Legality Tentative: MBR Official Ruleset for 2012

[Cactuar]

Foreword:

The contents of this ruleset are still up for debate. If you see anything you disagree with, have questions about, or we missed and you would like to see, you are strongly encouraged to speak your mind. Posts that give a thorough explanation of your opinion and the reasoning behind it will be noticed. Posts that complain with no basis for said complaint will be ignored. I will be participating in the discussions as much as possible.

That said, this is what we have so far:

MBR Recommended Rule Set
Super Smash Brothers: Melee (Singles and Teams)​

Singles Stage List

Spoiler

Starters/Neutrals:

• Yoshi’s Story
• Fountain of Dreams
• Battlefield
• Final Destination
• Dream Land

Counterpick:

• Pokemon Stadium

Stage Bans

• For Best of 3 sets, each player gets 1 stage ban.
• For Best of 5 sets, there are no stage bans.
• For Best of 7 sets, DSRM is enabled for the 7th match, but the winner of the 6th match is allowed one stage ban, to be used after the 6th match is played.

Doubles Stage List

Spoiler

Starters/Neutrals:

• Yoshi’s Story
• Pokemon Stadium
• Battlefield
• Final Destination
• Dream Land

Stage Bans

• For Best of 3 sets, each team gets 1 stage bans. Teams may ban up to one neutral stage and one counterpick stage. One team cannot ban both counterpick stages.
• For Best of 5 sets, there are no stage bans.
• For Best of 7 sets, DSRM is enabled for the 7th match, but the winner of the 6th match is allowed one stage ban, to be used after the 6th match is played.

General Rules

• Items are set to off.
• Stock and Time are set to 4 stock and 8 minutes, respectively.
• Double Blind*: If elected.
• Contest Port Priority*: If elected.
• Neutral Start*: If elected.
• Standard DSR*
• Gentleman’s Clause*
• Forced Character Selection*: Off
• Matches that time out will be determined by the remaining number of lives, then percentage of the current stock. In the event of a percentage tie, the match should be replayed in full. Sudden Death is not to be played, and will not count.

Additional Rules for Teams Play

• Team Attack: ON.
• Life Stealing is allowed.
• If the game is paused accidentally while attempting to steal a life, the opposing team may deem that life forfeit. Wait until the announcer has finished saying defeated before pressing start, or turn pause off prior to beginning the match.

How to Play a Set

1. Players select their characters. Either player may elect to Double Blind.
2. Use Stage Striking* to determine the first stage.
3. The players play the first match of the set.
   Prior to starting this match, either player may elect to Contest Port Priority or Neutral Start.
   
   Spoiler

   Note: Only one of these two may be used, as both have a built in Port Selection mechanism using RPS. If there is a situation where a player would like to change which option they elected after playing the game of RPS, it is the opponent’s choice to allow it. The results from the previously played game of RPS will carry over.
   
4. Winning player of the preceding match bans a stage/stages (if applicable).
5. The losing player of the preceding match picks a stage for the next match.
6. The winning player of the preceding match may choose to change characters.
7. The losing player of the preceding match may choose to change characters.
8. The losing player of the preceding match gets first pick of port. Either player may elect for a Neutral Start, but RPS will not be played to determine first pick.
9. The next match is played.
10. Repeat Steps 4 through 9 for all subsequent matches until the set is complete.

