the evasion game.

In the end, a balanced time battle is the way to go. Period.

 

[AlphaZealot]

No, Time is a Falcon Victory every time (slight exageration but you get my point).

Tournaments are 1v1, which means stock is the fairest judge of skill. It gives both people equal ground to play on, not just who is the most offensive. A player should be able to play with offense and defense, and stock is the best way to allow for that. Also, the time restrictions on...time...often make for a smaller learning curve and less mind games.

Show one way that stock is unfair in 1v1?

This is especially true in team battles, where one can actually use the other players as a distraction while they hang out on safe turf

That example is crap, your seriously going to let your team mate get his *** double teamed? That is how you lose in 2v2.

 

[Kokichi]

Don't complain about playing with more than 2 people in stock when someone isn't fighting. If they're just cherry-picking and you're whooping the other guy's ***, guess what? You should go after the cherry-picker. The one just sitting there staring at the grass. Don't complain when you can just hunt him down and kill him.

Stock is for professionals. It's the way you determine skill. Time just tells you who can kill steal easily if you're playing FFA with more than 2 people. And then there's the suicide issue. And even if the suicide issue is resolved, stock tells you who the victor is. Maybe they're plan is to stand back and then come in for the kill. Sure, it works, but not if someone starts attacking him. If he concentrates on running away, you should be able to get more hits on him. And if you're playing with 3 or 4 people, team up on him until he starts to actively fight.

Time is simply to have fun, but even then it's not really fun because it's just all kill stealing and suiciding.

 

[EdreesesPieces]

An equivalently legitimate question is "Stock or coin mode" or "stock or score/style mode" The answer is ovbious. With time battles, suicides mess things up. People have already explained the problem even if you change the suicide count. You can also stall if you have a lead. Well, coin mode would give a new meaning to the phrase money match. /shameless pun

And stock is mindless about who's last alive? Well there are ONLY TWO PEOPLE FIGHTING on a one on one match. Of course it's about who's the last one standing. The person with the most kills will be the last one standing.

When it comes to free for all, it doesn't matter. Free for alls are for pure fun matches every now and then, not to see who is best. IF you do time, it's about who kills fast and easy. if you do stock, its about who is gonna get teamed up on first.

 

[Mic_128]

Time is simply to have fun, but even then it's not really fun because it's just all kill stealing and suiciding.

Man, who do you play with?

 

[-{GALEMN}-]

Stock: Gets the idea of surviving, if its not a 1v1 match, you can stand at the side waiting, And still get 2nd!
Time: Here you really go for skill to win. Makes a more fair fight.

But i like stock more anyway just cause you can die only a certain amount of time, and makes the feeling a lil bit more relistic...

erm...

Wtever

 

[sampitt94]

Well, I like both Stock and Time, so both for me. Unless you're looking for a single answer, then time is good for some things, and stock is good for others. A.K.A. tie.

 

[gigameleeman]

time does show more potencial because your trying to do your worst to our opponen in a certain ammount of time,t but in stock you think your using your full potencial but but you can take your time.





i always use stock with my friends but i love to do timed matches

 

[Dorkdav]

I like time more. I think if you set the time to about 5 mins then the more skillful player will win. I do like to turn the sucide count up, though it's only one of my younger brothers that will sucide in time.

For me Smash Bros. is at it's finest in a hectic 4 player FFA. So with time you never lose that craziness.

1v1 not so much. I'm sure there is more "skill" invovled in that. But if I wanted a skillful fighting game I'd play Guilty Gear X2. Smash Bros. is 4 player fun to the max!

 

[cairne13]

I'm more used to timed matches, mostly because I use timed matches in shooting games as well. Stock matches are fun, but they don't last as long as a good timed match in my opinion.

 

[Dash Blaster]

I prefer stock because a person that is unsure about the game (fighting, to be specific) will stand at the edge and projectile anyone he/she can in a time match. That means that they won't die, and most likely get a good ranking. In stock, to win, everybody has to die. Nobody can run and get away with it.

