Four Wide

[Ryan]

I find it weird that when someone such as myself who rarely does 4 wide and to be completely honest doesn't pull it off very well, has as equal if not greater success using it against people compared to using btb tspins and tetrises which i tend to use the majority of the time.
4-wide isn't a noob tacit. It is just overpowered.  Just look at chow.  He went from a nobody to someone beating some of better players over night because of 4-wide in the process pissing off the majority of harddrop because of his cockyness and careless comments.  I think some were mad just because of there jealously of his success compared to them, but that is besides the point.  In my opinion players shouldn't be able learn one strategy (in this case 4-wide) and be able to beat people twice as good at virtually every aspect of the game besides 4-wide.

[Paradox]

This is how I see it:

APM
1= Lowest
5= Highest


Difficulty
1= Easy
5= Hardest

Code Select Expand


Attack        APM         Difficulty
Tetris          1                  1
TSD             2                  2
*4Wide          5                  3
TST             3                  4
AC              4                  5

*Successful


Note that this is my personal opinion when it comes to difficulty. However the reason I think combos are moderately difficult is because I have never really practiced it as much as the other line clears. If I practiced them equally I would put 4wide at 2.

[Paul676]

4 wide was relatively new when Chow burst on the scene, and it took people some time to get used to how to beat it. Now it seems to be shown as just as powerful as it is (i.e. not so OP as first thought, especially now we see mathematical analysis of it).

In his case, when he came up against players who could actually beat him by doing low tspins (just as powerful as 4w as proven), he reached an impasse. Indeed, he gave up on 4 wide for a while because he realised that he couldn't beat players who used such tactics against him. This only serves to back up my point. Those who use TKI or other low tsd setups (again these are a template just as much as perfect clears or middle 4 wides are) are better equipped to deal with the 4 wider than the 4 wider is to deal with them.

[Corrosive]

I think the game would be a lot better if garbage was all randomized like on TNET2, games would go by quicker and the tetrises I spam wouldn't be used AGAINST me.

[Paul676]

This is how I see it:

APM
1= Lowest
5= Highest
Difficulty
1= Easy
5= Hardest

Code Select Expand


Attack        APM         Difficulty
Tetris          1                  1
TSD             2                  2
*4Wide          5                  3
TST             3                  4
AC              4                  5

*Successful


Note that this is my personal opinion when it comes to difficulty. However the reason I think combos are moderately difficult is because I have never really practiced it as much as the other line clears. If I practiced them equally I would put 4wide at 2.

I'd suggest that you should do it as power per piece rather than power per attack (which is what I think you're doing here). In this case, I think you'll find that TSD becomes the winners by far. Zero uncertainty, max reward per piece. (0.8 attack per piece assuming no b2b bonus and 5 pieces to set it up. It becomes 1 attack per piece when b2b bonus comes on.) I'll leave you to compute the rest.

Also once you get the template down for ACs, they are repeatable very easily (only 3 pieces to decide on).

Most importantly, please give me the figures and evidence to back your table up. I see that you even admit that it's your own opinion. Which is fine, until you start making tables and make it look like a scientific analysis which has any sort of weight beyond opinion whatsoever.

I have given practical evidence to show that 4 wide is not OP. Now you guys' turns to show me that it is OP.

I think the game would be a lot better if garbage was all randomized like on TNET2, games would go by quicker and the tetrises I spam wouldn't be used AGAINST me.

off topic, but this. (is why I think garbage on attack is silly. you get punished for making large attacks like tspins, tetrises and even 4 wide (since usually the player will have to combo through some garbage before sending lines, meaning that the lines sent are pretty clean (as meow stated earlier.) and rewarded for making piddly little attacks like doubles.)

Please could a mod redirect the Corrosive reply and my reply to him to a separate thread entitled "Garbage Change on Attack; A Discussion" - it's something which should be discussed, yet should not be discussed in a 4 wide thread.

[caffeine]

I think the game would be a lot better if garbage was all randomized like on TNET2, games would go by quicker and the tetrises I spam wouldn't be used AGAINST me.

