« Back to juice.Doomastar's blog
Response to survey results plus BIG ANNOUNCEMENT
posted to the public at 4:14 PM on Thursday Jun 28, 2012
If you're here for the announcement, skip to the bottom.


Yesterday, I conducted a very brief survey asking some basic questions about one stock singles matches. (the survey can be found at http://www.tinyurl.com/onestocksurvey -- any input from anyone is still greatly appreciated) The results were not terribly surprising to me. For the most part, they reinforced my current opinion that most people are simply against one stock because they've never tried it and/or because they don't fully understand some of the nuances of the format. This is perfectly understandable.

In this blog, I will analyze the yes/no results for both the anonymous survey.

PLEASE DO NOT ANSWER THESE QUESTIONS IN HERE. If you wish to give your input, go to the survey page.




The Stats

Question 1: Would you attend and enter a singles tournament with the one stock ruleset?

Anonymous survey:

9 YES | 5 MAYBE/CONDITIONAL | 4 NO
(50% yes, 28% maybe/conditional, 22% no)

Reasons given for maybe/conditional:


  • "possibly. More likely than attending 3 stock at this point, unless it were a major."
  • Maybe
  • Not until I see some real promise. I do not wish to experiment with my money.
  • Maybe; I don't attend now.
  • if its mk banned


Someone also answered "Only if there was a standard doubles event as well," but I counted this as a yes because standard doubles would certainly be present.



Updated survey:

16 YES | 3 MAYBE/CONDITIONAL | 5 NO
(67% yes, 12% maybe/conditional, 21% no)

Reasons given for maybe/conditional:


  • It really depends on the entry fee


Other conditional answers included "depends on distance but most likely," and "In my own region, but probably not in further away regions," which I counted as "yes" because the hypothetical tournament is one that would be within reasonable travel distance, and "Yes, but only if a standard doubles event was part of it," because this tournament would also definitely feature standard doubles.


Analysis: This is a pretty good percent rate of interest in the format. Definitely a result I was pleased to see.







Question 2: Would you watch a livestream of a singles tournament with the one stock ruleset?

Anonymous survey:

11 YES | 4 MAYBE/CONDITIONAL | 3 NO
(61% yes, 22% maybe/conditional, 17% no)

Reasons given for maybe/conditional:


  • probably not unless it had high attendance
  • depending on the people that enter, yes




Updated survey:

20 YES | 2 MAYBE/CONDITIONAL | 2 NO
(83.3% yes, 8.3% maybe/conditional, 8.3% no)


Analysis

This is great! An overwhelming majority of responders would be interested in contributing to stream viewership.







Question 3: Have you tried one stock singles with players at or around your skill level for an extended period of time (roughly an hour or more)?

Anonymous survey:

6 YES | 12 NO
(33% yes, 67% no)



Updated survey:

7 YES | 17 NO
(29% yes, 71% no)


Analysis:

As I expected, most of the community has not tried the format for themselves. The results of this question are very telling.







Question 4: Do you feel that the length of three stock singles matches hurts match viewership on livestreams/on YouTube/in person?

Anonymous survey:

6 YES | 3 MAYBE/CONDITIONAL | 9 NO
(33% yes, 17% maybe/conditional, 50% no)

Reasons given for maybe/conditional:


  • Sometimes, depending on the player.




Updated survey:

8 YES | 4 MAYBE/CONDITIONAL | 12 NO
(33% yes, 17% maybe, 50% no)

Reasons given for maybe/conditional:


  • Sometimes it does, sometimes it doesn't. Depends of how exciting the match is.
  • technically no, it can't hurt it because it's always been 3 stocks.
  • Sometimes, depends who's playing really



Analysis:

Very split numbers here. I strongly disagree with the people who answered "no" here. Brawl sets rarely attract a big crowd, whether it be online or in person, and this is completely undeniable. A lot of people leave around finals at locals because they don't want to watch top 2 split and sandbag each other for up to ten games. I personally have had to walk away from many tournament sets that I was spectating because I either had to play a match of my own before game 2 was halfway over, I got bored of watching, or two meals' worth of time had already passed and I'd starve if I wanted to finish it out. I've literally fallen asleep during stream matches/YouTube recordings because matches took so long to end (as has one of the responders to the survey).

The length of matches hurting viewership is the talking point for one stock that I'm least likely to concede because it's easily observable and measured in poor stream numbers/YouTube view count.







