[T-Spins] Take a side --a decision must be made!!!

Sure there's some merits to including T-spins in a game, but the question isn't "Are T-spins good or bad?" but "Should T-Spins be a permanent feature of Tetris?"


Permanent. As in not removable, non-negotiable, every single game, every single variant with wildly different philosophies.

AFAIK even the guidelines doesn't force the inclusion of T-spins in a game. (Henk wasn't aware of its inclusion in TDS, implying the possibility of TDS lacking them; TGMA lacked them completely)

Permanent inclusion sounds like a pretty strong statement to me.

 

WOW impressive article !!!


hmmm Ultros ?

 

This is excellent. A 50:50 split with 14 votes and lots of great replis on both sides of the debate.

Caffeine and I aren't saying t-spins are cheap or anything like that. When I play TDS I sure as hell go for them: they are the winning strategy. My opinion is that they are an interesting game mechanic, and I enjoy going for them in TDS, but it doesn't really feel like it should be the standard. For the same reason cascades and squares aren't standard. The game is called Tetris not T-Spin, afterall. Right now t-spins give, what, more than double the garbage compared to a tetris (per line cleared)? That's obscene.


Anyways, I too want to stress the "permanent" in the poll question. I use t-spins, as well as other special moves, all the time playing TGM. The game rewards me with survival and I think that is good enough.

 

You don't need ONLY t-spins, or loads of them. You just need to be able to see them.


The good Tetris players have the ability to see how to fit the pieces together to clear garbage, or to clear a bit of the stack or fix awkward playing fields. Likewise, on TDS the good players also have the ability to see where to implement t-spins. You don't play for them, the opportunities just crop up, and you seize them.


As for S, Z, J and other twists, I think it mainly lies in the fact that they don't fit in a 3x3 box, leaving the corners clear, like t-pieces do. And anyway, you wouldn't be able to do them unless it was a t-spin triple style setup, and they rarely happen online anyway. Doubles are the only ones that get commonly and effectively used.

 

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think Singles and "Zeroes" get used also, if for nothing more than to B2B bonus.

 

Answered NO :

Some T-Spin reward are interesting but some are poor.

Z, S, T, L & J have the same wall-kick table set rules. Yes for equity balancing reward on Z,S & T (,L & J ?) but NO arbitrary T.

 

Not really effective at blasting the opponent with garbage though, are they?

 

It is. See Twist reward algorithms.

Then that's the problem. Gimme my 1G DAS and soft drop.

Thanks to Random Generator and hold piece, getting the I tetromino at just the right time isn't important. So the major luck element is the garbage more than the randomizer.

All Tetris brand games that work on a DS without an emulator and were published outside Japan are exclusively SRS-based. These games (Tetris Worlds and Tetris DS) also have a reward for T-spins and not S- or L-spins that seems hacked in ("3-corner" algorithm). The New Tetris for N64 rewarded all spins ("immobile" algorithm).

O RLY? Two of the S- and Z-spins work just fine even on Game Boy and NES rotation systems.


And no, T-spin zero doesn't affect back-to-back state.

 

I didn't think I was saying T-Spins were good or bad at all. I just wanted to clarify that maybe they have a bigger influence on the game than what people are realizing. To continue on this:

But I think maybe you're wrong. On paper, T-Spins look a hell of a lot better than Tetrises, and I don't think anyone yet has the right to say "well, the games been played long enough to say that the best way to go is to _blank_." The way it looks on paper, however, players should be going for TSS/D/T all the way (they're all worth the same in VS TDS), and then Tetrises only when necessary (say those frequent long garbage openings in TDS). In my experience, Tetrises are only really more favorable when clearing garbage in that specific circumstance of having a 3+ verticle hole.


So let's take a break and think about this for a second. Tetris has been out for over twenty years. The goal has always been to build up tall and put the long one down the hole. That's pretty easy for a beginner to grasp and then naturally build skill upon that. So wait, now that player can still do that, but this isn't the best way to play. The best way to play is something completely different. At some point if that beginner wants to improve, he will need to completely undue mostly everything he's learned and revamp his stacking method-- likely to something conventionalized and dry (ST stacking for example). If you ask me, making T-Spins more powerful than Tetrises results in two major things: 1. broken learning curve, hugely seperating the elite from the rest; and 2. conventionalized and inorganic optimal stacking method.


edit: To respond to, "Sirlin would probably be all for t-spins to stay," let me just say that Sirlin also said that for a developer to make a hugely successful multiplayer game, that developer must know how the game operates at it's highest level of play.

 

But the ST stack isn't versatile. You get a bad run of pieces, or make a misdrop, and you can be thoroughly screwed over.

Going for Tetrises is always the safest option. Yes, going only for t-spins would be more beneficial, but who does? I only know of one player who uses t-spins more than Tetrises. Tetrises are easier, and also allow for garbage to be cleared. To clear garbage with t-spin setups other than a double, you need to abandon the setup.

 

no.

 

yes but rosti's guide goes more in depth with t-spin doubles.

right on tepples! if cultris didn't have wackily colored pieces maybe i would play that.

yes tepples i agree that there is more luck with garbage than the randomizer, but of course it is always nice to build for efficient tetrises, and in doing so you may need an I piece to set it up, as well as storing other pieces in the hold box for later use. i've seen players that keep an I piece in the hold box and they're lucky if they get the right pieces in the right order to stack the way that the garbage underneath calls for.

