The Solution to 4w

[XaeL]

There has been much discussion about "fixing" 4 wide by simply reducing the combo table.
This has an (undesirable?) effect that the mid-game can sometimes now be incredibly longer, since 9-combo downstacks with t-spins would no longer be deadly.

I thought of a solution™ that nerfs combo starts while also increasing encouraging downstack.

Right now, there are a few concepts (SRS)
Combo retain - whenever you clear a line, your combo status is retained. Any piece dropped that does not clear a line breaks your combo.
Combo increment - whenever you clear a line, your combo goes to the next item in the table
Combo send - whenever you clear a line, your combo sends whatever your current index in the table is.
Combo table - 00011223344455555555
So right now combo retain, increment and send are all tied to whether your current piece clears a line.

Lets compare this to Cultris:
Combo retain - your combo retain is based on a timer. Certain clears increase your timer. You can place pieces that don't clear lines but still retain combo status. Pieces that don't clear lines don't increment combo index. Breaking combo resets index.
Combo increment - any line clear increases your position in the combo table
Combo send - whenever you clear al ine, your combo sends whatever your current index in the table is.
Combo table - (dont know off the top of my head, not relevant for this discussion)

XaeL's Downstack heavy solution:
Combo retain - you retain combo on any line clear. Non clears break combo status and reset combo index. (same as SRS)
Combo increment - any clear increments your position in the combo table (same as SRS)
Combo send - Only clears that have garbage involved send lines (DIFFERENT FROM SRS)
Combo Table - this will need to be adjusted, but i think something like (011233445566). Notice it is far more aggressive since non-garbage clears don't actually send anything.

Examples using all singles - C = normal line clear, G = garbage line clear:
CCCC (e.g, 4 wide) = 0 + 0 + 0 + 0
GGCG (e.g. downstacking) = 0 + 1 + 0(combo still incremented, but no send) + 2

So the basic result is the combo table will be made more aggressive.

[Okey_Dokey]

(In case somebody doesn't know what 4-wide means, have a look at the combo openers / combo setups wiki pages).

Rewarding only cleared garbage lines (like XaeL suggested) would look a little weird in my opinion. Actually, I am pleased with the guideline combo system as it is. I have no problems with Singles being the most effective way to combo and I think the strength of combo and downstack can be balanced properly with the combo table data (values for 1-combo to 7-combo in case of downstacking, values thereafter in case of 4-wide) - also taking things like line clear delay, garbage blocking, garbage messiness and softdrop speed into account.

I personally like combos. There's something satisfying in making consecutive line clears and seeing those numbers grow paired with a high and higher pitched sound. I also think with proper balance we could have a rock paper scissors system in openers ( center 4-wide > single bag T-Spin opener -> Perfect Clear > 4-wide ) and it could become a mind game which opener to use (predicting what the opponent will do).

The only real problems I see are:

• guideline games often reward combos too much
• center 4-wide

First problem could be fixed easily by using a weaker combo table. In my opinion a combo increment should never send more than 4 lines. The question is when the numbers should be increased (shall it be after 2 or 3 clears?). I think this table would be fine for Puyo Puyo Tetris: 011222333444444 (first number represents 1-combo) whereas I am undecided when the first 2 should show up (011122333444444 would be also an option).  A month ago, Blink asked people on Discord about the numbers and somehow most people thought the 4 should show up very late. The table they came up with reduced the damage output of ~14 combos to 70% of its current state; in my opinion this would be a too big nerf.

Problem with center 4-wide is that it takes the risk out of preparing a combo. Usually, a combo is a high risk, high reward strategy: preparing a combo takes some time (building 1 or 2 huge towers) and you have to finish the combo until you can start to downstack (unless lucky garbage). In meantime, the opponent may spike you out. But if the opponent can't stop you, then you can send a ton of lines in a short period, which could spike out the opponent in return. Center 4-wide reduces the risk part significantly, as you cannot be topped out that easily (a spawning piece can't collide with the 2 towers). So the only risk left is that you barely send any lines with the combo in case of a misdrop or when the combo is interrupted in the middle (combo breaking into multiple small parts).

The smaller risk of center 4-wide compared to sidestacked 4-wide originates from the top out condition entirely. In guideline Tetris, a player is only topped out, if a spawning piece collides with the stack or if a piece is placed entirely above the visible area. Later condition barely ever matters. In my opinion, the top out condition must be changed to balance center 4-wide properly. But honestly I have no really good idea how to do that. Jstris cuts off all filled cells located above the visible area which can reduce the length of a combo (if a big part of the towers is pushed above the visible area) but it also strengthens the downstack followed after the combo (because the top of the towers is flat after it is cut off). In my opinion cutting off the invisible area would look too unprofessional in official games ("pft they couldn't even make the game to remember the blocks above the playfield").

The best idea I have is just reducing the buffer zone above the visible area. Let's say the buffer zone is 5 rows high: If a filled cell is pushed less than 5 rows above the visible area, then everything stays at is: the player is not topped, and the filled cell will show up again once some lines are cleared below it. However, if a filled cell is pushed up more than 5 rows above the visible area, then the player is topped out immediately. So, this basically means an additional top out condition. Again, this top out condition could look a little unprofessional in official games ("huh, why was I topped out?") but the new top out condition should only occur if a player really uses center 4-wide.

When I spoke about center 4-wide being too strong, I meant as an opener. I have no problem with it in midgame. But at the start of a game a center 4-wide is just too easy to stack, and the opponent has no means of defense (no back to back bonus, no filled cells that could be incorporated in an attack). A question you should ask is why is center 4-wide even possible. And the answer is because of 7-bag randomizer and hold. It's always possible to stack the first bag in one of the 3 following ways (sometimes requires softdrop) whereas the surface looks the same (one tower flat, the other with T-shape on top). For this surface, it's also easy to place another 2 bags on top of it. Do we really need 7-bag randomizer? Of course, the randomizer shouldn't be changed just because one techique is too powerful (plus a meaner randomizer would have a stronger influence on T-Spins than combos). But why is there never an option to use another randomizer in official games? Official games totally took the survival aspect out of Tetris (Marathon-like gameplay was the main way to play Tetris in 80s and 90s but nowadays nobody with skill would consider playing Marathon).

[fumen]v115@oewwHewhxwDei0whwwQ4DeRpg0whR4BtBeRpglwhQ4?BtCeilaeRpwhAeAtEeRpwhBtQ4Deg0glwhAtwwR4Ceg0glw?hywQ4Beh0hlaeilAeAtEeglRpBtQ4Deg0RpAtwwR4Cei0yw?Q4BezhJeAgH[/fumen]

[Kitaru]

XaeL's Downstack heavy solution:
Combo send - Only clears that have garbage involved send lines (DIFFERENT FROM SRS)

Why not always send but use the TGM score multiplier rule for increment (double-or-higher raises, single maintains, non-clear resets).

[Kitaru]

Of course, the randomizer shouldn't be changed just because one techique is too powerful (plus a meaner randomizer would have a stronger influence on T-Spins than combos). But why is there never an option to use another randomizer in official games?

Whenever there is some sort of option to use a less lenient rule in a Guideline game, it's almost invariably provided as some sort of restriction or disadvantage. Sure, you can make a game like Tetris Ultimate where you can set 14 Bag or Memoryless / light Memory, or turn off wallkicks, or whatever, but everyone else can opt to use the defaults and have an easier time than you. Single player scores aren't separated by settings, and there isn't a way to enforce room settings in multiplayer, so, tough luck. The decision to use disadvantageous settings gets spun as "player preference."