A Change in Tourney Format

We all saw/were at EVO, and we all enjoyed it. Some of us saw people/got randomed out in both games. In a game like the Marvel Vs. series, I think that it is in the best interest that all tourney organizers for a change in the tourney format. The games in the marvel Vs. series can end before you even know what happened. The second game you will most likely be dong what you failed to do the first game, and that doesn’t guarantee a win unless you are really adaptive. Both games can end quick due to the nature of the games being notorious for having some of the most unorthodox game engines that allow things to be possible that almost no other game can get away with without people getting angry.

Infinites/damaging loops (Rom[from 2001-2011] C.Viper infinite[2011] Dante infinite[2011])
100% Combos
Quick Resets that happen quite often

All of these can make a match end before you even knew what game you were playing. The tourney standard format should be:
3/5 normal and 4/7 grand finals rather than**: **
2/3 normal and 3/5 grand finals**. **

I think that SBR had it right with its tourney format for MvC2. In game with NO rounds, no breaks to download your opponent, where matches can end in matter or seconds, the tourney format needs to change. This would make more sense as this is not street fighter, nor is this Big Bang Beat Revolve<support this, buy it, play it.> its not CvS2, King of Fighters, or even Guilty Gear ( this game has the courtesy of having rounds.) This is a Marvel Vs. game, and the standard should change in order to make things a little more fair for all players.

I request a poll here because democracy rocks. Yay or nay the people shall speak. And this one votes ‘yay’ for this proposition.

I agree, should be a poll. I also agree it should be 3/5 at least for normal matches.

Longer sets are always preferable in general when there is time to run them. Especially in Marvel, and especially for the reasons outlined in the OP. Games in MvC3 generally finish at a much faster pace than SF4, so it should usually be feasible.

And I have to say that I’d prefer more matches than just Grand Finals to be played on longer sets than the initial matches. Winners Finals, Losers Finals, and any other match that determines a position that pays out should play longer sets as well.

3/5 would definitely help to weed out some of the randomness

3/5 gives more room for epic comebacks too ^^

time is the only issue with this, otherwise I don’t see why not

Dunno why this only came up now. 2/3 is a horrible format for mvc. Time is barely an issue when most games take 1 minute at most to finish.

ramnation gets 20 players avg… they did 3/5 once and nobody liked it. Matches were anywhere from 50-66% longer. Results weren’t magically better due to the format change. The matches were even harder to watch because they were so long.

imo, if you deserve to be top 8 you’re going to get top 8 regardless of the format.

Doesn’t matter if it’s 2/3 or 3/5, if you’re consistently good then you’ll place consistently well. If you get randomed out, well, then, sorry to say it but you’re not consistently good.

I am seriously conflicted with this.

Both the OP and Sleazoid are right.

Marvel might not have rounds but the Marvel clock ticks a lot slower. It says 99 on the clock but the fact is that each Marvel second is closer to 2 real life seconds than 1. This means that 1 round in this game has the combined time of 2 rounds.

I think it should be given a fair shot to try 3/5 at more venues and decide whether or not from practice if it’s better. I don’t think it’ll have much, if any, impact on results personally, but it should be experimented with at least.

I agree, and disagree with this.

It is like saying Justin Wong is bad cause PR Rog perfected him.

And despite that he still made top 8. Top 4, even.

We already have double elimination to prevent someone from doing much poorer than they should due to the random factor.

Going 3/5 would be overdoing it.

Like I said, I agree and disagree. I’d like to see 3/5, but at the same time I can see how it can be ‘too much’.

I think matches should be win or go home. 1 game, no mistakes, be perfect or lose.

If a good majority of us both agree and disagree, then perhaps people do want change, but don’t think that 3/5 is necessarily the right way to do it.

I had this wild idea a while back, inspired by something people did at sessions here…

Once per tournament, and only while in the winners bracket, you may invoke “salty runback” after any match by standing up, putting your controller on the floor, and shouting “SALTY RUNBACK” at the top of your lungs.

Invoking salty runback would change that match from a 2/3 to a 3/5. The score would remain unchanged, but you would now be playing to 3 instead of to 2.

Such a right comes with a heavy cost - should you invoke salty runback and lose anyway, you not only lose that match, but you automatically lose your match in the losers bracket as well.

If you invoke salty runback and win, then you continue on in the winners bracket. Your opponent may invoke salty runback in response, changing the format to 4/7 and also putting their own tournament life on the line.

Final Round had 3/5 in top 8 and it was one of the best MvC3 tourneys we have seen so far. The BIONICCCCCCCCC ARMMMMMMMMMM!!! moment wouldn’t have happened had the Combofiend vs Marn match ended in 2-0. I don’t understand why they can’t at least make the losers and winners final a 3/5.

Let’s talk about Evo 2k2, where the MvC2 Grand Finals was **best of one **because they ran out of time.

3/5 costs a lot of time, but doesn’t really buy you much.

I see changing the tournament format as simply allowing for more mistakes, and hasn’t a mantra of the FGC been don’t make mistakes?

This is nothing new. Players always want longer sets and more games and more matches. I understand this as a player. I think just about every player understands this as a player.

However, realistic limits must be set in order for a tournament to be run effectively in a timely fashion. This can be difficult to understand as a player. I think most people can only fully appreciate this when they see it from the organizational end.

I like 2 out of 3 better than 3 out of 5.

Mostly because I rely on gimmicky keep-away zoning strategies that could easily be trumped if adapted to.

Edit: Sleazoid’s salty runback idea is hilariously awesome. Of course, it might complicate things at major tournaments and should be reserved to friendly tournament sessions where the community are already used to eachother or something.