Tetris Matches are Getting Too Long. What's the Solution?

[@foiledthrice]

Huff “only” made it to level 66

[@ReadytoDiveIn]

Me on level 15: WHAT THE FUCK IS GOING ON

[@iknowmyrobloxid]

HEY DONT SWEAR

[@zylanderr]

@@iknowmyrobloxidheck

[@zZeimos]

@@iknowmyrobloxidwe got a little timmy here

[@Catvinity]

@@iknowmyrobloxidyeah guys stop fucking swearing

[@MylesTheGreat]

scout doing a true service to the community here

[@driesvanheeswijk1633]

So cool, right? By the way thanks for leaving encouraging and positive messages like this :)

[@CobaltTetris]

The solution is simple. Shorter Tetris matches, longer Scout videos.

[@wearethewearethewearethhe]

ᕦ(ò_óˇ)ᕤ u sure about that sonny boy (c" ತ,_ತ)

[@MatthewBaran]

Y not both?

[@0m7_]

Omg tetris man

[@TS_Mind_Swept]

Lmbo

[@mysticjedi6730]

They need a new version based on classic and new controller

[@psterud]

I admit I often fast-forward through level 18 in many games. I do miss the good old days when level 18 was still a challenge, and only the best players could handle level 19, but these sports need to adapt. I just hope that the community stays happy with any changes.

[@YorTroYorTroY]

I would love to see a DAS only tournament.

[@fractal161]

Man I remember talking to you about this in January. So much has changed since then, and I feel this was the perfect way to demonstrate it all. I think we're only gonna get better at the game, and it will be really interesting to see how we will adapt in response. Lots of good ideas floating around, I'm pretty optimistic about how things turn out.

[@gessan1337]

Че

[@gessan1337]

Че

[@gessan1337]

Че

[@gessan1337]

Че

[@gessan1337]

Че

[@B-nu8ss]

"His opponent Huffulufugus _only_ made it to level 66" (emphasis mine) ...which would place him third in the colored chart that was shown a few seconds before. What an insane match.

[@alaeriia01]

So sorta like that one match of JACK•BOT where two players scored over 6 billion points in two different ways (insane luck on Casino Run and completing the Mega Visor)?

[@CobaltTetris]

Okay actually serious comment now. This is an incredibly well put together video, not that that's surprising in any way. It can be a tricky spot when considering any "exceptional" games as outliers, because doing that in the past resulted in those anomalous marks becoming commonplace later down the line. However, the visualizations perfectly showcase what has really changed in the past year or so. If a player is good enough to go on level 70+ runs, they're more than equipped to do well on level 19 starts if the competitive scene shifts to that. That makes me wonder though, how integral is level 18 to how we view competitive Tetris? Is removing that phase of the game potentially more harmful to the structure of competition than adding a new phase via the double killscreen? That I can't answer. In any case, we will get a live demonstration of how well an in person world championship is equipped to deal with longer games very shortly, and luckily for the CTM, the level 49 killscreen isn't set in stone. I am very eager to see how that phase of the game is fleshed out as the parameters are modified, but for now, it's safe to say that we're in a pivotal time for the game of NES Tetris. Amazing video once again Scout, the efforts put into this one created such an exceptional final product.

[@Warghas]

Since i have no clue of how the modded catridges works. But is it possible for them to make it so lvl18 to lvl 19 would require less lines for it to happen? That way you could still have the lvl18 start. But it would not consume so much time before lvl19.

[@EebstertheGreat]

@@Warghas You can do whatever you want with a hacked ROM. One downside of requiring custom ROMs is that it will require everyone to get a flash cart. They aren't too expensive, so it's no big deal for most people, but it could be a barrier for some.

[@JeffryJohnston]

​@@Warghas This would be the ideal situation. In videos where it starts at 19, the speed and impressiveness of what the player is doing is harder to recognize and is undermined. The speed increase to 29 is of course very exciting, but 19 is also. Still, I often fast forward to get there. If 18 only lasted a minute we could still enjoy the speed increases without the wait. However, all of this is my opinion as a viewer and not as a player. I personally feel that the tournaments shouldn't cater to viewers but instead to what is more fun for the players themselves, and I have no expertise to comment on that.

[@duffman18]

@@EebstertheGreat well it works fine in the Melee community. Everyone plays with flash cards stuck into a Wii. Nobody uses gamecube discs anymore. And they often are modded versions of melee too (to make it more even and fair, e.g. players with certain controllers that have been worn in over the last 2 decades gave them a real measurable advantage in matches against people with brand new controllers or controllers that haven't been worn in, and so there's a mod that nearly all tournaments use now that equalises everything so that regardless of what controller you use, nobody has any advantage over anyone else anymore). It's up to the players themselves to make sure they'll be able to actually play the games at these events because, especially at smaller tournaments, the people hosting the tournament can't afford to buy 200 gamecubes and 200 copies of melee. It's actually much cheaper to just buy a Wii and get it modded and load Melee from flash cards. There's only so many working copies of melee in the world and that number is always reducing, constantly, as discs get scratched or broken or lost. So this was inevitable. It's the same with Tetris, it's silly to rely on real copies of it, because they'll run out and the last few remaining ones near the end will become extraordinarily valuable because of rarity, so they'll probably cost thousands of dollars each by then. An NES flash cart is gonna be one of the cheaper things a player has to pay for to compete in a tournament overall, things like flights and hotels will cost them a lot more, so it's no big deal. Once they buy one it'll last them years. And if it's one like an Everdrive it'll have many uses for them, they'll get a lot out of it, not just tetris, because they can just buy any old micro sd card to stick into it and load onto it every single NES game ever released, if they wanted, which would be pretty fun.