 

[Vir_Iratus]

The problem with timed 4 player FFAs is that its too easy for a Fox to win... All he has to do is spam the edge someone just flew off of with his blaster... and if they can't make it back and just ONE of those several shots hit them, he gets the kill without having to put them out there... Even when I'm in 2v2 matches with my brother (we usually play on the same team) and he steals the point from ME I get pissed off... I prefer Stock all the way UNLESS I feel like playing for X amount of time and don't care about the victor or if it is just a fun FFA with 4 people...

 

[Dorkdav]

Yeah if you want to get competitive in time matches there are some real lame things you can do to win.

Playing for fun is what time is made for. And when you have like 8 other people waiting for a chance to play. Got to keep the line moving.

 

[Glide]

Time is ridiculously easy to win at. Someone who just has a knowledge of the game's rule-set can win incredible numbers of matches without learning anything but the walking c-sticker method. No, it's not unbalanced against certain characters; all the characters still have all their advantages intact from the standard 4 stock 8 minute match in tournaments. The problem is that it really doesn't test skill in combat as it does skill in scoring points. It makes the fighting system of Melee a sport; not a survival combat. Time is much like fighting for coins or style points. It's an interesting diversion, but in the end, it holds no place in tournament play.

 

[The Immortal Flame]

No, Time is a Falcon Victory every time (slight exageration but you get my point).

Tournaments are 1v1, which means stock is the fairest judge of skill. It gives both people equal ground to play on, not just who is the most offensive. A player should be able to play with offense and defense, and stock is the best way to allow for that. Also, the time restrictions on...time...often make for a smaller learning curve and less mind games.

Wrong. Scoring kills does not necessarily mean going berserk and playing aggressively. You can always play passively and let your opponent attack first. If you're a defensive player, all you have to do is manipulate them into making careless moves and punish them when they slip up and leave themselves open, and there are a million different ways you can do that. It doesn't matter what your playing style is or what strategy you use as long as you can get the kill. If you are worried about the time limit ruining opportunities for mind games and what not (which, by the way, doesn't happen if everyone is playing seriously), just increase the time limit. If you don't have that option in tournaments due to a strict schedule, using stock won't help either because you would have to limit the amount of lives each player can have so as not to consume too much - that's right - time.

And no, my previously mentioned method would not be a screwed up timed version of stock, because in the end, timed matches judge you based on how many kills you rack up, not who is the last one alive. In stock, you can win regardless of whether or not you score the most kills, cause the most damage, and land the most hits. In 1v1 stock, the player who gets fewer kills sometimes wins. That's bull****. Killing your opponent is the whole premise behind fighting games. So stock is not, in fact, the fairest judge of skill.

I guess I gave a bad example with the team battle reference, but the fact is that whether you are playing 1v1 or 2v2, you can win in stock even if you did not do the bulk of the work. In timed matches, you earn your victories. Stock, therefore, is crap.

For those of you who complain about players who would be unfairly punished for accidental suicides due to an equal point deduction system that disregards how the opponent was killed, stock is no different. Whether or not you get KO'd, you still lose a life when you fall off the stage. There's just no way around it. Any other point system in a timed match would leave us exactly where we are now, where a player can deny another player a kill by suiciding. Also, Why should a player who manages to build up his/her opponent's damage meter be unfairly denied a kill point simply because the hapless opponent killes themself at the last second? It would be no less of a rip-off for the attacking player in that instance. In any case, accidental suicides occure much less frequently than intentional suicides do in current timed matches, so it really does not make a significant difference. It's just a case of making the smallest possible sacrifice.

Just to clarify something, I am making absolutely no references to 3 & 4 player FFA's. I am well-aware that they are primitive noob contests, and that is why, like any long-time smasher, I don't play them. I either play 1v1 or 2v2, and in both cases, the same concept applies with an evenly-scored timed match. The match should be determined by which player or team scores the most kills overall. There is just no other way to play.

 

[nin10do]

Time is simply to have fun, but even then it's not really fun because it's just all kill stealing and suiciding.

Isnt' that what the Additional Rules --> Self destruct option is there for? But then, the kill stealing is annoying.

But then in stock, someone might keep spamming projectiles and running away from the enemy...so...

I prefer Timed Stock matches.

