Of course there's a problem with playing to lose: getting eliminated in the first round of a tournament and losing the entry fee, the round trip travel (if in person), and the lodging (if in person).
isn't that the very essence of a tournament ? i mean strong winning against weak ? if everybody use the same rules, where is the problem to compete (and lose) against stronger players ? you will always find better skilled players than you, you know ? it make me feel that you want to limitate everybody to your speed limit... i'm a total scrub on Basket ball, can you arrange a match up with Shaquille O'Neal ??? i know i have no chance to win but wow ! (do you see what i mean ?) but if i apply your vision, putting him on a rolling chair would be more fair for me... yeah let's modify basketball rules for that.... why are you comparing Tetris and Poker tournament since the 2 games playing style are totally unrelated ? several noticed but, you make me feel like every figthing game tournament start, when you see a lot of people with "the eye of the tiger" (aka : i'm the strongest player in the world and i will utterly destroy you), but rapidly defeated and throwing shame on the unfair game system rules, when they are not able to understand that they simply need more training...
Just to reiterate, the poker comparison is meaningless. The reason poker pros don't win every hand is because there are strong elements of luck - something that just doesn't apply to tetris. The implication seems to be that removing the speed cap would let the fastest players win every time - this simply isn't the case.
To build on Taratang's post, I don't feel the speed caps have much to do with "scrubs having some chance", rather it seems to be more related to the amount of randomness involved in the game. As for TDS, rule elements that add randomness are the fact that players get different piece sequences rather than the same sequence, and that the garbage alignment is decided somewhat randomly instead of being accurately predictable in advance. On the other hand, elements that reduce randomness are the 7-bag randomizer algorithm, pieces always facing the same way when they spawn (some games spawn in random directions), and so on. The attack cursor is slightly random in that you wouldn't know who the attack would hit if you didn't care to look at it, but leaves enough room for skill to allow specific targeting. As an aside: certain games and ways of gameplay (1988 Sega Tetris(*1), TGM3's Sakura Mode(*2)) remove all randomization whatsoever, giving the player a fixed piece sequence. While ordinary players would still play out the game as if it was random, skilled players would memorize the sequence, plan out all moves in advance before even playing the game, then rapidly execute the planned moves out to finish them in the least time/lines possible. I am not very familiar with the TAS scene, but perhaps such kinds of pre-planning gameplay has some commonalities with it? Of course, such kinds of gameplay obviously wouldn't work out in a versus environment (although it might be interesting to see such a match.) I guess piece sequence generation is the last thing that should be kept at least somewhat random in a versus Tetris game. *1: Sega Tetris was a basic endless game, however it had a "power-on pattern" in that the first game after the machine had been turned on always had the same piece sequence. After noticing this, advanced players began playing a game within a game: to construct patterns and execute them out to max out the score counter in the least number of lines possible. *2: TGM3's Sakura Mode was a mode to clear specified lines from prebuilt stacks in the least time possible, much like Flashpoint. Sakura Mode (but not Tetris with Cardcaptor Sakura or TGMA's Target mode) has a fixed piece sequence, and also allows the player to skip through pieces in the sequence by hitting the hold button during each level's ready-go phase. Again, players began planning out move sequences to finish all levels in the least time possible.
The games as they are now are fine. Note that the topic title is debating where the site owner is asking for an online versus game without the caps, which you just said that if the latter was how it was, then it'd be a problem. My topic wasn't meant to bash TGM in 1p or rare instances where some people who are capable of playing at that speed in 2p can do so, it's against making what would probably be the most-played incarnation of online Tetris (the next DS release, or the Wii release) under TGM-style speeds.