[@icetanker8062]

@@EebstertheGreat The need for an NES and a CRT TV is also a barrier to entry, and if a player is able to overcome those then they can also get a flash cartridge

[@Hakvin]

Gamescout may not be one of the master Tetris players but, just like in football, commentators and journalists can be masters on their part as well. Gamescout is undoubtedly our most beloved Tetris reporter. Thank you so much for these incredibly professional and well-made videos, keeping us up-to-date with the essentials in the now rather complex world of competitive Tetris.

[@Mayrink.]

My goodness, Scout, you've outdone yourself! I was a data-loving nerd gushing about the "Missing Statistic" video from last year, but this is an impressive amount of sheer grind work. The fact that the resulting data is not only useful, but also provides some counter intuitive insights about the current state of the game is amazing. I was surprised by the findings here, and the methodology was spectacularly comprehensive. This might be your greatest work ever. Loved every second of it.

[@ErenMichelet]

The linecap video is out!!! The blessed day has arrived! Super super impressive how much work was put into this, with the data collection, the editing, and the sheer amount of effort behind the scenes over the year of development! I can't wait and see how the community will continue to develop in the future.

[@QwDragon]

Right after I watched that match with linecap!

[@JTiger1046]

This might be the best put-together video I've seen on NEStris. The data is so incredibly comprehensive that the amount of time and effort you must have put into this is mind-boggling! And on top of that, you explain everything really well so it is very accessible. Your best video yet!!

[@DevilishlyDutch]

The strategy part is also the first thing that came to my mind when I heard a linecap, it adds a new killscreen, and the killscreen has always been the source of aggressive strategy being a necessity to win. (After survival was no longer an issue anyway.) Great video, loving the data, and very much looking forward to the next part to this!

[@highcommander2007]

Great video, so much effort went into this I don't think people even realize. Well done man, you add greatly to this community.

[@GregCannon7]

This was super insightful and well-researched, I had no idea how much non-29 factors were affecting the playtime of tournaments. I'm glad there's a follow-up video coming relating to the strategy aspect, cause that's a very important part of the equation in my mind: if infinite lineout is possible, pre-29 play becomes so much less relevant. Players can just go for safemax pre-29 every game and lineout forever. Even the knowledge of a 49 cap affects the chasedown potential significantly.

[@pawouapproval984]

Man Jonas would be so happy to see the community he left behind taking such great strides...

[@ceezeeemowndeadzombie4014]

No he wouldn’t. This is ruining it. He’s flipping in his grave.

[@trapzone707]

maybe one of the most impressive things about scouts videos is how he can explain what DAS, Hypertapping, and rolling over and over and I stay engaged every time despite knowing the playstyles in and out

[@ryanamburgy2791]

You know rolling inside and out? 🤔

[@trapzone707]

@@ryanamburgy2791 I know the concept of it perfectly 🤷🏻‍♀️

[@ryanamburgy2791]

@@trapzone707 fair enough lmao

[@TS6815]

"but first, we need to talk about parallel universes" "If you don't know what a framerule is, imagine a bus leaving the station every 21 frames..."

[@jamalsonicova2509]

It is impressive how this game developed in the past 2-3 years. I am sad that Jonas isnt there anymore to witness this but I really hope he is somwhere up there watching and smiling while he is stacking clouds!

[@swiftcrayon]

This is a very important and well put together video! I'm a guideline player who loves watching Classic Tetris. Here is my perspective from someone watching in the audience. The game is most enjoyable when both players have not topped out yet. With both still alive you can watch strategies switch and change live. There is drama in things like: is someone going to get more aggressive to catch up?, is someone going to play safer with a big lead?, watching people have to go for center wells or a dirty tetris, etc. Currently, when one player gets a large lead and then tops out after level 29, the other player can let off the gas, and clear singles on the kill screen until they overtake the lead. At this point it feels like it comes down to who is going to play better at level 29. Seeing complex stacking, solves, and strategies is what I am here for, not who can survive the longest on the kill screen. The time isn't the big concern for me. I don't think the players with better overall play always win in the current format.

[@IntegralKing]

I think the problem with the "start post transition" is: it increases the bar of competition too much for the casual player to get into. You'd basically make Rolling a requirement to even get into the game. So yes, it would be better for top play, but the state of the competition as a whole might have to be considered

[@NaNa_W4NT5_F3MNM5]

To be fair, you already have to get multiple maxouts to qualify for any tournaments right now, so I wouldn't call the competitive scene now "casual friendly" either.

