Thread: VGC 2016 Worlds
View Single Post
Old 08-28-2016, 03:28 PM   #4
Talon87
Shenmue III, baby!
 
Talon87's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Lafayette, Indiana
Posts: 20,184
Send a message via AIM to Talon87
Quote:
Originally Posted by Raves View Post
There was quite a bit of controversy in a few of the matches when the winner won solely to playing out the clock rather than trying to actually stall out the opponent, which isn't very sporting.

If you're going to run stall at VGC, you're not doing well. If you have to try and let the battle timer hit 0 and win through attrition, you don't deserve to be at Worlds.
It's controversial. You've got those who mind timer and those who do not. You've also got those who believe in winning at any cost and those who believe that there are some lines you do not cross even if it costs you your life. It forms a little 2x2 grid of permutations, and one of those squares is people who both dislike timer and who oppose victory at any cost. Those are the people who are upset right now.

The thing is, the vast majority of people who attended Worlds this year are in the column that says "victory at any cost." Whether they personally like or dislike victory by timer, they're going to be okay with someone else beating them via timer. "If I didn't want to lose via timer, I should have battled better. Victory by timer is a perfectly legitimate way to win. It says so right there in the rules."

Most of the controversy I seem to be seeing is coming from PokéTuber channels. I only follow a few select people, and right now because of my self-imposed SM blackout the only one I've been following is Aaron Zheng. But even on Aaron's channel, I'm not safe from the Verlisify fanboys and their enemies. Both camps are constantly spamming the comments section. And it seems like Verlisfy has been stirring the pot this week as far as timer victories are concerned. But I haven't heard of nor seen anyone who is actually in the core VGC community -- not Aaron Traylor, not Chase Lybbert, not Wolfe Glick, not Barry Anderson -- I've heard no one famous in the community speaking out against win by timer. Everyone seems to accept that it's a legitimate win condition. That doesn't mean they all like it, or that none of them would be sad to see it go. It just means that none of them are raising their pitchforks calling for its abolition.

The one good thing that might come from this controversy is, we might see Pokémon move from its current timer system to one that bears more similarity with the ones in use by chess and Go players. The key difference is that, instead of allotting n minutes of time to the match, you allot n/2 minutes of time to each player. This prevents either player from directly disadvantaging the other by whittling down the clock. You can whittle down your own clock, but you can't touch your opponent's. His time is his own.

I don't know if chess has what in Japanese Go we call byo-yomi, but Go has this thing where once your main match time runs out you still have a supply of 30-second windows of time. You're typically given five of these, and so long as you play within the 30-second time limit the one of these that you're on is regenerated. It's only if you go over the 30 seconds that you "spend" / "use up" that byo-yomi period and move on to the next one. If this doesn't make sense, you can read more about it here. Hopefully if TPCi does decide to implement chess-like timer rules, they will have something similar to byo-yomi in place. Because if not, we're probably still going to see people playing to timer, just in a different way to what they do now. With byo-yomi, I think there's little incentive to try to play to timer. You can still do it, to apply psychological pressure to the opponent. (People do do this in Go and other games with similar systems.) But you flat out can't run an opponent out of time. Only he can run himself out of time.
Talon87 is offline   Reply With Quote