General Knowledge
Players are responsible for their own general welfare in regard to the tournament environment. In other words, players are responsible for:

1. Stage List and Rule Set Familiarity
2. Venue and Entry Fees
3. Arriving On Time
4. Maintaining Personal Hygiene
5. Controllers and Character Knowledge
6. Minimizing Whining

Tournament Hosts should keep the following in mind:

• Tournament sets are usually based on bracket positions, which may be seeded at your discretion. If your tournament is to be run in any other format, you must advertise it accordingly.
• Some kind of stalling prevention is highly recommended. Since a definition of stalling is too potentially ambiguous here, all instances of stalling are determined by you.
• Unnecessary delays in a set should be discouraged. These delays can occur before (players not playing the set), during (players taking an unnecessary amount of time to counterpick) or after (players not reporting results) a set. The tournament Host is recommended to keep tabs on set status and completion.
• No more than the previous match should be replayed in the event of a rule violation. It is recommended that any disputes be brought promptly and quickly to the Tournament Host’s attention. Special exceptions may be made to this rule per your discretion.
• When running a pool, the game count of each set should be recorded (whether the set was 2-0 or 2-1). Ranking in a pool is determined by the number of sets won. There are several methods of determining a tie-break, but each has advantages and disadvantages. It is the TO's responsibility to determine which method they will be using, advertise which method they will be using in the tournament thread, and to consistently use that method across all pools during the tournament.
• The semi-final and championship sets should be, at minimum, Best of 5.
• Wireless controllers should be discouraged or banned due to interference, unreliability, and time hindrance.
• The Tournament Host reserves the right to, at any time, make anyone leave the premises of the tournament.
• For all Melee Tournaments, Metaknight is banned.

***Term Definitions***

• Double Blind: Either player may request that a double blind selection occur. In this situation, a 3rd party should be told, in secret, each of player’s choices for the first round. Both players are to then select their first round character, with the 3rd party validating that the character selected is the same as their word.
• Contest Port Priority: If an agreement cannot be made as to who gets what port, the players may enact a best of 1 game of Rock Paper Scissors. Winner gets their port selection, loser selects any other port.
• Neutral Start: Either player may enact this rule. Once enacted, both players may only use one of the two “Neutral Starting Positions”. A best of one game of Rock Paper Scissors may be used to determine who gets the higher port. If one player elects to Contest Port Priority and the other elects to Neutral Start, Neutral Start takes priority.
  Singles:
  
  Spoiler

  Stage|Port 1|Port 2|Port 3|Port 4
  FD|*|*
  FoD|*|*
  YS|*|*
  DL||*||*
  BF|||*|*
  PS|||*|*
  
  
  Doubles:
  
  Spoiler

  Stage|Port 1|Port 2|Port 3|Port 4
  FD|Team A|Team B|Team A|Team B
  PS|Team A|Team B|Team B|Team A
  BF|Team A|Team B|Team B|Team A
  YS|Team A|Team B|Team B|Team A
  DL|Team A|Team B|Team B|Team A
  

  For the counterpick stages not listed here: Take the 20 seconds to figure it out. This will get updated later.
  
  
  
• Standard DSR: A player/team may not counterpick to a stage they have won on.
• DSR Modified: A player/team may not counterpick to the stage they last won on.
• Gentleman’s Clause: Any stage may be played on if both players agree to it. This rule takes priority over DSR.
• Forced Character Selection: The losing player once had the option to select Random Stage as their counterpick and remove the option to change characters from the winner of the previous round. This is no longer legal. If a player wishes to select Random Stage as their counterpick, the winner of the previous round may choose to change their character.
• Stage Striking: Players eliminate stages from the Starter/Neutral list until there is one stage remaining.
  Players strike stages in this order:
  
  Spoiler

  Strike|Player 1|Player 2
  Strike 1|*|
  Strike 2||*
  Strike 3||*
  Strike 4|*
  

ArcNatural Edit: If required here is a link to the Old MBR Ruleset

 

[Roneblaster]

Has anything changed with bans? Ive seen alot of tentative rulesets that remove the ability to ban in some situations.

Did that not make it into this final version?



Shoutouts to Japes

If were encouraged to speak our mind....

No japes and there should always be bans, imo.

 

[Pi]

^in Bo5 there is no stage bans

Removal of KJ64, and Brinstar [[Edit] also rainbowcruise even though I don't like it]? but keep Stadium?