[@Supershocky]

Very well-made video Scout! I'm amazed at how much data you went through and how you explained it so well! :D Although the Classic scene for Tetris Effect hasn't reached this crazy level of play yet, this video gives a ton of guidance on how to manage long games if it happens here too!

[@iankeith]

The inherent problem with removing 18 play is that it takes away from a chapter of the game. A competitive game of Tetris can often be split into three chapters, each one with their own importance. 18 speeds, 19-29 speeds, and 29 speeds each have their own strategies, limitations, and importance over the course of a game. Using Transition Trainer mode to speed matches up may work well for a side event, but it takes away a significant portion of the game for many players, one that can still make a big difference over the course of those first 130 lines. They may not always be the most decisive, but they begin writing the story of the game, and without an introduction, a story is just a blurb.

[@dryzalizer]

I used to love watching 18 starts when both players were using DAS or even tapping but I'm all for 19 starts among the best players. I'd be interested in how those players feel about the idea, I imagine a lot of them are already practicing starting at 19 just because their time is valuable to them. We can still have 18 starts below Masters and CTWC play. This "story of the game" idea only has meaning if there's some struggle to get from 18 to 19, not if it's just a formality (yes, top players do occasionally top out on 18 but it's pretty rare...maybe scout has that stat lol).

[@GoldShockAttack]

If they can agree to bo3 early in tournament and only move to bo5 in top 16 (or wherever), then maybe they can also agree to having lv 18 only in early rounds and eliminating it once the players get good enough that it shouldn't matter.

[@ArbitraryConstant]

I believe the rule is that both players have to agree to do an 18 start instead of 15. Allowing a 19 start when both players can play consistently at that level just makes sense. This is just sensible given the huge leaps in the skill level of the players.

[@670839245]

If there are two players that can both play decently deep into the kill screen, the deciding factor is more like how deep into the kill screen they can go, and impact of pre-transition phase is less than if the players can't play much on kill screen...?

[@chrisbidwell895]

I agree completely. Rolling at level 18 has produced some crazy death-defying gameplay near the top of the screen that is extremely entertaining to watch. Having god powers over the game code can be a slipperly slope. I am in the camp where you change the original game code and design as little as possible. If you make too many changes to the ruleset, you will eventually lose the C in CT and instead you'll get modern Tetris played on an NES.

[@roshibomb4247]

This is an incredibly well made video! The whole time I was watching I was basically thinking to myself "the amount of effort and persistence that had to be put into making this must have been insane," because WOW, nothing here falls short! It's a decently long video, but it very succinctly yet still rigorously explains all of the necessary information not only about the subject at hand but all of the surrounding context. The editing is phenomenal, there's graphics at every turn, there's tons and tons of data to back up all of your claims, and at the end of it all you use your data to make worthwhile predictions with everything accounted for to see just what all of this might mean. You even gave your own solutions and applied them to the data to make simulations. This video felt like 10 minutes and an hour at the same time, both in a very good way. I don't even really know all that much about NES Tetris, much less its competitive scene, but this video kept me entertained and feeling like I learned something the whole way through. Seriously good content, man, well earned subscription :)

[@shadow9132]

I think I'd be interesting if they added a rule where the first player to max out wins immediately. This would help keep the game time consistent and would promote more aggressive, more risky play which would in turn be more interesting to watch

[@YagoFernades]

Why?? How?? I don't play Tetris, I don't get Tetris, why did I watch this whole video?? Goddammit, you're one hell of a communicator! Subbed

[@chrisbidwell895]

Great analysis! No need to change the rules until the theoretical crazy-long matches become actual multiple instances of crazy-long matches in round 0 and round 1 of a tournament. Best-of-3/No Mullening/More Saturday matches will keep the 2022 CTWC moving along. Once line caps become necessary, I would propose the cap to be removed in a decider match. This is the system used in Tennis, where the tie breaker rules are different for a deciding set than in the opening sets.

[@pumpyheart]

Deciders having different rules is a really interesting idea!

[@dandanthedandan7558]

I like deciders having different rules

[@sportsjefe]

Something volleyball does is have deciders actually be to a lower score. For example indoor volleyball games go to 25 unless they're game 5s which go only to 15. So maybe taking out level 18 for deciders?

[@SJNaka101]

@@sportsjefe fuck it, level 29 for deciders 😂

[@alecrutz956]

@@SJNaka101funny idea, but that would instantly doom any DAS players (if there are any left). They wouldn't be able to score a single tetris and would be instantly screwed, while hypertappers (to an extent) and rollers would, maybe only in a roller vs roller game

[@thatcommenter9111]

Now I’m not too well versed in tetris, but instead of a line cap having it still progressively get faster after a certain line with a rom hack would most likely be a better solution than line capping because it makes even more tense moments at the end and effectively makes it to where there is a cap but there’s more to it and makes it a crazy finish

[@kajlovich]

I know competitive Tetris is not about this, but to me the most appealing part about watching Tetris was always the soothing and relaxing way in which some players could manage their stacks to perfection at level 18 speeds. Now with rolling, the pieces are 'swept' to the sides so fast that it's not as relaxing to watch anymore (even at slower speeds). Taking away level 18 altogether is probably just the next step, and from a competitive standpoint it makes total sense - don't get me wrong. But here's the thing however: I'm probably just old, and while I do really admire the level of play nowadays, I'm going to say I liked to watch it more when even reaching the (former) killscreen was a rarity, let alone playing it.