Needle wrote: "On the other hand, elements that reduce randomness are the 7-bag randomizer algorithm" I'm starting to think that this is a major flaw with TDS and has no place in future versions of Tetris. I've found a way to exploit this flaw with an opening I stumbled upon through practice http://forums.nintendo.com/nintendo/board/message?board.id=tetris&message.id=30475 At first I liked it and it helped increase my rating, but I'm becoming increasingly disgusted with it's simplicity and I'm not going to use it anymore. It's totally brainless with just a little practice and is only an excercise in accurate piece placement and use of the hold box. All things considered it's about equal to B2B tetrises. It sends 9 lines of garbage to your opponent, and while needing no more than 14 pieces to set it up (2 of every type of piece) it does require at least 3 soft-drops, making it take about as long or maybe longer than to hard-drop 20. The obvious problem is that any player of any skill level can do it consistently. Only 1 of 4 conditions needs to be met in the natural order of the first 7 pieces: 1.S before T 2.Z before T 3.S before J 4.Z before L At least 1 of these conditions is met in approx 85-90% of games (I started 100 games and it was possible in 87).
Why do you feel the need to slow down the best players? 99% of players are too slow for this to affect them, and they'll be mostly playing against each other. I don't see the purpose of artificial delays besides pissing off that 1%.
"Online versus game without caps" does not equal to "the latter - a style which prohibits slow play". What I understand caffeine is asking is to make the MAXIMUM possible speed faster - he does not mention anything about MINIMUM permitted speed. (caffeine: If I am understanding wrong, correct me.) And in the TDS/Worlds style, it is certainly possible to make the maximum possible speed very fast without changing the minimum permitted speed at all.
to tell you the truth, i'm beginning to feel confused. anyway. "it's against making what would probably be the most-played incarnation of online Tetris (the next DS release, or the Wii release) under TGM-style speeds." i said absolutely nothing of this. one: tgm's too slow, especially in the beginning. there's one complaint. and two: tgm requires players to stack faster than an average player could go, especially in modes like death and shirase. i wouldn't want this in versus play. so are you familiar with the mechanics i'm talking about, mewtwo? the game i'm talking about doesn't influence the players speed at all, but on the same token doesn't restrict it. if you ask me, an average skilled player simply doesn't belong in the same ball park as an expert, and i don't see why you view this as necessary. edit: also about what was said earlier-- i think, i think there's a small window of time from first booting n64 tetris on a clean cart, you'll receive the same sequence of tetrominoes every time. that's if you quickly start the game (doesn't matter if it's marathon, sprint, or ultra).
Wikified. Thanks. Until your opponents start using it against you. In Mario Kart, snaking isn't cheating if they snake back. Perhaps this is part of why SRS doesn't have firm drop. And about getting the same tetromino sequence every time you start a game: This predictability just doesn't happen on newer platforms that have a real-time clock.
Snaking isn't cheating period. Besides that, Snaking and STSing are not even on the same level. Snaking is practically an alternate way of moving, NOT just MTing back and forth but (depending on who you ask) perfectly timed MTs to take the shortest driving lines possible. A lot of skill and experience is required to truly master this; STSing on the other hand is pretty much just memorizing a very specific setup and executing it quickly; anyone can do it with just a little practice and I would place it more along the lines of Wolverine's crouch cancel infinite in MvC. (Note: I haven't got the chance to try STS yet but this is how I'm seeing it based on fiddlesworth's comment and what I've seen in the Wiki.)
Thanks Tepples and Caffeine, and thanks to the Gods of luck for bestowing it on me in all their randomness. I would still like to see the game changed though
I compare snaking more to T-spinning in general. It's an alternate way of sending garbage. By ST, do you mean what this wiki article describes?
oh yeah-- but there's also other setups that i've seen on this one japanese site i can't seem to track down.
When Tetris Wii or whatever comes out, it won't be a problem anymore because of stricter T-Spin rules. IIRC, the most recent Tetris games will only give the T-Spin bonus if the piece axis does not move, so this move becomes a waste of time.
...and snaking is an alternative way of what? Going faster than not snaking? You can beat someone who uses t-spins without using them yourself, which is not the case with snaking.
