A Final Destination Only Ruleset

[LiteralGrill]

Since For Glory Mode was announced I have been considering the possibility of a Final Destination only competitive ruleset. This may sound weird from the guy who brought up considering items and larger stagelists, but I still wanted to discuss it as there are advantages to the idea as well. I'm not 100% sure where I stand on the subject and wanted to use the intelligence of Smash Boards users and a good debate to help me decide.

Final Destination Only Stagelist​

Pros:

No culling of stagelists, we'd have a universal standard from day one

Our metagame would develop much faster with less stages to learn (with the possibility of us being stronger players as well)

The game would be more recognizable and easy to learn for new players and viewers on live streams

Faster Tournaments without having to use a counterpick system for stages

Online events would be better as this stage is likely to have the least lag


Cons:

We would be eliminating perfectly good stages from play

We would be arbitrarily buffing certain types of characters

No variety could get boring

We would be perpetuating the stereotype of “No Items, Fox Only, Final Destination” which may make us look bad to certain types of people

Possibly less character variety and viability

[collapse= Other Thoughts]Psychologically new players will connect Final Destination with competition now. Back in my days with PSASBR everyone always went to a stage called PS2 because whenever you wanted to do a one on one to prove who was best after FFA battles you always went there. This went on to be the most used stage in any tournament ever and to be the tournament standard. Something similar might happen with Final Destination now that it is in the deemed “competitive stage” by newcomers where they'll find it odd to fight elsewhere.


Sakurai has said he does balance based on fight taking place on FD. This could mean that this is the stage for optimal play considering balance depending on interpretation.


The metagame in Japan for a long time was FD only with them adapting for some of our tournaments. It may be possible that by adopting this both the US and Japan could have a universal ruleset internationally bringing us together more often. The possibility of using this as the international day one standard in all countries could be huge as well.[/collapse]

Varied Stagelist​

Pros:

Lots of variety to keep interest*

It's what we have been doing for a while now

It keeps closer to the “spirit of smash”

We don't remove perfectly good stages from play

Possibly more character viability and variety


Cons:

It will take a while to get a solid stagelist down, years even

It will be argued about for years and no one will ever completely agree

Different regions will have different standards causing problems and dividing us competitively

[collapse=Other Thoughts]*That variety might not actually exist. Everyone knows the joke that in Brawl all matches are just played on Smashville anyways. While it isn't actually true a huge majority of matches are just played on that one stage. Are we keeping extra stages just to say we have variety while not using them? Is it worth doing that with the pros of having one stage? We can't know until we see all of the available stages, but it's something to consider.


Even with a varied list there is a chance we will end up with a very small stagelist at major events anyways.


Technically you could say we are arbitrarily buffing adaptable characters by having more stages as well, but I find it hard to list as a con as the base game of smash does reward those characters anyways.


Perfectly good stages is a seriously subjective term...[/collapse]


So, what do you guys think? Do the pros outweigh the cons of having an FD only stagelist? I want to know what everyone here thinks. If I missed a pro or con let me know as well. Get typing up those responses!

 

[Aninymouse]

It's too early to tell.

We need the game first to see how characters are or are not balanced for For Glory.

 

[XavierSylfaen]

No, a huge part of the game is having different stages to play on. Pretty much the only valid pro you list for a FD-only stage list is that tournaments would go faster because stage picking wouldn't be a problem. While this is true, it's pretty much a non-issue. The vast majority of the play is spent during the game anyway, as we've seen from years of Melee+Brawl tournaments where stage picking takes up but a fraction of the match. People are likely to lose interest if they see only one stage being played, competitive players included. I don't think the fact that stage list quarreling is a thing should prevent there from even being a stagelist. The entire reason people argue about it is because they want the best, most fair, and most fun places to play Smash on, and banning every stage except FD to limit arguments over what stages should be legal is like King Solomon cutting the baby in two.

 

[LiteralGrill]

It's too early to tell.

