After the gamestop tournament, do you prefer best of 5 rounds?


#1

I made a thread awhile back suggesting that tournaments should be single match, double elimination, best of 5 rounds. I saw some japanese vids having this format, but the reason to do this was not to copy the japanese. I thought it would make tournaments go faster while still having the best player win while eliminating counter picking. You have only one chance to beat a person.

If not you lose, but it’s still double elimination so you’re not completely out.

Some people agreed, most people disliked it and preferred the standard 2/3 rounds.

After reading some people’s comments on the gamestop tournaments, it seems that 3/5 was a good thing. I read that some people fell down 2 rounds to zero and were able to make a 3 round comeback. The better player one. Any difference of opinion now?


#2

Best of 5 is legit


#3

I prefer 3/5 in casual games.


#4

you say counter picking is eliminated. but at the same time, if the opponent knows who you use, he will still counterpick and you dont get a chance to do it back. 2of3 is how the game has been played for years. single elim, even at 2of3 rounds is still way too random, for the most part.

3of5 is ok for casuals. i dunno, 3of5 just gives way too much time to adjust in the heat of that match


#5

My GameStop didn’t even play by the rules when iv came to this. we played 2/3 rounds single elimination. but when it got down to last three(bracket was off) we played best 2/3 matches instead of rounds. I went on to win it anyways but i guess i would have preferred 3/5. That gets rid of randomness and does show that the best player won. just my opinion though.

Coast


#6

Most Japanese arcades are set up to best of 5. It’s what I’ve been playing for the past 5+ years, so I’ve had a hard time adjusting playing online against people in best of 3.

I like best of 5 better because it does give you at least one round to sort of adjust to your opponent.


#7

I see your point about counter picking. As far as your last comment though " 3 of 5" just gives way too much time to adjust in the heat of the match"

I would think that that is a good thing. As least you have to adjust in the match and not get a break between matches. I’m not just talking about 2/3 rounds here, but also the 2/3 match format.

Don’t wanna rephrase too much of what I already said in the last thread, but basically single match, 3/5 takes a lot faster than 2/3 rounds, 2/3 matches.

You’re playing a possible maximum of 5 rounds, with plenty of time to adjust in the heat of battle (with momentum involved), instead of playing a possible maximum of 9 rounds in a 2/3 round, 2/3 match format. Momentum dies after the first match is over.

You get one chance to prove you’re better than someone, not three.

I’m not surprised. With a game like 3rd strike, I can see why 2/3 rounds is better but for a game like alpha 3 or SF IV, 3/5 rounds is better. Yeah, with 2/3 you could be falling for the same thing in two rounds before you adapt. If you’re able to adapt, you can win the 3rd one, and if the opponent doesn’t change it up, he will lose the 4th and 5th round.


#8

Being from the Tekken community, I favor best of 5 all day over 3. The better player wins more often in this scenario.

I really don’t see any reason to complain about it, if you are indeed better than your opponent it will help your own cause to have it best of 5.


#9

I lose a lot more when its 2/3 versus 3/5. I tend to always need the extra round to adjust to my opponent, but will typically come out on top.

3/5 really eliminates the randomness. If you beat me 3 times, you are better than me. No question.


#10

I Still Prefer Classic Sets, first to 2, 2/3


#11

Haven’t played any tournaments so I dunno what could be said about that setting but I personally prefer best to 5 for casuals. By the last round, whether it be 3 or 5, you get a pretty good idea of who you’re up against. Really can see who’s the better player in a certain sense.


#12

For most Street Fighters, I would say first 2/3 is best. But for Street Fighter 4, I think 3/5 works better since the Rage Meter resets after every match but the EX bar carries over. The game gets more exciting once you have some meter anyways so I the later rounds turn out best.

Its kinda like base building in Starcraft; once you got your economy rolling (ex meter being used and earned) the real battle begins.


#13

I prefer the classic best of 3. But best of 5 isnt bad either. That is what is used in most tournies but for most casual matches on any fighting game, it is best of 3, like in MK and SF.


#14

3 out of 5 feels kind of long. I don’t mind it but for the time being best out of 3 goes at a better pace for me.


#15

In tournys i would perfer best of 3 but casual best of 5 cause more fight time :slight_smile:


#16

Which I don’t think is necessarily a bad thing. In fact, I think it makes it more interesting.


#17

It’s really a different game to me at 3/5. Neither better or worse, but you have more chance of building super meter and using it which favors characters that need a full super bar to do well.


#18

for Super Meter reasons, I’m starting to like best of 5 better now.


#19

my super meter never gets filled cause i like to use ex alot but still i think 2/3 is better


#20

1 round is too gimmicky, like taking a gamble. Although, quickly adapting to another players style is a nice skill, a drawn out match testing each players endurance makes for a more exciting match.