Question 5: Do you foresee one stock matches being at least equally as exciting or beneficial to the community as the current format?

Anonymous survey:

7 YES | 5 MAYBE/CONDITIONAL | 6 NO
(33.3% yes, 33.3% maybe, 33.3% no)

Reasons given for maybe/conditional:


  • its not fundamentally different
  • I don't expect much to change with 1 stock.
  • possibly with a good ruleset
  • not equally but pretty darn close




Updated survey:

11 YES | 6 MAYBE/CONDITIONAL | 7 NO
(46% yes, 25% maybe/conditional, 29% no)


Reasons given for maybe/conditional:


  • Exciting yes, beneficial TBD
  • I have yet to form a solid opinion of one stock vs. current format
  • initially 1-stock would hurt viewership because it wouldn't be taken seriously. if the community starts taking it seriously, then IMO it will be more exciting.



Analysis:

The increase in "yes" answers when identity became mandatory was really interesting to me. Aside from that, I certainly didn't expect such a positive response to this question. Almost half of the respondents believe one stock has a shot at being as good as the current format. When including the fact that one stock tournaments are undeniably shorter, this much support this early is promising.







Question 6: Do you foresee one stock matches being superior to the current format?

Anonymous survey:

5 YES | 2 MAYBE/CONDITIONAL | 11 NO
(28% yes, 11% maybe/conditional, 61% no)


Updated survey:

5 YES | 4 MAYBE/CONDITIONAL | 15 NO
(21% yes, 17% maybe/conditional, 62% no)


Analysis:

Well...can't say I didn't expect it. icon_razz







Question 7: Do you think other tournament organizers should attempt to host one stock singles?

Anonymous survey:

7 YES | 3 MAYBE/CONDITIONALLY | 8 NO
(39% yes, 17% maybe/conditionally, 44% no)


Updated survey:

12 YES | 5 MAYBE/CONDITIONAL | 7 NO
(50% yes, 21% maybe/conditional, 29% no)

The only reason given for maybe/conditional was for me to do it first, and one other person said that two stocks should be tried first.


Analysis:

How the hell did anyone answer no to this!? icon_eh That's just ridiculous.







Question 8: Do you feel that the duration of tournaments that run three stock singles is too long?

Anonymous survey:

11 YES | 1 MAYBE/CONDITIONAL | 6 NO
(61% yes, 6% maybe/conditional, 33% no)

Reason given for maybe/conditional:


  • yes, but only when poorly run



Updated survey:

14 YES | 1 MAYBE/CONDITIONAL | 9 NO
(58% yes, 4% maybe/conditional, 38% no)

Reason given for maybe/conditional:


  • Only when the T.O.s do a poor job sticking to schedule.



Analysis:

Well, this is mostly what I expected. Over half of the community agrees that tournaments take too long, and rightfully so. With a statistic like that...I'm sorry, but it's undeniable that at least SOMETHING needs to change about this game.

Yes, TOs can bend over backwards to ensure a three stock tournament runs as fast as possible...but even "as fast as possible" is still really long.  Plus, why should a local tournament take the host's blood, sweat, and tears to complete in a timely fashion!?  That's very unfair, and asking way too much of someone who is already doing the community a great service.

For those who answered "no," damn, y'all are some Brawlmonsters. I must admit, when I was younger and newer to Smash, I loved the experience of the 14-hour social events known as tournaments. However, it's simply unrealistic. This gives Smash tournaments compatibility issues with many venues, and makes the prospect of attending a tournament too much of an obligation for many. Perhaps that super long tournament magic would return if only majors were of that duration? Maybe then there'd be some more incentive to host and attend majors...hm...look at the FGC! They have very short locals but a lot of majors, and all of the majors do very well. People consider the long majors to be really fun experiences.



As far as the open-ended questions/problems most people wrote about, I have responded to these same things many times and don't really care to spout out the same answer for the twentieth time--so here's a condensed response.

IT IS NOT BAD that the tier list will not be the same. Banning stages changes the tier list, yet that sort of thing happens a lot. PT and ZSS are the only characters who get objectively better. ICs win a game from one grab, sure, but you win a game from one gimp on Nana. You get to switch the stage you're on after one grab instead of enduring three potentially horrible stocks and them winning half the set instead of a third of it.

SDs are your fault. That's why they're called self-destructs. They can also happen on the last stock of a best of three set, and cost you half the set instead of a third of it.