Why...
[edit] re-read the 'up for debate' portion of the post
and I'd be willing to offer some debate on the matter, but I would still like to know the official reasoning behind it
my main concern is that deciding that Stadium is some how less of a CP than KJ64/Brinstar/RBC.

 

[Max?]

Very nice. Glad to see most of the CP stages removed for singles, tho I can understand their usage in doubles. I heard rumors that there was talk about removing FD as a neutral as well?

I feel like there should be some definition of stalling in place... at least pointing out the very obvious ones.

 

[Strife]

Even more stages removed from singles. This will just continue to harm the community.

 

[EthereaL]

Bring back KJ64, Mute City, and Brinstar...this is "dumb."

The point of counter-picks is to counter-pick.

It's dumb to make everything essentially neutrals. Some characters have advantages over stages. No stage has enough of an advantage to make it an "insta-lose" or "insta-win".

The other stages are banned for about as much of a reason as Dreamland should be banned because of Peach/Puff (other than arguably Brinstar, due to lava).

 

[Cactuar]

@Roneblaster: We are now using a scaling ban system. The plan is to hopefully open up the doubles counterpick stage list. Stages will always be added in pairs, and with each pair, one ban will be added to each team. The pairs generally have to be weighed against each other (with consideration for viable characters), so that teams will generally be comfortable on at least half of the counterpick stages. The scaling ban system is also being used in singles.

@Pi: Please provide your reasoning to saying that PS is on par with Brinstar/RC. I'm not disagreeing with you here, I just want something to base this discussion on.

@Max?: FD is remaining as a neutral for the moment. It is, in a sense, the most, and I say this carefully, fair stage, but that does not mean it is balanced. It is fair when you consider the complete lack of outside variables available to influence the match, even down to the lack of platforms. There are generally two sides to this argument, which are:
1) the lack of platforms enables ridiculous combos that would not be possible on other stages.
or
2) platforms on other stages interrupt the ridiculous combos that would otherwise be possible.

Both sides are saying the same thing really, but each side has a different stance on what is the base/standard. I am of the first camp because 5 of the 6 stages now legal for singles do in fact have platforms, and to me that indicates it being the standard, and as such, the 1 in 6 stage is allowing for variation from the standard.

Regarding stalling: I'd like to have something in there about stalling, but we need to work on defining it and how to actually enforce anti-stalling rules.

 

[kevo]

Oooh, first page! Here are some of my thoughts.

What stage is DK 64? Is that Japes? The stage bans system seems rather complicated, and may be difficult to communicate to new players at a tourney. I have a hard enough time teaching people how to stage strike and what DSR means. The rules make sense (there's always around 3-4 stages to choose from) but I worry about tournament players being able to remember all the intricacies, especially if doubles differs from singles. What was your rationale in not just having all matches be 1 ban per player and forgoing DSR for DSRM?

I like the neutral start rule. Like double blind, it doesn't happen often, but I think it's an important contingency plan to have in case there is a dispute. Interesting how it seems like players can change ports between matches. That's always been a bit ambiguous and I assumed you can't change your port in the middle of a set. My philosophy is that if you chose a specific port, the knowledge of where your port stands in the various stages adds "depth" to your counterpicking. Interesting.

Forced character selection was stupid. Good call.

I've always used the practice of playing 1 stock, 2 minutes, same stage, same characters to settle ties. Saves the tournament time (it also kinda builds hype). Either way works IMO.

Also, if Metaknight was in Melee I bet he still wouldn't be that high up on the tier list. That's how fast Melee is

Looks good, I'll start implementing this in 2012.

 

[TheCrimsonBlur]

Oh, is that the new initiative? Remove FD from neutrals so the stagelist benefits spacies even more?

Taking out Brinstar; too good guys. Now its even easier to win a set against 7-3 matchups. Fox really needed that boost. Cute how stadium is on of course. Gotta keep that.