We need the game first to see how characters are or are not balanced for For Glory.

This brings up something interesting. How can we know balance is better with more stages or with just FD? There's no way to tell perfectly even with the game out. Still, I can't blame you for not wanting to decide yet.

No, a huge part of the game is having different stages to play on. Pretty much the only valid pro you list for a FD-only stage list is that tournaments would go faster because stage picking wouldn't be a problem. While this is true, it's pretty much a non-issue. The vast majority of the play is spent during the game anyway, as we've seen from years of Melee+Brawl tournaments where stage picking takes up but a fraction of the match. People are likely to lose interest if they see only one stage being played, competitive players included. I don't think the fact that stage list quarreling is a thing should prevent there from even being a stagelist. The entire reason people argue about it is because they want the best, most fair, and most fun places to play Smash on, and banning every stage except FD to limit arguments over what stages should be legal is like King Solomon cutting the baby in two.

You do also raise a fair point, though I've seen stage picks take much longer then moments in some events but it isn't horribly long I agree. It's not just the fact that we quarrel over stagelists, but I can tell you the part I put in bold has issues as in the past some stages have been banned just because someone didn't like them even though they were perfectly good stages (as stated by those who have banned them). Is that something that should happen, personal bias effecting the ruleset? It could effect it for the worse. In a way, going FD only lifts us from any of those implications and is the closest thing to a tournament ruleset nintendo has ever put out. (Kinda playing devil's advocate here, but am still curious about your response.)

 

[Sobreviviente]

Customizable moves anyone? we already have tones of variety in the game.

Smashville was awesome though.

 

[LiteralGrill]

Customizable moves anyone? we already have tones of variety in the game.

Smashville was awesome though.

Another interesting point, though, does that combat the variety loss from stages? Those may even need their own rules. I'd certainly say it helps the variety idea.

 

[Aninymouse]

This brings up something interesting. How can we know balance is better with more stages or with just FD? There's no way to tell perfectly even with the game out. Still, I can't blame you for not wanting to decide yet.

I don't quite agree with you, here.

Once we have the game, we can see if playing either traditionally or For-Glory-style is a more balanced or fair method of play. Why couldn't we discern such a thing? Is it some mystic spiritual truth, ungraspable by mere human minds? Hardly. Either the game plays in a balanced way, or it doesn't. It's either fair to all the characters, or it isn't. One way will appear superior, and another inferior. Worst-case scenario? For Glory turns out to be the most fair and balanced way to play, after all, and people will be loath to let go of the way it has always been done. But that remains to be seen.

Personally, I believe that picking stages to ban in a traditional way is the best approach. All of the For Glory stages are very likely to be tournament legal, so really, you lose nothing and gain more stages. The only gripe has been a hypothetical one, which is "it might take a long time to strike all the stages you don't want counter-picked," yadda yadda. It's not even the topic at hand, really; seems more like a secondary issue at best. Can't gripe about time constraints before you even decide on a format! But, that can be part of the decision, once we have more to go on.

We need to play the game and see the menus before we have any kind of unilateral decision. It's fine to speculate, as we have done, and even to say, "wow; it sucks, guys, but the boxing ring stage looks banned." That's about as far as you can go without playing it yourself, even seeing the entire menu system and stage list!

 

[LiteralGrill]

I don't quite agree with you, here.

Once we have the game, we can see if playing either traditionally or For-Glory-style is a more balanced or fair method of play. Why couldn't we discern such a thing? Is it some mystic spiritual truth, ungraspable by mere human minds? Hardly. Either the game plays in a balanced way, or it doesn't. It's either fair to all the characters, or it isn't. One way will appear superior, and another inferior. Worst-case scenario? For Glory turns out to be the most fair and balanced way to play, after all, and people will be loath to let go of the way it has always been done. But that remains to be seen.