[@EricBridges]

Another thought that just occurred to me -- if making the games more exciting for audiences is a big focus, having a loss by score gap could be an interesting way to go. For example, if at any point, one player gets more than 250k behind the other, they lose that game. Some of these endgame really aren't competition - I mean, if you're post-29 and just doing singles vs an opponent doing tetrises, you'll fall far enough behind that your chances of catching up get slimmer and slimmer, and audiences get bored -- we already know who's won, and we're just waiting for the other person to give up. Having a score gap loss would make it so that a player who is behind is gonna have to really turn on the aggression, which is what makes competition so exciting in the first place. It really puts a thumb on the scales for the "risk vs reward" mental math players do throughout the game. It's a new type of pressure that makes the game that much more intense and competitive. Implementation could be hard, since players would need to know at a glance how far back they are to be able to make those decisions quickly, but if that's solved, that could make these games both shorter and much more exciting.

[@user-it4iz7pv1g]

Yeah no. They are a lot games where the player who was so far behind still won at the end.

[@AlderDragon]

It's really amazing how fast the game has changed in such a short amount of time, and we all got to watch it happen over the course of just a few years. It's pretty surreal, like when you see old game records from decades ago and think "well yeah, there was less competition then and it was easier to get a world record" ... well, that sort of transformation is happening right now in front of our eyes.

[@MaxRoderbourg]

A completely different approach that I haven't seen discussed much in the community would be a first past the post system. In this ruleset, a target score would be set (for example - a maxout score of 1,000,000) and the first of the 2 players to reach that score wins the match. If a player tops out before that score is reached, then the regular rules are used. The target score could be changed as players get better and better to encourage some post killscreen play (if players just got really good at maxing out early, it would be sad to loose that element of elite play). This could lead to quite different strategies, where pushing down and risky plays are encouraged from the beginning. I think it would make the first 18 levels more enjoyable to watch, as players would look to maximize points and get through them as fast as possible. The main issue with these rules in my opinion is how much they diverge from the original rules, which makes them less likely to be adopted. I'd be curious to hear what people think of this and to see how it would affect game times statistically.

[@vaioretto-chanjade5810]

Man, the quality of your videos and analysis is always superb, you are truly a gift to the tetris community and im so very grateful that you make these videos

[@JA-dj1rj]

First of all, outstanding video. You make the data so easy to understand. I actually am in the camp wanting a level 49 “kill screen”. Players are only going to continue getting better at post 29 play and I can potentially see several players achieving Fractals post 29 line by line strategy. I do think both players playing beyond level 50 will at least be a semi regular thing in future CTMT events... creating long games even with the Mullen rule. However a 49 “kill screen” would solve this issue and also force players to strategize and become more aggressive with post 29 play. The importance of building for a Tetris after 29 would be a fun element to see.

[@SinageSounds]

This is completely amazing and insane. The sheer energy put into collecting and analyzing all the data is spectacular. And it shows how important is to have data when making important decisions. Amazing work. Thank you!

[@brijeshpenugonda5172]

Great video! You ascribe the increase in number of games getting to level 29 to an increase in consistency from players. I suspect your next video will go into the fact that the possibility of unlimited post 29 play has reduced the incentive for aggressive stacking and efficient Tetris percent in lower levels, taking more burns to ensure survival and avoid early top out. Looking forward to the next one.

[@prototypejack671]

I think the world championships should be a showcase of talent. Maybe a line cap at the regionals, but you want to see history to be made

[@Cleanpup108]

I'm amazed how you actually put some effort and dedication to the video, I feel most KZbinrs would've come up with some ridiculous hypothesis with little to no evidence and then gathered quotes from others. Then at the end of the video say something like " so what do you think is the best way to save time?" Meanwhile you actually gathered some hard statistics and came with a solid conclusion.

[@titopaul9299]

So true!

[@SJNaka101]

Wow, I'm not really into tetris at all, only vaguely aware of the competitive scene (boom tetris for Jeff, etc). This video was so clear and concise that I feel like I could explain the issue to another random person who doesn't know about tetris. Really high quality work here! I hope you guys get it worked out! Sounds like cutting out the beginning is the god-tier solution, but maybe it shouldn't be implemented until a couple/few rounds into the tournament. It would be nice to still have a space for newbies to come in and play a round or two in tournament :). The main issue I see with it is that the barrier to entry for competition would be extremely high, so you'd get less of those players who like tetris and just wanna go to tournament and be around the community.

[@tetrisitaliaclipsmlnz2042]

thank you very much for your excellent analysis Scout. The data is really interesting and I find many of your suggestions can really help the competitive scene, I look forward to the next video. The only note I don't exactly agree with is the hypothetical proposal to start at level 19. I know a lot of people who don't play Tetris who follow CTWC and the reason they follow it is because in their eyes it's an understandable and clear game and they can also imagine how they would play it. Removing level 18 in my opinion would make the games only enjoyable for an audience of gamers or non-casuals and would ruin the spirit of Tetris: a simple game that can be played by everyone. thank you for your video! greetings from Italy!!