I've been advocating against "see-saw garbage" for years. 90% change hole (random) makes for so much better gameplay. You actually have to think in order to downstack, and games don't last for five minutes. I don't know if we'll ever see the return of random garbage, though... Players have been spoiled, and they'd likely complain if it was changed back.

[Paul676]

I give you guys a fumen challenge. You are using any 4 wide you want. You are playing against someone who only plays tspin doubles. Both are optimally efficient players with identical speed. The challenge is: come off better than the tspin double player, whilst factoring in the garbage you would receive from them. I think this is impossible, personally. This is on a game with no delays, because that is even better for the 4 wider, as shown by me and caffeine. (p.s. you can factor in delays if you want, but the two players have to play with the same settings.)

Sorry about the badly aligned table, but I'll illustrate what it says. What it illustrates is lines cleared compared to attack per piece. When line clears are odd for TSDs and not multiples of 4 for tetrises, I have put an x, and only updated the attack per piece again when you come to send lines.


   Lines                 Tetrises   TSD   Combo
Attack per piece   1=combo 0:   0   0   0
   2=c1   0   0.8   0
   3=c2   0   x   0.133333333
   4=c3   0.4   0.9   0.2
   5=c4   x   x   0.24
   6=c5   x   0.93   0.333333333
   7=c6   x   x   0.4
   8=c7   0.45   0.95   0.5
   9=c8   x   x   0.577777778
   10=c9   x   0.96   0.68
   11=c10   x   x   0.763636364
   12=c11   0.47   0.97   0.833333333
   13=c12   x   x   0.923076923 - tspin double here would be 0.935, still more powerful
   14=c13   x   0.97   1

What I think you'll find is that the cross-over point is on the 13th combo, where the attack per piece of the comboer wins out. I doubt anyone in their fumen will be able to get to line 13 and therefore come off better than the tspin double player.

What this table does which a combo table doesn't is that it factors in pieces needed to build the combo as well as clear it. So combo 13 is 14 lines high, and therefore is 35 lines sent for 35 pieces, which is higher than tetrises for the first time.

[Corrosive]

Hmm glad to see that someone agrees.

[Paradox]

I like messy garbage but I also like easy garbage. I think there is different strategy with easy garbage. Things like doubles are more useful because of the messy garbage it sends.

But like I said I enjoy both.

[chopin]

Also, I'm sure if it were as strong as you suggest, in a tournament such as the TTO where people play to win, people would play 4 wide if it were the only way to win. But the evidence suggests that it is in fact quite low power in comparison to the risk in playing it.

I think that many players (I being one of them) have chosen to no longer do combo starts because we believe that it is more honorable to play without using such an overpowered start. Just look at a lot of good combo players who have stopped combo starts altogether or are trying to pull away from it although they gain huge success with it.

I like messy garbage but I also like easy garbage. I think there is different strategy with easy garbage. Things like doubles are more useful because of the messy garbage it sends.

And yes of course Change on Attack is generally easier to downstack, but that is part of the strategy aspect. With this system you have more control over the game and it doesn't allow someone to just ignore garbage completely and just play a quick Ultra game to kill you. And remember that BB and TNet2 didn't have T-Spins. With half the amount of lines needed to send 4-5 lines compared to Tetris, Tetris players will be even weaker. Change on Attack tests more aspects of skill than Random garbage. I don't think that 90% hole change is going to be coming back. Actually, 90% change has always been in only non-official multiplayer games I think.

[Paul676]

I think that many players (I being one of them) have chosen to no longer do combo starts because we believe that it is more honorable to play without using such an overpowered start. Just look at a lot of good combo players who have stopped combo starts altogether or are trying to pull away from it although they gain huge success with it.

Firstly, please look at my and other people's tables and other people's fumens for solid reasoning/evidence/sometimes mathematical proof why 4 wide is less overpowered than tspin doubles.

Secondly, you can't seriously maintain that every single person in the top 16 only do TKI starts because it is more "honorable" than comboing.

