Pokémon TCG: Sword and Shield—Brilliant Stars

75-minute top cut from T16 onward?

ajhawk said:
@ Pooka: I agree that the Top Cut should be 75 minutes. But your analogy does not work. In competitive gaming/sports changing from a Bo5 to Bo7 (or any change in series length) does not fundamentally change the game being played. In MLB, all five early round games are still 9 innings and require 27 outs, etc. In SC2, the games are the same.

Here, you are fundamentally changing the game. The difference between 60 and 75 minutes drastically alters gameplay. I think the time limit needs to be consistent throughout the entire course of the Top Cut.
Click to expand...

ajhawk, I agree as well that the top cut should be 75 minutes. But your analogy does not work. In MLB, not all playoff games are 9 innings and require 27 outs. Only 5 innings are required for an official game, even in the playoffs (even though officials try to play the whole game all the time). Inclement weather or other catastrophic events (for example, a thunderstorm or tornado) can cause games to end early. In fact, official MLB playoff games can be 5 innings, 6 innings, 7 innings, or 8 innings.

Likewise, I think the time limit does not need to be consistent throughout the entire top cut, given that the timing structure is clearly indicated to the players well in advance of the tournament.
 
I kinda get where people are coming from with the "all or nothing" 75 minute time limit, but how would 75 minutes after, say, top 32 be a bad thing? I'm legitimately interested in your reasoning, because I still don't see it. Yes, time limits alter deck choice. But if you already have made a deck choice for 60 minutes, and then 2 decks that were built for 60 minutes play against each other in 75 minutes, is there any significant change in the way these decks play, other than the players having a little more leeway to think and not scoop games early? I don't think there generally would be any significant change. The only way this would really dramatically affect results is if somehow a very slow deck squeaked it's way into top 16, and the odds of that are very low.
 
psychup2034 said:
In fact, official MLB playoff games can be 5 innings, 6 innings, 7 innings, or 8 innings.
Click to expand...

Yes, but it's also true that there are more situations than can result in the continuation of a game at a later date than there are that would result in a game being considered complete prior to 9 innings.

[edit]Actually, it's even better than that - no MLB postseason game can be terminated prior to 9 innings for any reason anymore, they're always picked back up where they left off at a later date.[/edit]

Regardless, the MLB is the only major professional league that can have shorter games, playoffs or not. Games in the NHL are always 3 periods. Games in the NFL and NBA are always 4 quarters.


Really, a sports analogy would be best served for the argument of no time limit, not a consistant time limit.
 
Ah, the 75 minute cut monster rears its ugly head again.

The one issue that keeps me from getting behind this is the possibiity of one 75 minute game deciding the match.

Allow me to call time at 30 minutes for each game, and then you have my support.

I will be the first to say that 60 minutes is not ideal...but the only true ideal, to stay consistant with the format is three 30 minute timed games.

There are those, including posters in this thread, who know how to manipulate time, just as any other parameter this game has to offer us. You'll get me to jump on board in a heartbeat if you add the caveat that we call time on each game after 30 minutes. Game 1, Game 2, and if that means a more limited game 3, then so be it.

Can it be done? Yes, especially at Nats and Worlds where your player to judge ratio is about 1-1 starting at the top 16 round (if not only 1 judge per match). And if there was 1 judge per 4 players, it could still easily be tracked.

I don't like to add time just to add time. But adding time, and keeping it more consistent with the swiss rounds...I am in.

Vince
 
meganium45 said:
Ah, the 75 minute cut monster rears its ugly head again.

The one issue that keeps me from getting behind this is the possibiity of one 75 minute game deciding the match.

Allow me to call time at 30 minutes for each game, and then you have my support.

I will be the first to say that 60 minutes is not ideal...but the only true ideal, to stay consistant with the format is three 30 minute timed games.

There are those, including posters in this thread, who know how to manipulate time, just as any other parameter this game has to offer us. You'll get me to jump on board in a heartbeat if you add the caveat that we call time on each game after 30 minutes. Game 1, Game 2, and if that means a more limited game 3, then so be it.

Can it be done? Yes, especially at Nats and Worlds where your player to judge ratio is about 1-1 starting at the top 16 round (if not only 1 judge per match). And if there was 1 judge per 4 players, it could still easily be tracked.

I don't like to add time just to add time. But adding time, and keeping it more consistent with the swiss rounds...I am in.

Vince
Click to expand...
While I'm not 100% sold on your proposed 30 minute per game in a best of 3, if that's the compromise that has to be made for us to see more time in top cut matches, you have my full support.
 
^
i actually don't like this let's play 3 30 min rounds, just b/c that really seems extremely time consuming and not needed as usually one of the three games goes by pretty quick(donk or one player draws dead) also the ONLY way i can see one 75 min game deciding top is maybe two Truths going each other and neither running ESL...i mean a 75 min game.....there's like no way.
 