Love how I now have to win on Dreamland and Stadium in a bo5 set. I knew the other changes were inevitable, but I gotta admit, I didn't see that one coming.

What a ****ing joke. I'm sorry, but this **** is getting ridiculous. A stagelist shouldn't be decided democratically. Just do Battlefield only already so I don't waste my time learning stages I won't need to know in 2 years.

 

[kevo]

I actually don't see a problem with varying the stagelist a little bit year to year (also, the TO has the final say on their own stagelist >.>). When I played CoD4 they changed map rosters all the time; sure it was annoying learning new maps but it's not like they're getting rid of the classics. Just learn them.

Japes is fine on doubles, it's not any more or less spacies-favoring than Rainbow Cruise, the stage it's "replacing". I personally hate Brinstar, so anything I say about that one is biased.

 

[Cactuar]

@EthereaL: It isn't so much an issue of stages being insta-win or insta-lose, but a combination of that factor and the issue with the random elements causing "wildcard" situations. These situations are generally factors that have nothing to do with either player actually playing the game, but their character being affected by the stage in a negative manner which can potentially cost them the game, especially when high level play in this game often comes down to "last stock last hit". We don't want to enable stages that will essentially randomize the outcome of the match, and we don't want stages that will essentially guarantee victory for certain characters. Brinstar unfortunately can be placed under both catagories, as the lava element has enough of an effect to sway the match in such a manner, but at the same time provides such a benefit to certain floaty characters that it has been deemed near insta-win.

@TheCrimsonBlur: There is no "initiative" to remove FD. It is staying on neutral, and I've even made it a 100% guaranteed counterpick against spacies in BO5 sets, so high/top level spacy players are going to be required to learn it or lose to chaingrabbing. In my mind, all that happens on that stage is some characters get a huge boost to their punishment game and defensive game due to the lack of movement options.

And while you have to win on Dreamland and Stadium, spacies now have to beat you on FD and Yoshi's/FoD.

You are more concerned with how this affects you than how this affects the top 8-10 characters.


Also, like I said in the OP: This is tentative. Provide a solid enough backing for removing PS and it will happen. Or you can keep whining and accomplish nothing. I am okay with removing PS and having the 5 neutrals on for singles, but there needs to be enough support to do so, as well as sufficient evidence of imbalance.

 

[Atlus8]

I say first match should just be on Battlefield then counter-pick accordingly!

 

[TheCrimsonBlur]

@TheCrimsonBlur: There is no "initiative" to remove FD. It is staying on neutral

Yeah, sure. We'll see. Its not like there hasn't been an obvious trend over the last few years.

and I've even made it a 100% guaranteed counterpick against spacies in BO5 sets, so high/top level spacy players are going to be required to learn it or lose to chaingrabbing. In my mind, all that happens on that stage is some characters get a huge boost to their punishment game and defensive game due to the lack of movement options.

And while you have to win on Dreamland and Stadium, spacies now have to beat you on FD and Yoshi's/FoD.

So basically I have to fight on 2 disadvantaged stages and they have to fight on 1. I have to win game 1 or I'm heavily disadvantaged, and if I lose on Yoshis or FoD I'm done.

You are more concerned with how this affects you as a Marth main than how this affects the top 8-10 characters.

No, actually I'm not. If you haven't noticed, I'm against Brinstar being banned. Marth is horrendous on Brinstar. Same with Cruise. But, shock and awe, I actually don't use my character's performance as a way to measure if something should get banned or not.

But thats not how most people think, and thats why we have this list. Of course when you pool a bunch of players, the majority of whom play spacies, Brinstar will be banned. Duh. What is this whole exercise supposed to determine? That people look out for their own self interests? Cause I could have told you that and saved you some time.

 

[Pi]

Cactuar can I have some basic reasoning's behind the removal of the stages? I just tried to type up an ambiguous response regarding the comparison between the CP's and found it really hard to structure with nothing to go on specifically. I also may lack some understandings of why the stages were removed and if I were to not address them then it would almost be a wasted post.