Personally, I believe that picking stages to ban in a traditional way is the best approach. All of the For Glory stages are very likely to be tournament legal, so really, you lose nothing and gain more stages. The only gripe has been a hypothetical one, which is "it might take a long time to strike all the stages you don't want counter-picked," yadda yadda. It's not even the topic at hand, really; seems more like a secondary issue at best. Can't gripe about time constraints before you even decide on a format! But, that can be part of the decision, once we have more to go on.

We need to play the game and see the menus before we have any kind of unilateral decision. It's fine to speculate, as we have done, and even to say, "wow; it sucks, guys, but the boxing ring stage looks banned." That's about as far as you can go without playing it yourself, even seeing the entire menu system and stage list!

Ah but if the game plays well is so subjective! It's like what stage is best for a character, you'd be surprised how wrong many people were when statistics were taken about such things. The way things "feel" is too large to objectify, and we may even turn out to be wrong. (Brawl seems to be an example.)

I'm definitely not saying FD only is the only way to go, but with the advantages it also presents it's worth considering is all. The effect of having our meta develope quickly and all of us as players grow stronger faster holds some merit too.

 

[Road Death Wheel]

Well iv tried to talk about this my self and im more on the devils side to i guess.
If all the character are optimally balanced on FD. I can only see other levels interfering with certain characters form of play.
My best example is little mac. Lets say meta knight and mac are on fd and both have an equal chance of betting each other.
Now lets say battle fielfd was the choice, (Hypothetical) little mac might be at a instant disadvantage because he is forced to jump while having terrible air game. He may want to keep his feet on the ground but can't because meta knight is exploiting the platforms.
Im in favor for FD only. but im a minority of the community.

 

[Aninymouse]

Ah but if the game plays well is so subjective! It's like what stage is best for a character, you'd be surprised how wrong many people were when statistics were taken about such things. The way things "feel" is too large to objectify, and we may even turn out to be wrong. (Brawl seems to be an example.)

I'm definitely not saying FD only is the only way to go, but with the advantages it also presents it's worth considering is all. The effect of having our meta develope quickly and all of us as players grow stronger faster holds some merit too.

Yes, those all are reasonable points.

Still, this isn't rocket science. Sometimes less than ideal scenarios play out.

I know, for instance, that I wasn't sold on Brinstar being banned. But, enough players wanted it banned, and it happened. So we lost Brinstar. And you know? Not the end of the world.

I think the biggest argument for using For Glory for tournaments, barring any serious character-based balance issues, is the unifying nature of it: keeps it simple; lets us move on to other matters; eliminates bickering over things like Brinstar. That's a pretty nice advantage, really.

But it's still subject to how platform-less play will hash out with the roster. I hate to play "what if" games, but if, say, Little Mac is dominant on stages with nowhere to run with all his speed, priority, super armor, and all the rest... That kind of forces us to consider platform stages, or causes Little Mac to have the Meta Knight stigma. Again, this is all hypothetical and not useful, but it is a way to show how the characters themselves might shepherd us one way or the other when it comes to how we pick stages.

 

[LiteralGrill]

Well iv tried to talk about this my self and im more on the devils side to i guess.
If all the character are optimally balanced on FD. I can only see other levels interfering with certain characters form of play.
My best example is little mac. Lets say meta knight and mac are on fd and both have an equal chance of betting each other.
Now lets say battle fielfd was the choice, (Hypothetical) little mac might be at a instant disadvantage because he is forced to jump while having terrible air game. He may want to keep his feet on the ground but can't because meta knight is exploiting the platforms.
Im in favor for FD only. but im a minority of the community.

What you just described is why people like the counterpick system however, it does add some depth to the game. It is a matter of taste I'm guessing. It's good to have someone in support of this in the thread, it should keep it interesting.

Yes, those all are reasonable points.

Still, this isn't rocket science. Sometimes less than ideal scenarios play out.

I know, for instance, that I wasn't sold on Brinstar being banned. But, enough players wanted it banned, and it happened. So we lost Brinstar. And you know? Not the end of the world.