[@TheTurboKeys]

What an amazing synthesis of data. Beautiful work Scout!

[@ahbabaziz]

This is such a well made video using all the statistics. Well done!

[@sunte91]

This is probably the most ambitious Tetris-related video I’ve watched in a long time. The collection of data, the presentation of it and a general good flow of narration. Very well done Scout 👏🏻

[@aenstreams1998]

Amazing video. You are such a credit to this community! Thanks for all your hard work!

[@michaelclarkj]

Incredible analysis Scout! so interesting seeing this data. Looking forward to the next video.

[@proberush]

it seems like every time I come back to this channel my mind is blown yet again, thank you gamescout

[@nnse1]

If this video was for a school project you'd get an A+ and extra credit for going above and beyond with your research.

[@Warghas]

No Mullens is an amazing solution. And i do like the lvl19 start. Concidering how much better the players have became the last 3 years.

[@corporal381]

Interestingly, I’m noticing that commentators have had less patience for them and are putting more stringent rules on when players can do them. I think folks have sort of realized that organically. It’s more fascinating watching two players duke it out 29+, than one person scaling for 15 minutes.

[@inthe_flowers]

loving the videos man, I'm new to watching tetris videos but man have I been enjoying watching your videos

[@captaindoublebear]

If there was a tetris committee or board of directors, I would nominate aGameScout for sure. This was so well thought out, analyzed, and put together. His recommendations should definitely carry some serious clout.

[@mikeratkiewicz6720]

Holy crap Scout you crushed it! Mind blowing well done!!!!

[@codetaku]

To me, the line cap for competition makes sense for more than just time constraint reasons: it brings the focus of the game back to stacking skill and efficiency rather than endurance. If you can make it to level 146, you can beat someone who made it to level 39 with only tetrises by using exclusively single-line clears past level 29. That's... definitely not the spirit of the game I started watching in Jonas's (and even Joseph's) era. With a line cap introduced, people will be seriously incentivized to try riskier, more interesting plays if they are behind post-level 29 transition. The people still in competition today may disagree but I don't really care lol, esports are for the spectators even before the competitors, and watching people try to organize back to back tetrises on level 38 will be hype as hell. Edit: oh it looks like that's the subject of your next video. Cool, I look forward to when it comes out.

[@diablowigglz]

Level 18 start. Line cap at 39 instead of 49. Only if a player is on world record pace then they would be allowed to Mullen. This is the ideal setup that I'd like to see but I guess in time a solution that is best will be found. Great video, love the content!

[@iwersonsch5131]

I think the question is what you want. If you want shorter matches, Bo3 or 18less definitely seals the deal. If you want fewer outliers but not a guaranteed lack of outliers (like that Lv.146 game that would have still gone to Lv.70 without Mullen), then no Mullen is the way to go. If you're really worried about your schedule and want a surefire way to guarantee an upper limit on the match length, that could be done with a true killscreen on e.g. Lv.49 or Lv.99. And if you want a sort of "retro" score-optimization tournament where Lv.18-28 play a big role agan, you might even want a true killscreen on Lv.30.

[@aGameScout]

Spot on take. And yeah, the best way to do a "retro" score-optimization tournament is probably to only allow the DAS playstyle - the DAS World Cup last month definitely gave off the vibes of early CTWCs.

[@iwersonsch5131]

@@aGameScout DAS only, interesting. I was thinking to allow all techniques but only allow 13 lines of killscreen, just to see how clean those Lv.18-28s can get

[@Danorpx]

I personally like the idea of a second killscreen. The game will still work the same way, having a limit of how long you can go so therefore aggressive play is still incentiviced.

[@countofst.germain6417]

My favourite and only Tetris channel. I would sub to this man no matter what he talked about.

[@Djieff]

dude! thanks so much for all that hardwork. You are one of my youtube hidden gem.

[@krzybiel8935]

Great analysis, as always :D I think that length of the games might be more important for ctm than ctwc. I love ctm, but I'm watching it more casualy and sometimes, when see the game is too long I just give up. Ctwc is that special period, when I'll find the time no matter what and as you said if the match is hyped enough I can sit and watch all night

[@zanierrules]

Yeah they've implemented the best ways to reduce the time while still providing a great competition. IMO though, the beauty of CTWC prior to Rolling was the inability to survive on the kill screen. It was exciting to see some people squeak out a few lines, maybe even a Tetris... and if the match was really close it was super exciting. Instead of, "who can amass the most points from levels 18-29", it's now become "who can amass the most points". And there's nothing wrong with that but it inherently feels like a new game-mode. That being said, to return that excitement, I think they should utilize a modification that produces a new kill screen (like mentioned in the video), on whatever level they like. Time for me isn't the issue though.