Also the forced random neutral stage selection thing is the forced character selection ? So no longer can you force someone to stay the same character by random neutraling it?

 

[TheCrimsonBlur]

Provide a solid enough backing for removing PS and it will happen. Or you can keep whining and accomplish nothing. I am okay with removing PS and having the 5 neutrals on for singles, but there needs to be enough support to do so, as well as sufficient evidence of imbalance.

Dude, I'm not naive enough to think that any argument I make is going to make spacie mains take Stadium off the ruleset. I don't even WANT Stadium off the ruleset, so the point is moot.

What I want is for us to actually have a standard for removing stages and stop doing so democratically.

 

[FrootLoop]

I don't like the idea of taking a stage off for being near insta-win for some matchups.
Yes, Fox can camp out samus on kj64. Maybe that means samus isn't as good of a character as we thought she was? Besides, the players know the stage before picking characters, it's not like the samus gets hoodwinked into playing on kj64.
Bad matchups on different stages should count against characters, not against stages, at least in non-extreme cases. Otherwise, you're basically deciding the tier list through the stage list. There's loads of stages that aren't "1 strategy beats all" that should be included, the effects on the tier list should be more or less irrelevant unless one character/strategy becomes super OP.

 

[Varist]

I took a stab at an objective definition of stalling and no one seemed to have any problems with it.

Stalling in a tournament match is prohibited. Stalling includes:

• Maintaining any map position not on or immediately above the stage via stalling techniques, when in possession of a stock/percent lead (null when both players are using the same character).
• Using an inescapable technique to damage your opponent past the 300% threshold (null as long as PS is not on default layout).
• "Stalling Techniques" include:
  -Peach Bomber
  -Wobbling
  -Blizzobbling
  -Rising Pound
  -Battlefield Infinite Walljump

edit: epilepsy

 

[Bones0]

You have DK64 and Kongo Jungle listed as counterpicks, but they are the same stage... lol? I'm assuming you meant KJ64 and Jungle Japes... KJ64 should be neutral in Doubles in place of Poke Stadium. The only thing that makes it ban-worthy in singles is excessive stalling, but it isn't an issue in teams. As far as Jungle Japes goes, has stalling been identified as an issue on it? Otherwise I don't see why it would be legal in teams but not singles (I have almost no experience on the stage so if there is a reason I am genuinely curious; I am assuming the Klap Trap is not the reason, though I could understand why it would be considered less of an issue in an 8 stock game as opposed to a 4 stock one).

Disabling pause should simply be a RULE. It is pretty unprofessional to have a rule set that relies on players to press start at the correct time or not at all, especially when we have a perfectly effective way of just disabling it entirely. If neither player remembers to or doesn't care enough to turn off pause, then they should simply have to deal with any resulting accidental pauses, and if someone quits out, then they lose.

I also think selecting Random at all should be disallowed. A lesser-skilled player could essentially win by getting a lucky stage for the matchup that the opponent has to randomly guess (oh wow, you got FD and won because you could chain grab; there was no way I could have known not to select my character because I had a 4/5ths chance of beating you on every other stage!).



Instead of all the varying ban rules for different set lengths, there should just be one rule set. It will be applied more easily because it will apply universally, and players do not have to keep track of how many bans and which DSR rule they are using. I also believe it is better than no-ban sets which can force some particularly difficult matchups (mainly FD, which is great for most matchups, but is usually ridiculous for matchups with chain grabs).

- The winner of the last game can ban a stage. Stage bans do not last for the entire set, which means a player can change their ban from one stage to another after any game they have won.
- Modified DSR: Players cannot counterpick the last stage they have already won on.

The effect of these two simple rules allows players to play without extremely biased stages, and DSRM takes another stage out of the counterpicking decision so that players are ensured to be playing on only the 3 most fair stages.

