Classic Tetris European Championship 13-14 March 2015

The video in question:

 

i am so tired from this incredible weekend. i want to say thanks to everyone that put hard work into hosting it. congrats to linus and i hope to see you at the american competition next year!

if i may put my two cents in about the starting level debate: if you really want to showcase skill then you shouldnt make everyone start on a level that almost anyone can play on. it would make for shorter games (the event ran for ~5 hours!), and more excitement. watching level 9 slow play is brutally boring...

 

I totally agree with you on both accounts. I forgot why level 9 was chosen.

 

btw: I just want to clarify I totally respect the slow play. Given the rules, I think it's the best thing you could do to maximize your chances of winning. (If you know your opponent dies first, you know what to score and how much risks you need to take). I'd probably do the same, even though it's totally boring for the audience. Level 9 start is absolutely fine, when players just play normal speed...and at least press down every once in a while (90% of the games were fun to watch!).

I think level 18 start would be too difficult for most players and punishes little risks too much. At least, I know I can't play consistently well on level 18
And even for a ''championship'', this tournament benefits most from many participating players, play for fun, not just only focusing on ''the best'' players or winning.

 

What a weekend! Now ready to sleep for the next week!

But really cool to see so many of you at the event! And big ups to Muf for coming over here to setup that awesome looking stream with our local tech master Sumez! Any time you are in Copenhagen and need place to crash, the couch is ready for you Sir!

Please do keep it coming with what you thought was good, not so good, ideas for the future etc. We need all the input we can get, to make this even better next time.

Like Sumez said, we talked about the whole starting at level 9 thing in brackets at the event. Maybe it could be like CTWC where the highest seed choose start level, but instead of saying 9-18, say 9-15, so it's not too crazy either? I got a new PB saturday on 111k, so I know nothing

That level 21 game from Jani was AMAZING to watch! You all seemed like awesome people, but Jani is my hero in the world of NES Tetris! He was a bit greedy with those free french fries though, but hey, they were sooo good, so I get it Hope to meet all of you (and more!) again next year!

 

Wait. Free french fries!?

 

i totally agree with this! i had so much fun playing in this tournament because it really seemed to be more laid back, supportive, and less stressful than the CTWC. he CTWC is all business during the day, all party a night. the TEC seemed to be a better mixture of both. it was so fun to cheer everyone one, honestly and genuinely, after i got knocked out in this tournament than it was sulking and wishing i had another shot at it when i got knocked out of the CTWC.

on a related note, however, if you want the championship to be taken seriously as truly competitive one i believe you should make it more difficult, and not create rules that will benefit weaker players. if you want to maintain that the TEC is about fun and participation that is fine, but if you want it to become on par with the CTWC in terms of competition level it may behoove everyone to reconsider the rules.

that said, i honestly dont think you should change anything! i don think we need another "world championship." you great european players should keep coming to the CTWC, and we americans will be back to the TEC- guaranteed. and next time, we are bringing reinforcements!

 

Level 18 would make the matches faster and more exciting to watch. Personally I'd be more interested in that than benefitting the "weaker" players. Besides, nearly all the 16 qualified players were very talented people who should be able to handle level 18.

That said, I would feel bad for someone who made it to the preliminaries only to get crushed by level 18 next to a person who aces it like it's nothing.

 

I see a lot of debate between 9 and 18, but if we want to make it look similar to NTSC Tetris... Why not level 15? It's a fairly good speed and it's before a point in which thinking becomes hard. 16 could be similar to 18 in which case I don't see a lot of differences with starting with level 16 or 17 or 18. Even though the game will give less points than if you were to start with the best levels like 9 or 18, it will still be an equal competition with a bit more speed

 

Yeah, 16 and 17 would make no sense for the reasons you mentioned. But 15 might work as a compromise. Even I can mange the game somewhat decently on level 15, but it's nearly twice as fast as level 9.

There's just something oddly "non-standard" about a level 15 start to me, dunno why.