[@chris4660]

I think my problem exclusively as a spectator is that because level 29 play has become reasonable for top players, efficiency and aggression has taken a back seat to endurance. The match I find most emblematic of this issue is the grand finals of the most recent CTWC - EricICX was less aggressive and less efficient in almost every single game, yet still won because he's capable of playing forever. Why set up an interesting solve or take an aggressive risk instead of taking a burn when taking a burn doesn't matter? In my opinion, I think the best way of doing this would be to implement a limit on lines burned past 29 - that way, players are encouraged to play efficiently and take risks, yet with enough skill and luck, could still theoretically play forever. For instance, example, say the burn limit is 40, that means a player can only burn 40 lines once they enter the killscreen, and all other lines cleared must be tetrises.

[@Xi_Vi]

I don't play Classic Tetris but I have been following the game's journey for many years now because of you! Thank you so much for your contribution through yout videos!

[@manwhiches]

Incredible work on getting the data and putting theories to the test. 👏👏

[@Nixnaxist]

Loved the video. This might be something that you will talk about in the next video, but I think linecap would bring back certain elements that are missing in the current meta that used to make the games more exciting. The reason 19 and especially 18 might feel boring now is the fact that there's no point in playing aggressive on them, because there's no reward for it. With the current meta I think someone like Fractal should always prioritise playing safe. In a matter of fact I think the most optimal playstyle for him would be to play 18 and 19 safe, and then go for ONLY singles on 29, not even doubles. That being said I think the best solution is to keep this years CTWC the way it's currently being done. However I think after that some changes should be done based on which direction people think the game should develop in. If you want tetris to be about efficiency you should cut 29 play, it not then perhaps remove the 18 play.

[@Whale_Tales]

I completely agree. In past years it was the looming 29 killscreen that made level 19 play so exciting. The risks players would take building for a tetris when one wrong move could mean defeat. Look at this years CTWC DAS and the reactions from the crowd in the final game, which in my opinion has been the most exciting game of late.

[@JustinEvertrip]

Great to see some objective data and structured, thoughtful opinions on this contentious topic. Great video Scout!

[@MatthewBluefox]

I would have prefered the linecap to be happening at Level 39 instead. 100 lines of killscreen is exciting enough and rollers with a high aggression can still add more than half a million points to the score before reaching Level 29. But the most effective thing by now would be to just either start on Level 19 or even Level 29 because that's what you need to be capable of playing if you wanna be one of the best 16 in the world.

[@Angultra]

Since there's no DAS players left in the top 16 the rules need to change, such as no mullen and 19 starts. But would also be nice to see more DAS only tourneys where the classic rules still apply.

[@Motosapien46]

Scout, as always an EXTREMELY well don't video. I was commenting as I watched Eric's match that you'd be making a video but this is so much more than I imagined! Thanks!

[@m_rissspeedruns1231]

There is another solution glossed over here: Starting on level 19 and 0 lines

[@Dinormous]

This video is incredible, I couldn't spot any flaw. As a statistics student, all the time I see videos here on youtube "analyzing" situations where they look at the wrong things or don't make proper conclusions, or disregarding small but important details, and it honestly makes me not even want to watch the video because it makes it lose credibility and relevance in my eyes. However, in your video, even though I don't know much about Tetris, with every passing minute I was getting more invested in your explanations, your data, and your thoughts, and always going "oh, that's so well thought!". A big thank you for making such a pleasant and interesting video to watch! I know that even though it is only 17mins, there are too many hours of work behind it, unlike most content these days. This definitely earned you a sub :) ----- As for the discussed measures, once again I'm not in the scene, but I think that starting from Level 18 and the super killscreen on Level 49 should be no-brainer measures. Especially starting at Level 18 if they want to appeal to a bigger audience (it's easier to get people to watch if every game is 5mins shorter lol). As for bo3s, also a no-brainer but only in early sections of qualification; eights or quarter-finals and forward should be bo5. As for the no mulling, I'm a bit torn because: - I want to watch record-breaking runs - It makes it only about a win or a loss, and I think it's really interesting to see how much of a win it is, and how far that person can get - You gather less information, in terms of statistics. If you allow mulling, you can know how long the match it would take without mulling. But the reverse is not true: if you don't allow mulling, you cannot know how long the match would have been with mulling. However, the clear advantage is: + It becomes boring if a single player went on for a long time. My suggestion would be: Up until a certain line / level / timestamp, if one player loses, end the game instantly. If that threshold is surpassed, allow mulling. The reasoning behind this is that, if the game ends early, then if you allow mulling there is a big chance there will be a long solo run which is boring, and since it's early in the game you don't really think "oh it could've been a PB/WR but he was forced to stop". If the game becomes longer, than allow mulling because: it likely won't go on for much longer, super kill screen max, and since you're farther in the game, more anticipation is built regarding "will he beat WR/PB?? I want to find out!", so you don't really want to cut it out. Of course the issue here is determining that threshold! But it shouldn't be too controversial imo, and could be adjusted if this upward progression of game length/points continues. I would love to know your thoughts on this idea! Once again, thank you for the incredible and thought-provoking video

[@CutieCakeClips]

I feel making the start of the tetris sets further is the best way to counter this problem. I always found it strange, coming from a tetris viewer casual, to have a start at such a slow pace.