 

I agree somewhat with your first point. Yes, T-Spins are too powerful in their current state and should be toned down. However, why should the gap separating an elite and a novice decrease? If anything, it should increase in my opinion.


On your second point, how is it conventionalized and inorganic? I can say the same thing for tetrises once someone comes up with the best way to stack with nine cells. T-Spins can also be morphed and built without setups. They are just way harder to visualize but the possibility is always there.

 

T-spins are almost better for clearing messy garbage than tetrises. If you have 1 row of garbage against the wall, do a TSS. If you have garbage in the middle, then drop an S or Z and do a well-known twist. And you can practice this at your own pace: Try starting LJ, playing gimmick H.R. Derby, making a whole bunch of singles to get garbage, and then clearing the garbage that way.

 

No, the gap should follow the normal distribution bell curve. What I'm saying is that because the skill set forks, many players will never go anywhere near expert levels since expertly skilled players will play an entirely different type of Tetris than them. The reason I like Tetris so much is because theortically anyone can, by themselves, hone their skills and become an expert through logic and practice-- fine tuning things little things like overcoming difficult land situations (and garbage), and ultimately speed. Normally a decent player might follow this type of course, but that will only hurt him in the long run if you throw T-Spins into the equation. What it comes down to is that certain people will learn to exploit T-Spins and will thereafter rape all the other players who _go for Tetrises and make T-Spins when possible_. It doesn't matter what the majority of good players are comfortable with now-- I'm telling you, sooner or later all you will see is T-Spins and very little Tetrises from the elite players.


This is my own opinion, so I admit you do have a good argument, but I consider Tetrises more pure and organic than T-Spins because A) Tetrises are the most simultanous line clears you can make at one time. That is why they are significant. That is why we go for them. They are special because they are very clearly big and important line clears. Anyone can tell you that. And don't forget they're risky, too. That's why the game's fun. We have to stack higher than any other method in order to go for a Tetris-- nearing us closer to the top.


So why are T-Spin's so special? We've been doing them since version one. Okay, they were kind of cool, but eventually they're just another trick in your arsenal of many tricks. There exist way more helpful tricks, but we'll humor them. Then when you see a noob do it, and he's like "did you see that? cool huh?", you kind of just smile, nod, and think "how cute." T wall kicks work the same as all non O/I tetrominoes. I really don't see what's so significant about them.


Oh yeah, and the other reason to that was the name of the fucking game is Tetris.

 

Ah, I understand what you are saying now. If the root of the problem is that T-Spins reward more than tetrises, then wouldn't a mild nerf fix the problem? If we make T-spins supplemental to tetrises, would it not become an added skill like all the other little things (rotation mastery, speed, etc.)?

We all have opinions I guess. I consider T-Spins (and any other twist) more risky.

I can't argue with that!

 

J, L, S, T, and Z wall kicks all have the same problem: there is one choice where the end state does not overlap any blocks of the start state, so where is the axis?


"The name of the game is Tetris"? This means that all the clones can satisfy both trademark law and truth-in-advertising law by calling themselves "T-spin", right?

 

You tell me. Should someone make a game Tetris game called T-Spin to find out?

 

I assume that you're only refering to SRS with that statement. It seems to me that the biggest problem with SRS is caused by the following entry in the wallkick table: "5: Position one right and two down"

Are you sure it's a good idea suggesting that to him?

 

I voted "No". T-Spins are the primary reason I do no play Tetris DS multiplayer: I know that if ever would want to become competitive in multiplayer, I would need to learn T-Spin strategy, which I have no interest in. Not because it's cheap, but like others have said, because it's arbitrary, random, and inelegant. I don't believe in the word cheap, honestly, and agree with most of Sirlin's article. If I wanted to become good at Tetris DS, then I'd play the game the way it is. But that brings me back to why I don't play. I find the game uninteresting, compared to TGM or pretty much any other Tetris game.


Now T-Spins as a concept are fine. I see nothing wrong with counting them, showing a special graphic when they are achieved, etc. But I don't think they should be anything more than an extra, as something neat you did. I don't think they should have any obligatory bearing on game play. They just aren't as interesting as classic Tetris gameplay to me.


Others have made the case that they are good because they expand the gap between the good players and the bad, or that they create a high-level game. Having a high-level game is not a bad thing. Suggesting that Tetris needs T-Spins in order to have one or to have a higher one is ridiculous, though. Tetris already had one of the highest high-level games before the concept of rewarding T-Spins came around. Just look at any high-level TGM video for proof of this. Clearly there can be separation and a high-level game without rewarding T-Spins.


As far as high-level play specifically for multiplayer going forward, I believe the way to differentiate players should not be with twisting ability, but with high-speed play ability. I've been playing Heboris multiplayer when I play multiplayer lately, and it allows either side to select speeds arbitrarily. I'd like to see high-level players try multiplayer at Death mode speeds! That would certainly be interesting, high-level, and would still be Tetris as is always has been. I don't think everyone would be on an equal playing field at that point. As Sirlin's article says: "The point is that if a game becomes no fun at high levels of play, then its the games fault, not the players. ... For games that truly arent good at a high level, the only winning move is not to play." I couldn't agree more.