I think the biggest argument for using For Glory for tournaments, barring any serious character-based balance issues, is the unifying nature of it: keeps it simple; lets us move on to other matters; eliminates bickering over things like Brinstar. That's a pretty nice advantage, really.

But it's still subject to how platform-less play will hash out with the roster. I hate to play "what if" games, but if, say, Little Mac is dominant on stages with nowhere to run with all his speed, priority, super armor, and all the rest... That kind of forces us to consider platform stages, or causes Little Mac to have the Meta Knight stigma. Again, this is all hypothetical and not useful, but it is a way to show how the characters themselves might shepherd us one way or the other when it comes to how we pick stages.

But we already do that! With or normal flat/plat stages we arbitrarily buff and nerf certain characters. In a way you do the same by having more stages too, Brinstar with Wario and Jigglypuff are quite crazy as an example. it is very true that a strike down "FD Only" is very strong in the unifying and simplicity of it, and in ways just taking that stance eliminates the player bias when taking out stages that causes issue. I personally want more stages, but I can see how this could be a good idea.

 

[Road Death Wheel]

Yes, those all are reasonable points.

Still, this isn't rocket science. Sometimes less than ideal scenarios play out.

I know, for instance, that I wasn't sold on Brinstar being banned. But, enough players wanted it banned, and it happened. So we lost Brinstar. And you know? Not the end of the world.

I think the biggest argument for using For Glory for tournaments, barring any serious character-based balance issues, is the unifying nature of it: keeps it simple; lets us move on to other matters; eliminates bickering over things like Brinstar. That's a pretty nice advantage, really.

But it's still subject to how platform-less play will hash out with the roster. I hate to play "what if" games, but if, say, Little Mac is dominant on stages with nowhere to run with all his speed, priority, super armor, and all the rest... That kind of forces us to consider platform stages, or causes Little Mac to have the Meta Knight stigma. Again, this is all hypothetical and not useful, but it is a way to show how the characters themselves might shepherd us one way or the other when it comes to how we pick stages.

I agree
it really is hard to discuss this sort of thing but i do think it should be addressed
I just hope that on FD characters would be on equal footing.
I have no problem with the idea of counter characters. if mac counter samus. i would imagine diddy counters mac with the banana's and what not.
Counter character>counter picks in my opinion.

*edit* @ LiteralGrill
yeah i guess its a matter of taste to an extent. i just find counter pick messy. Plus i personally feel the opposite with the potential characters being viable. If the characters are all (if) balanced for FD i feel less character would be viable for varied stages.

 

[LiteralGrill]

I agree
it really is hard to discuss this sort of thing but i do think it should be addressed
I just hope that on FD characters would be on equal footing.
I have no problem with the idea of counter characters. if mac counter samus. i would imagine diddy counters mac with the banana's and what not.
Counter character>counter picks in my opinion.

If the game became more about character counterpicking there would be a lot more variety as well, possibly a cool amount of it too. Even more hype then more stages is seeing lots of different characters fighting. Remember that time a Luigi player in Brawl ran through a bracket? Or course you do. Remember the time that Rainbow cruise was legal? Not as likely.

 

[ryuu seika]

A Luigi did well in Brawl?

 

[LiteralGrill]

A Luigi did well in Brawl?

to not get too off topic, I remember a tournament where a Luigi beat Rich Brown and almost made it to finals. It sticks with me still and I never forget that hyped match. Which kinda proves the point!

So we don't get too off topic and while you're here, thoughts on FD Only?

 

[Canuckduck]

What if Sakurai, in addition to creating a Final Destination form for each stage, decides to create a Battlefield form for each stage?


I'd much prefer it over just Final Destination in "For Glory" mode.

Also, no, it's too early to consider stage selection for competitive mode.

 

[Road Death Wheel]

What if Sakurai, in addition to creating a Final Destination form for each stage, decides to create a Battlefield form for each stage?


I'd much prefer it over just Final Destination in "For Glory" mode.