 

[Simna ibn Sind]

ok....in a 1v1 match.....STOCK>TIME

SDs(self-destructs NOT sudden death) ruin it. You can manipulate the points with SD. Also, people have a different idea of what SD is than the game does; say you get tilted off the stage and you have plenty of room to get back with just your double jump, but instead u accidently airdodge and die. People call this a self-destruct, but the game calls it a KO(in stock this doesnt matter). Stock matches aren't affected by campers; it doesnt matter if sum1 is sitting back because the match wont end until sum1 loses all their stock.


in a FFA w/ 3+ players......STOCK=TIME

I dont care what mode you are playing in. Every mode of FFAs has problems. You don't play FFAs for the balance, you play for the chaos.

But then in stock, someone might keep spamming projectiles and running away from the enemy...so...

That is no argument. It has the same result in time matches....except you end up in sudden death....which then asks "What's better? Stock or Sudden Death?" If your opponent is running and shooting....then just catch him

 

[Mottled_in_Ink]

In 1v1 stock, the player who gets fewer kills sometimes wins

WTF? Assuming whoever you play with doesn't run around killing themselves for fun in stock mode, and assuming you're not on a hazardous stage, how does that work out?

Let me see if I can explain this to you:

1v1 5 stock, Player A vs. Player B

Player B kills Player A four times

Alas, but Player A kills Player B FIVE times!

Mysteriously, Player A is the winner

Because he was able to kill Player B five times in a five stock match

Player B lost, because FIVE, the number of kills that Player A achieved, is MORE than FOUR, the number of kills Player B achieved.

PLEASE explain to me how in a five stock match, somebody could win with four kills, even though the other person killed him five times. I would really love to hear it.

 

[AlphaZealot]

Well, I hate to do this.

Player A plays Player B
Player A Suicides 4 times
Player B kills player A 1 time
Player A Kills player B 4 times

Player B wins, but has only 1 kill to players A's 4.

The only people who believe time > stock are mostly non-tournament players who don't understand the fundamentals of the game.

Killing your opponent is the whole premise behind fighting games. So stock is not, in fact, the fairest judge of skill.

Mind telling me how you can win in stock without killing your opponant?

Your defense idea is great at a low to mid level, at a high level things don't quite work like that, L-Canceling an air attack into a grab or another shuffled air will ussually do all you need to get a hit in when someone is just dodge spamming or attempting to sheild to much. High level smash is much quickly and much more differant than you scenarios describe. You will not run into someone who just sit's there and tries to wait from someone to make a mistake, cause that doesn't happen.

 

[Mottled_in_Ink]

Well, I hate to do this.

Player A plays Player B
Player A Suicides 4 times
Player B kills player A 1 time
Player A Kills player B 4 times

Player B wins, but has only 1 kill to players A's 4.

I was aware of this, which is why the first thing I was careful to post was:

WTF? Assuming whoever you play with doesn't run around killing themselves for fun in stock mode, and assuming you're not on a hazardous stage, how does that work out?

No harm done though, I suppose. I must've checked and re-checked that post a hundred times to make sure I didn't make an a** of myself. =P

 

[nin10do]

But then in stock, someone might keep spamming projectiles and running away from the enemy...so...

By that I meant you could keep wasting time and making the game long and boring for everyone. But through timed stock matches, you don't really face the problem of TIME matches, and at the same time you can't keep running away from your opponent (or sudden death occurs).

 

[Simna ibn Sind]

So why is the game not boring for the person who is running and spamming?

Just stop chasing him....now don't get me wrong I dont mean sit down in one spot and not move. I mean stop chasing him. Where are you playing anyway? temple? Running just means they can't handle you up close at low percent. It is also, however, the reason why tournament matches are stock w/ time limit.

 

[The Dark Lord Ganondorf]

As a Ganondorf disciple, speed isnt my strong point, not only that, but Im just naturally a laid back fighter. I dont like that in timed matches you need to fight within a time limit, I normally take quite long to finish a match depending on the opponent. Stock matches are better because theres more strategy involved, its a truer test of skill. Not only that, but its impossible to get cheap wins in stock battles.

 

[Quiksilver326]

I like timed matches better because no one has to wait for the other players to finish the match, and no one can drag on the match.

 

[Luigio]

I usually use Stock, simply because Stock matches are over before Time ones, and in Stock matches, you can always tell who's winning.

