SSB4: SSB for Wii U and 3DS, maybe the NX and also your toaster!

[Jedi]

http://smasheurope.com/europe/smash-wii-u-official-stock-count-poll-results/

Europes TO's have been doing polls on what people would prefer between 3 stock 8 mins or 2 stock 8 mins.

3 Stock seems to be more commonly wanted

[euklyd]

it's funny how we use(d) as many stocks as possible in previous games, and that's also the preferred way to run this game

what a coincidence

Edited December 29, 2015 by Euklyd

[Knife]

I use 3 stocks in my local scene. 3 stocks is much better.

Edited December 29, 2015 by Knife

[Zera]

Back with Brawl, our friend group always played with 5 stocks for nice, meaty matches. Nowadays it's usually 3 stocks. Has anyone ever experienced an epic 99 stock match?

[Great Geargia Gateway]

I find 3 stocks to drag on in any tourney. 2 is good because you no player needs to much stamina to keep at the games pace. It's also quicker, and no one like being bodied 1 to 3 stocks.

I can only find what ever stocks acceptable when I play for fun.

[Jedi]

I find 3 stocks to drag on in any tourney. 2 is good because you no player needs to much stamina to keep at the games pace. It's also quicker, and no one like being bodied 1 to 3 stocks.

I can only find what ever stocks acceptable when I play for fun.

I find 2 stocks incredibly jank, because if someone makes one single error they basically lose, there's no room for exciting risky play in 2 stock either.

And I'm sorry if you can't handle being three stocked by a superior player you are a wuss. The only reason places even use 2 stocks is freaking FG and wanting to be in Nintendo's tournament graces.

[Comet]

time is a thing, though i don't know if 3 stocks takes much longer than 2 stocks

[Zera]

I agree with Jedi. I think 3 stocks is best, at least for Smash 4. It's long enough that it feels like a complete match but short enough that every move counts.

[Florete]

Is this another case of viewers having differing opinions from TOs and high level players? Because I'm hearing about these polls results saying people would prefer 3 stock, but if it's ever brought up at a tournament they always seem to feel 3 stock is too long.

Has anyone ever experienced an epic 99 stock match?

I have. In SSB 64. Back then my friends and I regularly played with ~20 stocks.

[Darros]

I'm aware the topic poll is a complete joke ((well, knowing Shin maybe it isn't but anyway)) but I'd be behind Subspace Emissary 2. There's something about Smash 4 that just feels empty compared to the two previous games in the series. Subspace would at least be something to do.

Edited December 29, 2015 by Papyrus

[Jedi]

Is this another case of viewers having differing opinions from TOs and high level players? Because I'm hearing about these polls results saying people would prefer 3 stock, but if it's ever brought up at a tournament they always seem to feel 3 stock is too long.

Its interesting you bring this up because Esam recently did a video on the 2 stock vs 3 stock thing. Mentioning viewers/players data etc.

[Zera]

Too long, didn't watch. Can someone extract the relevant points for me?

[Comet]

there isn't any data for how much longer 3 stock matches typically are

stuff like "it's boring" is opinionated and subjective.

a whole match revolving around 50/50's is bad.

[Jotari]

Foolish people. You all should be playing coin mode. That's where the real fun is.

Seriously speaking though I actually miss bonus mode (and bonuses in general) from Melee. Sure I didn't play it an awful lot but I liked the idea of victory determined by who is the most stylish.

[Knight]

I never even knew what Bonus mode was.

I play 99 stock 300% once and awhile with my friends.

[Jedi]

I never even knew what Bonus mode was.

I play 99 stock 300% once and awhile with my friends.

This was fun with BOMBS on too

[Great Geargia Gateway]

I find 2 stocks incredibly jank, because if someone makes one single error they basically lose, there's no room for exciting risky play in 2 stock either.

And I'm sorry if you can't handle being three stocked by a superior player you are a wuss. The only reason places even use 2 stocks is freaking FG and wanting to be in Nintendo's tournament graces.

I would've had a laugh if you said "Git Gud". But that was a little than excessive, don't you think. I had a short opinion, and the point I was not trying to make. I mean, I could say that you're no good at 2 stocks cause you're not fast enough to get on your feet. Or when you make a mistake, you don't own up to it and etc. But I'm not one to judge. I don't care.

I doubt anyone could handle getting JV4 match after match. But that's how it goes. Because the player was better, not because of the stocks. 2 stocks... would have been the same. So why say something like that?