Also, no, it's too early to consider stage selection for competitive mode.

It's never to early to discuss the matter.

 

[LiteralGrill]

What if Sakurai, in addition to creating a Final Destination form for each stage, decides to create a Battlefield form for each stage?

I'd much prefer it over just Final Destination in "For Glory" mode.

Also, no, it's too early to consider stage selection for competitive mode.

i prefer to agree that it's never too early. We made some mistakes going from Melee to Brawl, it's better we discuss things now and try to avoid problems.

 

[ryuu seika]

to not get too off topic, I remember a tournament where a Luigi beat Rich Brown and almost made it to finals. It sticks with me still and I never forget that hyped match. Which kinda proves the point!

My point was the reverse, I remember plenty good times on Rainbow Ride but never a competitive Luigi. Oh well, to each their own.

So we don't get too off topic and while you're here, thoughts on FD Only?

I am not a fan of stage limitation (or any other form of play restriction) unless it's heavily warranted but, if the game is truly balanced with for glory in mind and that has a significant gameplay impact, I wouldn't mind seeing two separate metas develop, perhaps even having non-FD stage selection relegated to a small side event.

 

[LiteralGrill]

My point was the reverse, I remember plenty good times on Rainbow Ride but never a competitive Luigi. Oh well, to each their own.

Whoops.. well different stuff is hype for different people right?

I am not a fan of stage limitation (or any other form of play restriction) unless it's heavily warranted but, if the game is truly balanced with for glory in mind and that has a significant gameplay impact, I wouldn't mind seeing two separate metas develop, perhaps even having non-FD stage selection relegated to a small side event.

Well Sakurai did say in an interview that he does balancing battles on FD so who knows? I'm not a huge fan of limiting either but this has attracted me a bit for some reason.

 

[Road Death Wheel]

Whoops.. well different stuff is hype for different people right?



Well Sakurai did say in an interview that he does balancing battles on FD so who knows? I'm not a huge fan of limiting either but this has attracted me a bit for some reason.

I think the idea of the meta being more balanced is what attracts me the most. Like many fighters smash 4 could be adopting the similar arc type of game play in witch each character could have a chance. plus the previous games seemed to only support characters with really good air game witch could still be the case this time around. I just wont understand it when more of the cast is ground orientated.

 

[ryuu seika]

Well Sakurai did say in an interview that he does balancing battles on FD so who knows? I'm not a huge fan of limiting either but this has attracted me a bit for some reason.

I'm still sceptical but I will definitely try it. An FD balanced meta does certainly intrigue me.

 

[Road Death Wheel]

I think if nintendo VGC only support FD rules than we as a community are going to have to develope a meta for it. Like smogon dose VGC doubles battles for pokemon.

 

[LiteralGrill]

It might be worth investing in either way, with a lot of online stuff probably going to happen on the 3DS there is an ample opportunity to test it thoroughly. Honestly I'm surprised more people aren't ringing in on this on the opposite end, any dissenters out there?

 

[Road Death Wheel]

It might be worth investing in either way, with a lot of online stuff probably going to happen on the 3DS there is an ample opportunity to test it thoroughly. Honestly I'm surprised more people aren't ringing in on this on the opposite end, any dissenters out there?

This topic has been addressed on several accounts iin different forums. I would imagine not many people would flock to talk about it again.

 

[Deleted member 245254]

No, a huge part of the game is having different stages to play on.

While I don't necessarily or outright disagree with this statement, I think it's a highly subjective one.

I think more important than a grand selection of stages is a modicum (hopefully more so than its predecessors) of balance, allowing fair play for a maximum variety of characters. If this game is, as stated by Sakurai himself, being balanced to the tune of Final Destination form stages, then For Glory may very well be the format we adopt tournament-side if only because it actually ends up being the most fair, in-obstructive and straight-forward way of deciding who is better between two players. Really this kind of thing we cannot know until we actually get our hands on the game, however right now things are in favor of such a future given Sakurai is trustworthy given what he's said.