I suggest an alternate reason why they started tspin doubling: They were comboing, until they came across people e.g. TOJ players such as Hebo or rowa who don't let them combo because they TKI (which is more OP than 4 wide and any other combo) and then they stop because they have found now a more powerful, easier and less risky setup to do. Which happens also to have a better reputation than 4 wide because of misunderstandings about it. HAPPY DAYS!

Evidence you ask? There were a few lone 4 widers (some of them fast) in the TTO and none of them got through to the top 16. If it were THAT powerful or even a bit as powerful, it would have featured far more than it did.

[perfectclear]

Also once you get the template down for ACs, they are repeatable very easily (only 3 pieces to decide on).

paul, past the first PC, there is no template. try stringing them together fast enough that you can spike out a comboer- it takes forever to learn how. I spent over a month doing almost exclusively pc starters, and my best was 3 pcs in 23 seconds. (or 4 in 32- depending on what you think is "best"). my sprint isnt that great admittedly.  I then spent all of 3 days to learn four widing and was sending more lines with four wide than with my perfect clears. so dont say that it is "very easy" when you have absolutely no experience on the topic other than (MAYBE) reading 3 pages of discussion on it.

also- I now use bbb's dt cannon into c spin to counter four widers. I have sent 25 lines in 20 seconds with this method, which is plenty to cancel out and spike up an average four wider. I dont think four wide is overpowered in that it is impossible to beat- but I do think that it is overpowered in that it is so easy to learn.

[Paul676]

sorry perfectclear, I guess I made it vague with the result that you misunderstood what I meant - I was only referring to the first pc, which I think my statement about the template of the first 7 pieces holds true for. I wasn't considering following the perfect clear on past the first one.

oh and p.s. you assume that I have never had experience on the topic...rather than just being silent about it, since others were contributing more to the discussion than I would be able to

Anyway, assuming the person perfect clearing manages to get their perfect clear out (10 pieces) before the 4 wide middle player gets to 10 columns up (6/4x10=15 pieces, so probably about equal/better for the pc player given soft dropping vs tf's das/ar or sonic dropping vs nullpo's das/ar), the max combo without a lucky hole is 9 or 10, which sends an easily counterable number of lines for the perfect clear player. (approx. 20 without cancelling the pc, approx. 10 with cancelling the pc), which then taking into account time taken to complete the combo, and the perfect clear player sending tspins/downstack/tetris garbage, means that they will always survive the combo, and will not be doing much worse, if not equal or better, than the 4 wide player.

In terms of risk, I am aware that not all perfect clear starts will become actual perfect clears, in which case the 4 wider has the advantage. However the 4 wide is far more susceptible to both misdrops (for the reason Aaron stated; it takes more pieces to do) and messing up the actual combo.

[Ryan]

i think we should have a tourney with people of similar speed where half do 4 wide and half don't.

[caffeine]

And yes of course Change on Attack is generally easier to downstack, but that is part of the strategy aspect. With this system you have more control over the game and it doesn't allow someone to just ignore garbage completely and just play a quick Ultra game to kill you.

Change on attack only gives the player "more control over the game" in the sense of "make Combos instead of Tetrises because they send messier garbage." Messier garbage gives the player no more an excuse to ignore it than change on attack. It's just as important to downstack--only it's more interesting and in depth with random garbage.

And remember that BB and TNet2 didn't have T-Spins. With half the amount of lines needed to send 4-5 lines compared to Tetris, Tetris players will be even weaker.

I don't think you can say "Tetris players" will be weaker. I mean, the Tetris column in change on attack games are already lined up for clearing. All the person has to do is drop in the I-piece. Why would a "Tetris player" be better at that than a "T-Spin player."

Change on Attack tests more aspects of skill than Random garbage. I don't think that 90% hole change is going to be coming back.

That's like, well, your opinion, man. =b I'd say downstacking through random garbage takes a whole lot more critical thinking and skill (to place pieces efficiently in order to open up future holes).

Actually, 90% change has always been in only non-official multiplayer games I think.

Tetris World's multiplayer, EA's online multiplayer mobile game, and Tetris Evolution to name a few that were random garbage games. I could probably dig up more if I did some research. I believe TTC changed the guideline to cleaner garbage after Tetris DS's success.