Every other argument is pretty much entirely appealing to sentiment and opinion, and I'll have to agree to disagree on those points right now.










AND NOW, THE MOMENT YOU'VE ALL BEEN WAITING FOR...

Juice.Gaming presents: YOLO!

Free venue fee, free parking, conveniently located right off the D and B trains and Metro North, and only a short drive (less than two miles) into the city off of I-95 and I-87!

Regular doubles, one stock singles, Apex stagelist. MK legal.

Anyone who's been to the Fordham fests I hosted last semester can vouch for how godlike the venue is. There are multiple rooms we can use, and they're all massive. I would ideally pick the ballroom or the second floor lounge, the two biggest rooms in the building. I'll get pictures up next time I'm there!

let's gooooooooooooo
Recommended by aisight, AlphaZealot, Sean, t1mmy, t0mmy

Comments

1 2
The Iron Wolf wrote at 10:09 PM on Jun 28, 2012 :
Why isn't this recommended by mods? I was initially opposed to the 1 stock ruleset but after some thought I realized that it didn't HURT to try something new. On top of that, since you're willing to try it out, as a stream viewer I kind of look forward to seeing how this might go.

And I pretty much expected 'YOLO' to be the title xD

juice.Doomastar wrote at 10:18 PM on Jun 28, 2012 :
Not to brag or anything, but it's kind of the best tournament name ever.

Player-1 wrote at 11:50 PM on Jun 28, 2012 :
should be an interesting tournament to watch







even though the stage list is terrible.

Illmatic. wrote at 12:25 AM on Jun 29, 2012 :
LMFAO the tournament name is INCREDIBLE.

Illmatic. wrote at 12:25 AM on Jun 29, 2012 :
Glad to see you back, Doom.
Along with Juice Gaming.

Eternal Mangekyo Zebra wrote at 12:28 AM on Jun 29, 2012 :
I don't get it. Does yolo hold some value in it's name? :I

ANTi wrote at 12:31 AM on Jun 29, 2012 :
One stock best of 3?

Almo wrote at 12:31 AM on Jun 29, 2012 :
Yolo = You only live once. Zebra i swear you live under a rock

Atomsk wrote at 12:39 AM on Jun 29, 2012 :
I'm not going to make any effort to attend it, but GL with this and i'm glad you're sticking to what you believe in.

LEGOF wrote at 12:41 AM on Jun 29, 2012 :
Possibly one of the few times YOLO has actually made sense and was funny. Good luck to your endeavors to bring one-stock sets into play. It wouldn't hurt to try.

juice.Doomastar wrote at 12:41 AM on Jun 29, 2012 :
One stock, best of five

B0NK wrote at 12:46 AM on Jun 29, 2012 :
hype! =P

Eternal Mangekyo Zebra wrote at 12:47 AM on Jun 29, 2012 :
Almo wrote at 11:31 PM on Jun 28, 2012 :
Yolo = You only live once. Zebra i swear you live under a rock

Kind of a rude thing to say but alright.

juice.Doomastar wrote at 12:48 AM on Jun 29, 2012 :
Zebra, that saying isn't considered rude at all LOL

unless of course, people who actually live under rocks take offense to it

Illmatic. wrote at 12:49 AM on Jun 29, 2012 :
It's really not rude, more of a joking.. figure of speech kind of thing.
Damn, you DO live under a rock LOL.

Illmatic. wrote at 12:49 AM on Jun 29, 2012 :
WTF super hardcore telepathic ninja by Doom.

Not CT Bloodcross wrote at 12:50 AM on Jun 29, 2012 :
Zebra is the type of guy to love Naruto but barely pay attention to anything about it.

Eternal Mangekyo Zebra wrote at 12:52 AM on Jun 29, 2012 :
juice.Doomastar wrote at 11:48 PM on Jun 28, 2012 :
Zebra, that saying isn't considered rude at all LOL

unless of course, people who actually live under rocks take offense to it

"To live under a rock" is to be a person who lives in isolation from and has limited knowledge of what is happening in the world around them. Used to describe an ignorant or obtuse person.

Oh.
Anyway that's not important. Hype given.

Illmatic. wrote at 12:59 AM on Jun 29, 2012 :
You would search it up....