My personal opinion is just as everyone else's, a personal one. I live in Japan and play with random Japanese smash communities very often so I'm quite accustomed to seeing only Final Destination, while still seeing the same breadth and variety of winning characters we have current in Melee/Brawl. There really isn't a drastic difference in which characters see superiority most of the time, but when those high tier a-types aren't dominating, what I will tell you is that you very often see characters over here that you see almost never on the western side of things.

You see, I'm under a (possibly misguided) impression that while there are many hot topics out there about tiers and stage viability worth having, that many people tend to be a "follower" on most subjects. Somebody reads on Smashboards that a character is overpowered, then one day they get beat in an online match by one person playing that character and they say to themselves "Damn, that character IS overpowered". From then on, that person feels validated in parroting what they've read, like they've seen it firsthand, even though they may have just been outplayed by a terrible version of that character. It's sort of like balance criticism in this game is a bit like an interesting game of telephone. One high profile player says something about a thing, all of the sudden everyone notices that thing at 10x worse a level than the original player ever meant to criticize.

It's been stated by pros at the international level (mostly western gamers) that platforms are beneficial to character variety so I'm not about to clout and doubt their judgment, but I think that grand over arcing generalizations about how platforms will be necessary in the upcoming smash are just too premature.

I was personally tickled by Sakurai's adding of a Final Destination version for every single stage, and I was actually surprised when I came on here and people were just ******** even louder simply because the mode will seemingly lack platforms. It was a weird juxtaposition from what I had felt when I saw him say it. You can probably attribute this to the fact that Sakurai, himself, is Japanese, so it's likely what he's grown accustomed to understanding in terms of balance, and maybe he's also taking that knowledge he has in to his development, which makes me excited for this game.

All in all, we can't really know how playing on only flat stages will go until we understand the character balance more, but I for one, am greatly looking forward to this sort of "normalization" attempt at a competitive rule set by Sakurai, because it's how I've basically played melee all my life. Everything he said in that direct about why he was forcing For Glory in to FD-like stages applied directly to players like me.

 

[Thor]

Yes make this rule.

Then ban everyone but Fox. No items either.

PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE DON'T TAKE ME SERIOUSLY!!! Don't get rid of Battlefield yet...

 

[Deleted member 245254]

It's also worth noting that the "Fox only, Final Destination" is a stereotype perpetuated by Smashers, within the Smashing community itself. It's not like that's a stereotype that resonates as comedically with new players as it does you or me.

Essentially what I'm saying is I don't really see that as a "con". It's more of an inside joke.

 

[mimgrim]

The only way I can get behind FD only is;

1. CGs are gotten rid of completely (which I really don't want to see happen), from what I heard Japan was FD only in Melee until Ken went there and showed them CGs.

2. Every character is made to at least be decently good at zoning.

3. Every character has a way of dealing with zoning.

The chances of all 3 happening? Pretty low.

 

[Road Death Wheel]

The only way I can get behind FD only is;

1. CGs are gotten rid of completely (which I really don't want to see happen), from what I heard Japan was FD only in Melee until Ken went there and showed them CGs.

2. Every character is made to at least be decently good at zoning.

3. Every character has a way of dealing with zoning.

The chances of all 3 happening? Pretty low.

I think as long as a character can get by zoning. said character wont need to zone.
if sakurai has been paying attention to the competitive play i would imagine that he would not like chain grabs. and focus more on pumbling .

 

[Deleted member 245254]

The only way I can get behind FD only is;

1. CGs are gotten rid of completely (which I really don't want to see happen), from what I heard Japan was FD only in Melee until Ken went there and showed them CGs.

This is a pretty broad assumption, that one player (no matter how prolific) changed the very face of the way Japan plays the game today based on something you "heard". Chain grabbing is also not something with zero counters despite playing on a FD-like stage.

2. Every character is made to at least be decently good at zoning.

3. Every character has a way of dealing with zoning.

The chances of all 3 happening? Pretty low.