CFOURCOLTSFAN said:
^
i actually don't like this let's play 3 30 min rounds, just b/c that really seems extremely time consuming and not needed as usually one of the three games goes by pretty quick(donk or one player draws dead) also the ONLY way i can see one 75 min game deciding top is maybe two Truths going each other and neither running ESL...i mean a 75 min game.....there's like no way.
Click to expand...
In some formats maybe a game wouldn't go that long. I can totally see that in this format though with VVV and Accelgor hanging about, and The Truth still exists, too.

And I think you misunderstand. What Vince is saying is that each game is timed to 30 minutes, but the entire Bo3 is timed to 75 minutes. So the first 2 games can't take longer than 30 minutes (+3, of course), but the last game can be quite a bit shorter than the 30 minutes if the 75 minutes is up.
 
And, if game 1 lasts like 5 minutes, you begin timing after set-up for game 2.

Game 1 finishes at 5 minutes. After set-up, you launch the timing for game 2, which will have time called at 38 minutes into the round (still +3), but if it finishes earlier than the 38 minute mark, on you go, set-up then another 30 minute timer (which COULD put it under 75 minutes for all 3 games even if game 3 goes to time).

This only works when you have 1 judge per 4 players or less, but I think it is my preferred method, if I was forced to say...OK, what would you change??

I will agree with the posters who started this, and continue to support more than 60 minutes being given. For a tough-fought match between equal players with a LOT of strategy and calculation taking place (which happens at HIGH level events), 60 minutes is certainly NOT enough in my opinion. I just don't want to deal with 1 60 minute game (which true, yes, I could have now...)

Vince
 
Vince, let's simplify that a little bit...

If Game 1 is still going at 30 minutes, then it ends at that point (or +3).

If Game 2 is still going at 60 minutes, then it ends at that point (or +3).

That way, you can have central announcements and you don't have to rely on the Judges to keep track of when each individual game starts.
 
bullados said:
Vince, let's simplify that a little bit...

If Game 1 is still going at 30 minutes, then it ends at that point (or +3).

If Game 2 is still going at 60 minutes, then it ends at that point (or +3).

That way, you can have central announcements and you don't have to rely on the Judges to keep track of when each individual game starts.
Click to expand...
The issue with that simpler method you are proposing is that is that you get shorted some time in the second game if game 1 went to time, which could be quite the problem with the system.

Really, you just need 2 timers. 1 for the current game, and 1 for the overall match.
 
psychup2034 said:
ajhawk, I agree as well that the top cut should be 75 minutes. But your analogy does not work. In MLB, not all playoff games are 9 innings and require 27 outs. Only 5 innings are required for an official game, even in the playoffs (even though officials try to play the whole game all the time). Inclement weather or other catastrophic events (for example, a thunderstorm or tornado) can cause games to end early. In fact, official MLB playoff games can be 5 innings, 6 innings, 7 innings, or 8 innings.

Likewise, I think the time limit does not need to be consistent throughout the entire top cut, given that the timing structure is clearly indicated to the players well in advance of the tournament.
Click to expand...


Even so, the analogy holds true. You jump on a rabbit tail to avoid the man point. That point is that the game never fundamentally changes. Every game is slated to go 9, but there is the possibility of it being weather shortened. Every. Single. Game. is the same.

If you don't like the Baseball analogy (which still holds water), move onto the NHL, NBA, or NFL. Every single individual game remains fundamentally unchanged no matter how long the series is.

Right now Pokemon is divided into two sorts of games: Swiss and Top Cut. All the Swiss games need to be the same. Like wise all the Top Cut rounds need to be the same. If not, you are fundamentally changing the way the game is played out. The difference between 60 and 75 is HUGE. That is the very reason people are advocating for 75.

@ Vince: I have no problem having someone call time at 30.
 
Calling time every 30 mins, even just for one of the three potential games, is punishing slow setup decks too harshly imo. I don't think it's wise to reward decks that take 4 prizes in 4 turns but then can't finish the deal by letting them cover their behinds with a 30-minute time limit. jmho.
 
Box of Fail said:
Calling time every 30 mins, even just for one of the three potential games, is punishing slow setup decks too harshly imo. I don't think it's wise to reward decks that take 4 prizes in 4 turns but then can't finish the deal by letting them cover their behinds with a 30-minute time limit. jmho.
Click to expand...
But Swiss, which is the majority of a tournament's play time, and how you get to cut in the first place, is played in 30 minute rounds. The point that Vince is making, I believe, is that a deck ought to function equally well in a top cut situation as in a swiss situation. If it is any better or worse in Swiss than it is in Top Cut, something is wrong with the system.
 
I think it's acceptable to have extended time as you progress closer to the finals. I think having 75 for Day 3, and then having an even higher number for T4 & Finals is okay. I mean seriously, does anyone think it's fair when you win on time? Would I be upset if I did no, but it doesn't make it fair. I can't disagree with the logic of increase time for those who make it to T16 and better, seems logical to me.

Drew
 
With Nationals being spread out over three days, I think it's kind of inexcusable for us to not have longer top cut times than 60 minutes. The game and results don't feel as legitimate if the best decks aren't winning because they get snagged up on time because their opponent was a tad bit of a slow player or whatever.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top