[@oxey_]

I completely agree with your notion on a line cap affecting strategy! When players are forced to go for tetrises things are a lot more unpredictable, you can live every piece and you feel every risk. Current records are impressive obviously but the way they're set is about the opposite of what you as a viewer would want to see

[@zetorux]

This is an excellent analysis! It's great to see actual data applied to the different ideas that have been floating around. I'm just a silent observer in the Tetris community but I thought this was interesting and very well made. I hope tournaments will end up converging towards solutions that people are happy with

[@slidenaway]

SCOUT!! Holy cow this video is amazing. I am glad you waited, and kept rewriting the script. I can imagine it must have been frustrating at times, but you ended up with the best possible video! So much data, so many comparisons, and your projections and all are just so incredibly easy to understand and USEFUL. And I hadn't even thought of the level 18 thing. I have no comment on what is best, but I wanted to at least say that you did the most amazing and perfect and incredible (no wait, it's credible wink wink) job possible! You are a treasure to this community!!!

[@jpa3974]

The level cap may be the least effective solution to decrease the average time, but it is a 100% guarantee that no match will extend more than the feasible time that the organizers have, and that's very important. It's like an emergency measure or a safety equipment that you don't expect to change things much, but that makes all the difference when it needs to be used. As rare as long matches are, there is always the possibility that two players will be fighting for 2 hours and this can ruin a championship.

[@bobguy619]

One idea I've had at one point is to add a 2-minute sudden death when one of the players hits L29. So when someone reaches 29, the match will only be 2 minutes longer, regardless of whether or not a player tops out. Might be a terrible idea but I think it could add an interesting layer of strategy to competitive NEStris while also limiting the amount of time. People might then start down-dropping on 18 or even stacking higher. Rollers still have the advantage Great work, by the way, compiling all that data from previously recorded matches! That's some impressive work. Very Secret Base-esque. Keep up the good work man.

[@oneistheloneliestnumber7026]

i just find it funny that classic tetris matches are going too long while modern tetris games are going too short and being artificially increased by bo15s

[@zenbmonk1016]

You're videos on Tetris and even Hatris are greatly appreciated in the community. Keep up the amazing content Scout.

[@Alvin_Vivian]

Time is one thing, entertainment value is another, but the most important reason to implement a line cap is this: Tetris is about efficiency, not endurance.

[@iron___]

Good analysis! I recently checked back into the NES Tetris scene (last was following early 2020) and was shocked by how much things changed. I think starting matches at L19 might not be a good approach as it will effectively require players to roll (which, tbf, doesn't seem terribly difficult to learn if you practice enough)

[@mr.scurvy]

While it would really suck to lose the tradition of the level 18 start, the game has evolved beyond it. All sports evolve. Players have gotten so consistent that I do find myself fastforwarding to level 19 play.

[@Kibi_Byte]

scout is basically saving Classic Tetris, sincerely. this video has such good info, I think your hard work will be much appreciated!!

[@chimyshark]

this vid went in a way diff direction than expected. I want a line cap for a diff reason though, lining out is boring, and i want to see efficient play, not safe play. I want to reward those who had good pace on 18 and 19. so your next vid which foreshadows this is gonna be good.

[@jessgjerstad2180]

I don't play championship tetris but I'm fascinated by it. What if instead of a "line cap" in the future, there was a "scoring cap"- where the first player to reach a certain score (1.6 million?) in a competitive match game gets the victory heart- (assuming both players are still alive at level 29+) while all other previous rules apply. It would allow players to strategize in how aggressive they want to be at every stage (level 18; level 19-28; level 29+) and encourage playing risky.

[@670839245]

Dumb observation: Before people can consistently-ish play on kill screen, the game has a heavy focus on how many Tetrises a player can squeeze before the kill screen kills them. Once people start to play on kill screen, it's more like an endurance test of how long you can keep up on the kill screen. Not sure if it's a good direction or not, and not sure what the game organizers want, but if there is desire to bring Tetris% back into the equation, a line cap / level cap / time cap might be a way to get it done?

[@ChrisFORYST]

I have a feeling that cap would make TRT important again. Nobody would like to see 0% TRT maxout regularly.

[@adrianhendricks772]

GameScout, your video analyses on all things Tetris are *on point as always!* Marvelously done, sir! 👏👏👏👏 Speaking as a casual outside observer who likely has NO CHANCE making any sort of progress in a Classic Tetris Monthly let alone make it to the World Championships _(and it doesn't help that I haven't actually played a Tetris game in ages... 😰),_ with all these powerhouses out there shattering longstanding records left and right like it was second nature, I feel rather intimidated and overwhelmed at the current state of the community; it's like you must max out your score and get to Lv.29 *just to qualify for the blasted thing!* [WARNING: Potentially Controversial Opinion Incoming] Perhaps another "solution" to this situation would be to introduce *separate leagues into the CTWC Circuit based on the various playstyles of the contestants?* A DAS-focused league (start @ Lv.15) that plays out like the Classic Tetris Championships of years past, a Hypertappers' League for the current players of recent years (start @ Lv.18), and finally a "Rollers' League" for those super grandmasters out there that experiments with new rule adjustments that adapt to their undeniable skills (start @ Lv.19, no "Mullening", new line cap or "kill screen" @ Lv.39/49, best of 3)??? 🤔

[@eatingsfun]