Eternal Mangekyo Zebra wrote at 1:03 AM on Jun 29, 2012 :
You would search that I searched it up :3

Limit wrote at 1:03 AM on Jun 29, 2012 :
hooray.

I never knew the answer to this, so--what's the Bowsercide rule in single stock matches?

I'm sure you'd probably think, "who uses bowser", but...

juice.Doomastar wrote at 1:03 AM on Jun 29, 2012 :
LOL

To be real with you though, I research everything people talk about that I don't know for the sake of sounding like I have a clue. One of the best luxuries of the Internet.

Limit wrote at 1:04 AM on Jun 29, 2012 :
oh god zebra stop

juice.Doomastar wrote at 1:04 AM on Jun 29, 2012 :
All suicides go to the initiator.

Limit wrote at 1:04 AM on Jun 29, 2012 :
the joke was corny but i'm with doom. the internet is good for research obviously

Limit wrote at 1:05 AM on Jun 29, 2012 :
holy **** really?

that's...awesome.

Limit wrote at 1:05 AM on Jun 29, 2012 :
you mean all victories go to the initiator, right?

a little confused there lol

John12346 wrote at 1:05 AM on Jun 29, 2012 :
Hey, the next time you hold a survey like this, ask about MK. I am legitimately curious about what the results would look like.

Aside from that, good work on amassing all of this information, indeed.

juice.Doomastar wrote at 1:07 AM on Jun 29, 2012 :
The initiator wins, yeah.

John, I'm starting small with this. While I eventually wouldn't mind seeing MK banned in this format, I think allowing him to combat some theoretical big threats is a good idea.

Shado Chimera wrote at 1:07 AM on Jun 29, 2012 :
I definitely live under a rock (your not alone Zebra).

waldorf2007 wrote at 1:11 AM on Jun 29, 2012 :
yolo just means you're down for anal.
Doom is always down for anal.

Keitaro wrote at 1:18 AM on Jun 29, 2012 :
You Only Live Once....

For 3 Matches.

Kinda hot but still wtf at that name lol. You be making fun of my crew, screw you :P I'll probably be there.

John12346 wrote at 1:18 AM on Jun 29, 2012 :
Ah, it's alright if you want to take it slow, just put it on your agenda on some point, alright?

As someone who's been researching this MK nonsense for as long as I have, the data will definitely serve to be very interesting in quite a few respects. But yeah take your time for sure.

Eternal Mangekyo Zebra wrote at 1:20 AM on Jun 29, 2012 :
I'm not the Tsuchikage anymore sorry.

Also how many people are you expecting? That schedule seems kinda tight. But i guess with single stock rules that might make it much shorter but if doubles are being played normally will that complicate things? Unless your own of those hosts you doesn't take any crap and makes people play there matches immediately :I/

Illmatic. wrote at 1:32 AM on Jun 29, 2012 :
do you ever post any of this on smashboards?
could help attendance, idk

Tuen wrote at 2:12 AM on Jun 29, 2012 :
Polling on smashboards could get better numbers... also, it'd be more accurate to state that 'the surveyed population thought'... as opposed to 'the community thought', since you did not manage to poll a significant portion of the community (though what counts as 'the community' has been debated before).

Seeeeemantic junk aside, HYPE. :-D

AlphaZealot wrote at 2:36 AM on Jun 29, 2012 :
YOLO...*facepalm*

I mean, now it could be almost funny in only that it is annoying (e.g. the obama pic for the tournament) but when this tournament actually rolls around, I think you will be regretting this name.

Otherwise good stuff.

Toziko wrote at 3:03 AM on Jun 29, 2012 :
... well, I have been let down by life once more. x _x

juice.Doomastar wrote at 8:01 AM on Jun 29, 2012 :
Yes, I usually post on Smashboards. I was having a difficult time connecting yesterday and also was very tired/busy--SWF thread will go up sometime today when I have time.

I actually love the name of this tournament, haha. I think YOLO is the funniest troll meme ever because anyone who seriously uses "yolo" as justification for doing something...is likely very unintelligent. I use troll yolos quite a bit

dcold wrote at 10:36 AM on Jun 29, 2012 :
I really would go, but from my own experience playing friendlies/seriouslies with one stock it's not something I'd go to a tournament for and spend money on, but best of luck to you all. My own personal choice, but I'd like to see how the tournament goes about, hopefully this ruleset doesn't destroy light/weaker characters like I think it will. Preparing to stream monster.

1 2