 

[Lagmaster]

Every time I play time I end up in a sudden death match, which is really not a good situation for the Doc. I always play stock, the only reason I ever play time is if I forget to change the settings while setting up a tourney.

 

[Simna ibn Sind]

*looks at join dates*

Well...Lagmaster joined a month before most of the ppl in here, so I'm gonna listen to him.

 

[Fiery_Phoenix]

id hav to say stock. in timed matches, a person can get one KO and run around for the rest of the match. in stock, everyone will eventually haav to come out and fight, or the battle will never end. i jsut feel that a n00b to the game could easily beat someone who has been playing for years by getting a lucky kill, than running the rest of the battle. in stock, your abilities as a smasheer are truly tested.

 

[The Immortal Flame]

Well, I hate to do this.

Player A plays Player B
Player A Suicides 4 times
Player B kills player A 1 time
Player A Kills player B 4 times

Player B wins, but has only 1 kill to players A's 4.

The only people who believe time > stock are mostly non-tournament players who don't understand the fundamentals of the game.



Mind telling me how you can win in stock without killing your opponant?

Your defense idea is great at a low to mid level, at a high level things don't quite work like that, L-Canceling an air attack into a grab or another shuffled air will ussually do all you need to get a hit in when someone is just dodge spamming or attempting to sheild to much. High level smash is much quickly and much more differant than you scenarios describe. You will not run into someone who just sit's there and tries to wait from someone to make a mistake, cause that doesn't happen.

You obviously don't know what being a defensive player is. It doesn't mean just standing there and waiting for your opponent to attack you, or spamming dodges or shielding. It simply means you do not attack quite as often right off the bat - you let them take the first shot or two and focus on counter-attacking whenever you have an opening (usually a split-second after their attacks). If they don't attack right from the start, just take a shot at them, coupled with techniques like dash-canceling or shorthopping, to provoke an assault. It is not completely dependent on the other player attacking first and starting the momentum. Of course your opponents aren't going to just screw up by themselves, genius. Defensive fighting is often all about that very thing you mentioned earlier - mind games. You use well-timed tactics such as the ones above to manipulate your foes into putting themselves into a vulnerable position when they attack. This often enables you to pinpoint where and when they will attack, and so you will also get many opportunities for shield-grabbing, attacking out of sidesteps, chain throwing, etc. Thus, you cause them to screw up. If the player you are up against is the aggressive, offensively-coordinated type (I'm one of those), then you can sometimes afford to be a little laid-back - they will usually come after you themselves.

When timed matches are played, the chosen limit is usually long enough to allow a sufficient amount of variation in battle, and plenty of kills. This means 6 or 7 minutes at the very least. No one is going to get anywhere in the match if all the players do is rely on eating away at the clock. No one, I'm sure, is too fond of sudden death, either. So the safest bet is to focus on getting as far ahead in kills as possible as time elapses, and there is more than enough time to accomplish this. In a grueling, fast-paced game such as Melee (yes, I know how varied and fast-paced the game is, I'm not new to it), plenty of kills can be made in a relatively short amount of time, regardless of strategy. So a time limit makes very little difference.

How can you win in a stock match by getting fewer kills than your opponent? You answered that yourself in your last post (disregarding the gross exaggeration of the suicide-to-kill ratio). Your stock can still be depleted before your opponent's if the combined number of times you were killed and times you suicided adds up to the original number of lives you had at the beginning before you can kill your opponent as many times as is required to win.

Perhaps I've been ripping on stock a bit too much. I guess I'm just pissed off at how little thought people give to timed matches. I'm aware that instances like the ones I mentioned seldom occur in stock battles, but the point is that they can and they do. The main case I'm making is that a timed match with a balanced scoring system is a perfectly legitimate option. While it may not be enough to derail stock as the main mode in tournaments, it could still serve as a reasonable second option.

Seriously, name one real problem with a balanced timed match.

 

[Guildenstern]

Time is useful for new players because it allows them to continue to play throughout the entire match no matter how many times they are KO'ed.

However, with people who are already familiar with the game, I always play stock. Like most of those who posted in this thread, I feel stock is a better test of skill (because you don't have cheap tricks available like kill stealing and suiciding).