Anyway, I'm sure if you make a mistake in general, it'll cost you the match. Can depend on the mistake. But it's irrelevant either way. No one can have a perfect game. You can't just have everything go your way, or go down as you expected, for short.

[euklyd]

1) mental stamina is often considered to be mark of a superior competitor; not breaking down under pressure is important

2) shorter = better is completely subjective

3) jv4 is only marginally worse than jv3

your opponent won 100% of the many interactions in neutral (and other states) either way

[Jedi]

I would've had a laugh if you said "Git Gud". But that was a little than excessive, don't you think. I had a short opinion, and the point I was not trying to make. I mean, I could say that you're no good at 2 stocks cause you're not fast enough to get on your feet. Or when you make a mistake, you don't own up to it and etc. But I'm not one to judge. I don't care.

I doubt anyone could handle getting JV4 match after match. But that's how it goes. Because the player was better, not because of the stocks. 2 stocks... would have been the same. So why say something like that?

Anyway, I'm sure if you make a mistake in general, it'll cost you the match. Can depend on the mistake. But it's irrelevant either way. No one can have a perfect game. You can't just have everything go your way, or go down as you expected, for short.

I'm sorry for my wording, that was a bad day of mine.

I'd just really rather having 3 stocks overall because it feels like the match actually has substance.

[PuffPuff]

3DS

Wii-U

Son-Kun

Loving this game already! For my vote...I've picked Subspace Sequel.

Edited January 1, 2016 by Lin_Lee_Koo

[Great Geargia Gateway]

1) mental stamina is often considered to be mark of a superior competitor; not breaking down under pressure is important

2) shorter = better is completely subjective

I think mental stamina is big, but too much in Smash Bros, like in a 3 stock would mean that to be good, you don't need a lot more skill than ZeRo or Nairo, just endurance than whatever you're facing. 2 stock would include more skill and still showing you need endurance, especially when you enter rounds. You might not like any of the matchups that will drag you down with time. 2 Stocks and 5-6 minutes of it can be a limit. Again, especially with rounds. Do you want 3 rounds, 3 stocks 8 minutes against a campy DHD? And I mean a good zoning DHD. Yeah, no one wants that.

I don't think it's as subjective when it comes to tournaments.

Now when Jedi (We cool bruh) said he preferred 3-stocks. The wording sounds like from a 'Players' standpoint. But you're in a tournament, so whether it's 2-3 stocks, the 'Players' aim to just win.

You must factor from other standpoints too. 1st, the 'Audience'. A 2-stock is quicker and so the chances of getting bored is low and the entertainment is still high, all depending on matchups, play styles and etc, can even take up 5 minutes. Imagine 2 DHD's camping and spamming. No one wants that. Once that game is done, the next one starts with newer matchups and play styles. They only want to be entertained and 2-stocks keep them wanting more. 2nd, the 'Managers'. The people who drive, started, hosted, in control of the venue. They don't want it taking too long. So time is of the essence. So with 2-stock, they control the 'Players' length of battle and styles for their benefit. So with 2-stock the 'Audience' will want more, or won't get bored etc, so the 'Audience' will stay for their benefit.

[euklyd]

from my experience a lot of the issues people have with 2-stock is that it's frustrating to have so much of the match determined by luck

"but there's no luck involved" ok while that's technically true, having half a match decided by guessing wrong in a 50-50 is pretty unsatisfying for both parties

3-stock is not that much endurance

I'd rather have a terrible slow campy set than a set that ends too quickly. of all the sets I've played in tourneys (admittedly, not too many) I don't think any of them have been "oh my god let it end I wish this went faster," while many I've wished could've been 3-stock.

[Jedi]

Nice stylish Link play

[Great Geargia Gateway]

I agree. There's some luck somewhere is smash. "I SD'ed, I was unlucky." True, but prefer these people to stop making Johns. Not everything will go out as smoothly. There's no one to blame.

Also, another one of Mr. Danish's "Bomb to DAir" combo's. He made Samus look good, and cause of him why I'm better with Samus. Her style bruh... Hm, hm, hmmm. Samus maybe low tier, but she can make you look pro and dish some salt.

[HK Motendra]

From my own experience, even tho I own only the 3DS version and when I have the chance to, generally play the Wii U version with my 3ds as a controller, I always seem to find myself to be playing MUCH better on Wii U. Idk if thats just pure coincidence or not, but am I the only one who gets this?