The way I like to break it down is this. You have 6 stages, numbered 1-6. Players strike from 1-5, and they strike to 3 because it is the most neutral for the matchup. Stages 1-3 favor one player while stages 4-6 favor the other. Stages 1 and 6 are very biased in each player's favor. I think I speak for most players when I say that I would rather play this set:

3-5-2-4-3

Each player bans 1 and 6 respectively through the whole set. DSRM prevents 5 and 2 from being played a second time, so what you end up having by the 4th and 5th game is both players not being able to choose their 2 best stages, which means you will be playing the two most fair stages, 3 and 4. This makes the set overall much more competitive as counterpicks are less of a free win than if there are no bans and players are forced to play on more radical counterpicks.

This is the type of set you would have with the current rule set:

3-6-1-5-4

DSRM still prevents 6 and 1 from being played again, but the lack of bans just forces games onto more radical stages. As you can also see, stage variety is hardly being supported any more in the first rule set where the only stage being played on twice is stage 3, which was the most neutral based on the initial stage strike.

 

[Cactuar]

@TheCrimsonBlur: At what point was removing any of the stages done democratically for this stage list? It's more like a dictatorship imo. (In all seriousness, the second half of my original sentence was by far more important than the first. There needs to be sufficient evidence of imbalance.)

@Bones: Thanks for pointing out the KJ and DK64 thing. It is supposed to be jungle japes.

 

[Pi]

if varist edits his post 1 more time i'm going to have a seizure

 

[Teczer0]

Cactus don't you mean jungle japes for the doubles cp not kongo jungle?

Kongo jungle and dk64 are the same stage.

 

[Cactuar]

Someone actually pointed that same thing out in the MBR and I thought I fixed it lol.

 

[Pi]

I'm also curious as to why this was opened up to the general public?
Discussion still must be occurring in the backroom, are you just hoping to gauge public opinion on some of the changes and discuss it among the MBR at the same time?

 

[Varist]

Cactus don't you mean jungle japes for the doubles cp not kongo jungle?

Kongo jungle and dk64 are the same stage.

...no they're not.

 

[Bones0]

I'm also curious as to why this was opened up to the general public?
Discussion still must be occurring in the backroom, are you just hoping to gauge public opinion on some of the changes and discuss it among the MBR at the same time?

This ain't URC, son. Melee community has ACTUAL unity in these matters.

 

[Bones0]

...no they're not.

Yes... they are.

 

[Teczer0]

...no they're not.

I meant that in the context of his stage list. Iunno I forgot the name differences w/e

 

[TheCrimsonBlur]

@TheCrimsonBlur: At what point was removing any of the stages done democratically for this stage list? It's more like a dictatorship imo.

OK, thats fair, I'll stop making assumptions about how you reached this list. So tell me, exactly what was the methodology applied to reach this ruleset?

 

[kevo]

Yeah I'd like to know some of the stuff I asked in the first page, too.

I don't really like Kongo/Brinstar/RC, because they feel oddly unnatural (probably because I don't play them ever) and gimmicky. That would have been my reasoning on taking those stages off singles (and a rather poor reasoning at that)

 

[Cactuar]

I say first match should just be on Battlefield then counter-pick accordingly!

If tournaments only used the top 8-10, it wouldn't be the worst idea ever. But they aren't.

Cactuar can I have some basic reasoning's behind the removal of the stages? I just tried to type up an ambiguous response regarding the comparison between the CP's and found it really hard to structure with nothing to go on specifically. I also may lack some understandings of why the stages were removed and if I were to not address them then it would almost be a wasted post.


Also the forced random neutral stage selection thing is the forced character selection ? So no longer can you force someone to stay the same character by random neutraling it?

The stages have been removed due to how severely they affect play through both on-stage element influence on character advantage as well as wildcard scenarios. Example of this is any of PS's stage changes. Explain how it changes/influences matchups/play, and compare/contrast with Brinstar or RC. In all honesty, I don't think it would be difficult to make a strong argument for removing PS.