 

I havent played the game at all really, but as a spectator sport it would be fun to start at a level where you can expect all top16 players to do a few tetrises at least. So if lvl 15 means most good players can do 4-8 tetrises or so before the game freaks out that would be good. Looking at

it seems that at lvl16 you have a speedup thats very noticiable. So starting at 15 might be a good warmup? I now realise that if you start at lvl 15 you might have that weird rule where you play at that speed for 100lines before the speed goes up or what have you? I heard about something like that before..
Anyways, Im guessing that around lvl 15 people stop pressing down, that would also be a good thing. Then both players will be end up playing around the same speed and hence be at around the same lvl all the time. That means its easier to follow for viewers as the score can be compared directly more or less. We also would not end up in as many situations where the slower player is at an advantage in knowing the score of the faster player losing 50lines ahead.

Having a level where all top16 can do 4-8tetrises means that the caster should have enough time to talk about the players background, and different styles. Starting off a bit slower gives time to give a proper introduction while the game is going on. Also a slower start gives you time to talk about the ending of the last game and how the different playstyles played out in the end, what misstakes where made. In this tournament I had plenty of time to compare the players efficiencies and highlight playstyles which were consistent and efficient which feelt like a good thing. Linus and Sabina comes to mind when it comes to a ton of Tetrises early game. Or the player that can manage to play even while the game is crazy fast like Jani and Terry. This way everybody can show of their skill.

So matches that are at least 2-3min on average would be good. Then a bo3 or bo5 is exciting all the time, but not too short so that some bo3's ends in 5min total. Everybody that goes out to an event and goes to top 16 should, in my oppinon, get the opportunity to show their skill in more than 5min total.

Also one could plan the starting level from how long you want the event to take. If you are aming for 3h top16 then every match bo3 should take 10min +2min for getting players on/off stage. So that could be an way to figure out the rulings too.

But my ideas above might work for lvl 18/19 if there is that rule where the game does not speed up until after some 130lines. As long as top16 can do at least 4-8 tetrises I am happy I think

 

Level 16 is identical to 18 in terms of speed. It's only the scoring that's different, so there is no reason at all to start on level 16 or 17. Same with 13 and 14.

The "weird rule" is basically that the higher level you start at, the more lines you need to make the first transition (level 100 for a level 9 start, and I think 130 from level 18 ). After this, the level increases for each 10 lines.

So essentially, to maximize scoring you should always start at the highest level you can consistently manage.

 

I've watched the whole stream of the NES finals and from a spectator view all I can say that for me starting from level 9 was not boring. I could watch different tactics and lot of exciting high stacking action (especially from Jani).I liked the lenght of the tournament ,sometimes one tennis match can last that long and this was the final so if it should be that way.For me it was perfect and I really wan't to go next year.

 

@Alexsweden- the point you make about it being easier to announce during the level 9 play is so far the best (and only) argument i have heard that makes me want to keep level 9. again, i am not the director of the tournament, and i know that we want to include as many potential players as possible, but if you want to see good tetris make people play the fast levels and dont cater to the slower speed. level 9 may be more comprehensible but it isnt as honest and accurate a showcase of pure tetris talents. anyone can play level 9, but select few can play 18. when we get excited about TGM or any other tetris variation videos do we purpposefully seek out mediocre speed videos, or we seek out the fastest, most talented players?

 

As a spectator, for me, level 18 is still easily slow enough to comprehend and understand stacking strategy and thoughts of the player. I might not necessarily be able to play it at that speed myself because of controlling difficulties, but still it would be fun to watch. And after 100 lines of that, I'd feel it's been enjoyable for a long enough time. Would it really be that hard to comment as a commentator? Matches being fast and ending faster would also avoid the commentator having silent moments or trying to grasp for comments just for commenting's sake.
People that can play at 18 and higher are simply the ones fitting to be at the top placements, so it doesn't matter if players not being able to handle that speed dies fast, they just haven't practiced enough. Come back next year with more practice under the belt.
These are my thoughts. Start at around level 18 is good.

 

I pretty much agree with @Meroigo. Level 18 is not really fast, but it's fast enough to be very difficult to control due to the quirks of the NES version.
I don't think the games would be so fast that the commentator won't have time to talk about the things he need.