Plus, there is a certain satisfaction in that when you kill someone N times, they stay dead. Free-for-alls can be exciting, to see who is going to last to the final 1-on-1 showdown, and what state they are going to be in when the manage to get there.

Sure, in a stock free-for-all, someone can always go camp. But then you just chase them. If they do it a lot, they are bound to get double-teamed and eliminated first.

 

[the prophet]

I would pick Stock over time anyday. In Stock i play my best because i can play relaxed and not being rushed.

 

[dr.d]

Stock works best because its all skill involved. I play to win and i don't want someone like my little sister winning cause she ran around the whole match then pulled out a lucky shot in sudden death.

ya that's true it's mostly skill in Stock becasue in time the you can avoid your opponent and still win however in stock your going to have to face your opponent no matter what the circumstances.

 

[The Immortal Flame]

ya that's true it's mostly skill in Stock becasue in time the you can avoid your opponent and still win however in stock your going to have to face your opponent no matter what the circumstances.

NEWS FLASH: THAT NEVER WORKS!!

I don't know who you play, but in a serious match, you are basically forfeiting the game by running. Dropping your guard and focusing solely on avoiding your opponent for any longer than a few seconds is stupid and obviously a death sentence because it quickly becomes easy for your opponents to track your movements. Shorthop attacking out of wavedashing, shuffling, grabbing out of L-cancels, and firing steady barrages of well-aimed projectiles are all ways to corner and trap your opponent and make sure that they can't escape. It's not hard to do at all. Most stages with helpful hazards or particularly secluded areas are apparently banned in tournaments, so when playing against pros, you really don't have anywhere to run to. In the end, the best way to survive is to fight. If your main focus is to prevent your opponent from hitting you, tactics like shield grabbing and sidestepping are much more useful. Your opponent's use of the more advanced techniques in the game practically requires you to counterattack anyway if you don't want to get burned. Running only helps if you are up by more than two or three kills, and in high-level games, that's hardly ever the case - it's usually neck and neck. People who understand this will focus on fighting regardless of the time limit, so killing the clock is really not much of an issue to be concerned with.

 

[dr.d]

NEWS FLASH: THAT NEVER WORKS!!

I don't know who you play, but in a serious match, you are basically forfeiting the game by running. Dropping your guard and focusing solely on avoiding your opponent for any longer than a few seconds is stupid and obviously a death sentence because it quickly becomes easy for your opponents to track your movements. Shorthop attacking out of wavedashing, shuffling, grabbing out of L-cancels, and firing steady barrages of well-aimed projectiles are all ways to corner and trap your opponent and make sure that they can't escape. It's not hard to do at all. Most stages with helpful hazards or particularly secluded areas are apparently banned in tournaments, so when playing against pros, you really don't have anywhere to run to. In the end, the best way to survive is to fight. If your main focus is to prevent your opponent from hitting you, tactics like shield grabbing and sidestepping are much more useful. Your opponent's use of the more advanced techniques in the game practically requires you to counterattack anyway if you don't want to get burned. Running only helps if you are up by more than two or three kills, and in high-level games, that's hardly ever the case - it's usually neck and neck. People who understand this will focus on fighting regardless of the time limit, so killing the clock is really not much of an issue to be concerned with.

i understand what your saying but what i'm trying to say is that in time mode you can avoid your opponent as much as you want and still win. however in Stock you will have to end up fighting your opponent in order to win the match at least that's when we didn't have the time on when playing stock, plus i already understand the tatics that your talking about since i use them but read the article in the sept issue of nintendo power to understand what i'm talking about.

 

[AlphaZealot]

Dr. actaully hit one of the main things. In Time, killing the opponant isn't nessasary. In fact, if your opponant suicides just once (on the -2 scale), that effectively loses him the match. That means, with minimal time, you would have to kill the other person TWICE to return to even. If someone has half a brain and is playing say...Fox, then its they'll run away most of the match. You may even succeed in killing them once, but you have to do it twice, and there are many players who could easily run out 3 minutes of time and only lose 1 stock.

I've heard you talk about high level play, so, wanna offer what sort of expierance you have?