I'm also curious as to why this was opened up to the general public?
Discussion still must be occurring in the backroom, are you just hoping to gauge public opinion on some of the changes and discuss it among the MBR at the same time?

I really value the opinion of anyone who wants to voice theirs, so I'm really doing this to acquire as many inputs as possible on the whole thing. The community will likely be divided on... pretty much everything. I'm generally pretty good at picking out the valuable information from the sea of nonsense, so I have no problem use the public as a source for suggestions. Plus there is something just... awesome... about having an entire community contribute to something rather than a private being the be all end all for decision making. I really want the backroom to be able to create the framework, and the entire community to flesh it out.

@TheCrimsonBlur: The answer to your question is after the second quote.

 

[TheCrimsonBlur]

The stages have been removed due to how severely they affect play through both on-stage element influence on character advantage as well as wildcard scenarios. Example of this is any of PS's stage changes. Explain how it changes/influences matchups/play, and compare/contrast with Brinstar or RC. In all honesty, I don't think it would be difficult to make a strong argument for removing PS.

@TheCrimsonBlur: The answer to your question is after the second quote.

That doesn't answer my question at all.

What I'm asking is not what type of arguments were made, but how those arguments were weighed. Did you take a vote? Was it just "Cactuar listens to a bunch of arguments and then posts a list of his own?" How exactly did the list get made.

 

[Pi]

Well let me go ahead and throw out my understanding of why the stages were deemed CP stages in the first place

Stadium: Favors fox, and maybe falco pretty heavily
Low ceiling, and two of the transformations, as stand alone stages, would be banned outright. But because they are not permanent, the stage is okay, so instead mostly it just ends up being players not approaching if one would be forced to go above the other one (osht, please leave this discussion open thru apex @.@)

Brinstar: Benefits jiggs, and maybe peach, heavily
No walled edges, jiggs planking on this stage, while not prevalent, I guess is buffed?
Lava interferes with standard gameplay, and can deny kills in certain instances?

RBC: Walled stage on the ship, would be banned outright
Forced interaction between characters, benefits faster characters, or characters with the ability to 'camp' with projectiles
Low ceiling

KJ64: High ceiling, tall platforms allows for characters with good aerial maneuverability to avoid having to 'fight' their opponent for prolonged periods of time (see shinobi vs. rockcrock), as well as gives characters with projectiles somewhat of an advantage
Also no walled edges
And the barrel...which I don't feel should be an issue, if it was. Some characters may be able to use it more frequently than others, but all in all you can prepare for interaction with it, so accidental deaths should not occur unless due to lack of experience on the stage.


Cactuar unless there's anything you'd like to add onto this I'll go ahead and start putting together my post.

for the record, I do not want to see these stages, or stadium, removed from play. I'd rather we have potentially more bans, or maybe a ban of both a neutral and a CP stage, rather than to remove them from play.

Basically I think we may be focusing too much on the matchups that are most affected by the stages, and discounting those that are affected only slightly, I'd like to see more effort be put into making more stages viable, without allowing for auto wins.

If this is something that you'd be open to discuss as well then I can put some thought into that as well

 

[Varist]

Yes... they are.

Spoiler

settle once and for all

 

[Cactuar]

@TheCrimsonBlur: I basically did an elaborate version of what PI just did, for every stage in consideration and while weighing the effect each has on the top 8-10 characters in tournaments sets of BO3 and BO5. There was no vote. There was open discussion around the provided evidence. I think voting is generally unreliable, as people very rarely change their initial opinion and will just vote mindlessly without consideration or comprehension of evidence.

@Kevo: Sorry, what questions did you ask? Your first post just asked what stage I was referring to and then made statements about the rest. There is a lot on the thread already, so I could have easily missed what you posted.