I don't even play Tetris but I find your videos super interesting

[@jonthomson5764]

Great video. At this stage, seems to be a solution looking for a problem, yes games are getting longer because pretty much everyone who will qualify for CTWC will be able to reliably make killscreen a large percentage of the time, but the combination you would need of two players who are BOTH going deep into 29 speeds in the same game is still going to be a very isolated event. If the quarters onwards at Portland all go into five game series which reach level 50+ multiple times, then address it then, but I don't think we're going to see that yet and for now simply addressing the mullen issue will be more than enough for events to run smoothly

[@eee_inn2658]

Wow, really informative. I would not have guessed that the increase in time was due to consistency pre-killscreen more than post-killscreen play. I reallly hope that tournaments don't start to axe level 18 though, that would be a sad day for a lot of players, myself included.

[@QwDragon]

Level 15 was possible some time ago, not sure if it is allowed now. Can make 18 optional too.

[@robo_ghost8760]

I think that there should be a level cap. At this rate, its gonna be 3 hour lings games that are a matter of not dying instead of strategically stacking.

[@Orion26DML]

I played a game to 28 while listening to this. That used to be pretty good hah Fantastic work as always.

[@Aelolandas]

That was way more informative than I was expecting. Keep up the good work!

[@the_officials38]

First time viewer here, I love that you take the data and present it so a you don't need a math degree to understand it. Thank you

[@avinashprasad23]

Program the game to start from Line 130 or level 19. As anything before that seems too slow nowadays and time-consuming.

[@pierQRzt180]

really well done. And starting from 19 makes sense with the actual incredible consistency.

[@IkeSan]

The solution is that just once you won you stop like Tetris effect does. I know you can go for a world record but this is a competition to determine who wins a championship not setting world records even if it is impressive but that should be done alone to not make the events longer.

[@rinylvinyl]

Yes, that is what we call No Mullens.

[@goodshipzion]

The solution is the first player to maxout wins. This gives more emphasis on clean stacking, and gives all playstyles a chance, including DAS. Also, push down will become relevant.

[@hiimemily]

How do we determine the first player to maxout though? Number of lines? Number of pieces? Purely by time?

[@PiratDunkelbart]

Imo a REAL new killscreen at lvl 49 would be nice. This way 29+ games would be more agressive, which also would lead to faster games, because having 1 or 2 liners all the time for 50 minutes wouldnt be an option anymore. @ Lvl 18 skip. I dunno. It may be something for CTM, but for new watchers lvl 18 is a speed everyone can follow. If a "watcher" who starts out, they wont be able to follow lvl 19 very well, not even talking about 29. A match gets boring for the watcher if they cant follow and make their brain compare the players's move with their own. At least thats what happens for me in 29. I still can follow it,but its too fast to compare it with my own placements I had in mind. But yeah, no one wants to see games like Eric's. Sure, its fun in the beginning, but if this happens more often, the audience will leave their chair like Huff during this game.:D Its actually quite funny, how Cheeze predicted this (well dont need to be Sherlock to figure this out^^) and didnt want to make Rolling public. But yeah, maybe not yet, but the skill level is so high right now, 50+ will be a regular thing and I think 49 Kill screen is a good stopping point.

[@QwDragon]

In that match of CTM with linecap we definetely see more agressive playing on 29+ in all games, not only in that one that reaches the cap. Why skipping level 18 instead of starting on 19? The second option requires no modifications of the game. It would be interesting to see stats differenciated by round. Lika average for finals, average for semefinals and so on. It's logical that the final match has the best opponents and becomes longer then others, so linecap can affect it. Otherwice average mach length incrised by half doesn't seem to be too big.

[@LaPingvino]

When you start on later levels, the game keeps that level for a longer time. It would nullify the advantages.

[@QwDragon]

@@LaPingvino it won't as 19 is 1.5 times faster then 18.

[@bennett_quack]

Each one of your videos is a gem in the insight into Competitive Tetris, thank you for making such great videos!

[@NzBoiiii]

Wow.. that's alot of work you put in for this video... I'm glad I watched it all

[@Arrica101]

Doing away with the 18 start and keeping the best of 5 is easily the best solution. They did away with 15 when it was no longer suitable, that time has come for 18

[@thebaitandswitch4623]

Maybe maxing out with the fewest lines gives you a game win in the match? For the top 8 I would prefer letting the matches run as long as they need to, but I could understand keeping the rules the same throughout the entire bracket. In the previous brackets I'd cap the games at maxing out. Rollers would still excel if they have good stacking and could clean up in the top 8, but the field would be less hostile to DAS players at the same time. It would be possible to top 8 with DAS with good stacking. It changes the dynamic of the competition, as it puts more emphasis on strategy over rapid reflexes Also, yeah, not allowing Mullens would have a beneficial effect, but if the trend continues, more and more games will go much farther in levels and would create a great deal of de-synchronization where matches have to wait for players to finish previous matches. I don't like going to 2/3 from 3/5. I much prefer the match being determined by more games. The only scenario where this would be more acceptable is if players are playing the same seeds, since you don't need to compensate for piece variance. Level 19 starts are a good idea for the gold brackets