@Pi: I like the scaling ban system because it allows for stages to be added back even if they are (slightly) too influential. So you are more than welcome to make an argument for adding stages lol.

@Bones0: Thanks for the alternate system, I don't have enough time to really look at it right now, but I will when I get back. Hit me up online sometime, I'll probably have questions/comments.

--I'm off for the moment. I might not be back online till tomorrow, so I'll go through things whenever I can. That aside, thanks for the comments so far

 

[the_CAM_factor]

hmm, not sure how i feel about this but ill give it a shot. feeling bad for jiggs though, she really did love brinstar.

 

[Bones0]

Spoiler

settle once and for all

Damn, I got wrecked. haha

@Bones0: Thanks for the alternate system, I don't have enough time to really look at it right now, but I will when I get back. Hit me up online sometime, I'll probably have questions/comments.

--I'm off for the moment. I might not be back online till tomorrow, so I'll go through things whenever I can. That aside, thanks for the comments so far

Okay, cool.

 

[TheCrimsonBlur]

There was no vote. There was open discussion around the provided evidence.

So people posted stuff and then you made a list?

Come on Cactus, you're a reasonable guy, do you really think thats the fairest way for our community to make a ruleset?

as people very rarely change their initial opinion and will just vote mindlessly without consideration or comprehension of evidence

I genuinely believe you aren't like this, but don't you think that the same argument could be flipped on you? That maybe you won't change your opinion regardless of what people post? Even if you are completely impartial, what precedent does this set for future rulesets where the leader of the MBR isn't so fair?

while weighing the effect each has on the top 8-10 characters in tournaments sets of BO3 and BO5.

This is a side point, and I don't want it to distract from my main concerns above, but why are you trying to balance a game when making the ruleset?

 

[JPOBS]

I would like to hear the reasoning behind no DSR for best of 3 and best of 5 sets.
Watching The Big House stream, many many sets were determined, or partially so, by the winner having won on the same stage multiple times. In fact, some sets where detemrined by the winner winning ONLY on that one stage.

Why remove DSR?

I havent read the full thread yet because I'm really busy atm, so if this has been asked and answered in the thread then just direct me please.

 

[Bones0]

Not sure why you're sketching, Crimson. It's clearly been stated the rule set is not set in stone. Cactuar just posted it here so people could see the back room's idea of a rule set, criticize it, and/or argue for their own, so just argue your changes and then maybe it will be changed. If not, well, life's a *****. >_>

I would like to hear the reasoning behind no DSR for best of 3 and best of 5 sets.
Watching The Big House stream, many many sets were determined, or partially so, by the winner having won on the same stage multiple times. In fact, some sets where detemrined by the winner winning ONLY on that one stage.

Why remove DSR?

I havent read the full thread yet because I'm really busy atm, so if this has been asked and answered in the thread then just direct me please.

I addressed the lack of DSR in my post, so you can read that and lmk what you think.

Side note: who lost on the same stage 3 times? lol Like, why wouldn't you ban it or not strike to it in the first place. XD

 

[TheCrimsonBlur]

Not sure why you're sketching, Crimson. It's clearly been stated the rule set is not set in stone. Cactuar just posted it here so people could see the back room's idea of a rule set, criticize it, and/or argue for their own, so just argue your changes and then maybe it will be changed. If not, well, life's a *****. >_>

Bones, you know me, I'm passionate. And I just think we need to have a better way of doing these things. Its obviously not fair to put this much power in one person's hands, and it wouldn't be fair to do it democratically either, because people would just vote with their interests in mind. What we need is a concrete standard, not necessarily the Turnip Threshold like Kish said, but something super well-defined. We have to determine and justify that first before making a list..

I respect them for trying to do something, and I know how hard it is to make a ruleset for this damn game, but things like this are very, very important and change how we are viewed by people outside and unfamiliar with the community. The methodology is the most important thing, and its very sad for me to see us becoming a caricature of the criticisms people mock us for..