I mean there are plenty of examples of fighting games with characters who can and can't zone existing within the same roster that are observed to be pretty balanced even in the the modern FGC, there's really not much more to it than that. It's not so black and white as you're making it seem. Balance doesn't hinge one one, two, or maybe even a little less than a handful of things. Balance is a amalgamation of many concepts done at least fairly right.

 

[mimgrim]

This is a pretty broad assumption, that one player (no matter how prolific) changed the very face of the way Japan plays the game today based on something you "heard".

I trust the person I heard it from a whole heck of a lot more then I do you. And it's a pretty believable scenario anyways.

Chain grabbing is also not something with zero counters despite playing on a FD-like stage.

That could be said for a lot of things. However FD is much more polarizing towards CGs, there is no denying this, because the lack of platforms make it both hard to avoid getting grab and hard to get out of the CG, well the latter part is more for Melee then Brawl.

I mean there are plenty of examples of fighting games with characters who can and can't zone existing within the same roster that are observed to be pretty balanced even in the the modern FGC, there's really not much more to it than that. It's not so black and white as you're making it seem. Balance doesn't hinge one one, two, or maybe even a little less than a handful of things. Balance is a amalgamation of many concepts done at least fairly right.

It's not rocket science.

FD has a history of being polarized towards zoners for both Melee and Brawl, despite both games being very different in how the play, and being bad for characters that don;t have a good counter against zoners.

Other more typical fighting games are hugely different from Smash in how they are played, it's like comparing apples and oranges (they're both fruit or fighting games but they are vastly different in how you eat them and how they taste or how they play and how they are made).

 

[Road Death Wheel]

I trust the person I heard it from a whole heck of a lot more then I do you. And it's a pretty believable scenario anyways.



That could be said for a lot of things. However FD is much more polarizing towards CGs, there is no denying this, because the lack of platforms make it both hard to avoid getting grab and hard to get out of the CG, well the latter part is more for Melee then Brawl.




It's not rocket science.

FD has a history of being polarized towards zoners for both Melee and Brawl, despite both games being very different in how the play, and being bad for characters that don;t have a good counter against zoners.

Other more typical fighting games are hugely different from Smash in how they are played, it's like comparing apples and oranges (they're both fruit or fighting games but they are vastly different in how you eat them and how they taste or how they play and how they are made).

But asking every character to have what you stated is ridiculous you make it seem like its impossible to balance a rush down character against a zoner and vise versa. It's comes off as alot more simple that your trying to make it seems. Even if other fighters can do it. That's no where near something that can't be done on smash. And using history for smash is like using human evolution. Are we still monkeys? no We can all agree melee and brawl were very different games. im sure s,ash 4 arc build will be quite different.

 

[Deleted member 245254]

I trust the person I heard it from a whole heck of a lot more then I do you. And it's a pretty believable scenario anyways.

You don't have to be snotty, but really it has nothing to do with who you trust. What if he told you the earth was flat, would you believe that too? I actually live and play here and Japan, and it's still very much a primarily Final Destination play-style. You don't have to take my word for it at all, I am actually not prone to correct ignorance, I don't mind it. I'm just telling you how it is. You can believe whatever fantasy hero changing the world fairy tale you like.

That could be said for a lot of things. However FD is much more polarizing towards CGs, there is no denying this, because the lack of platforms make it both hard to avoid getting grab and hard to get out of the CG, well the latter part is more for Melee then Brawl.

There's also no denying that every single fighting game has a roster full of checks and balances (particularly in regards to zoning), and in all of the examples I would use, the stage means absolutely nothing.

It's not rocket science.

FD has a history of being polarized towards zoners for both Melee and Brawl, despite both games being very different in how the play, and being bad for characters that don;t have a good counter against zoners.

It most certainly is not, seems like a statement of the obvious.

Doesn't Mew2King play Marth most dominantly when on FD? Marth doesn't have any zoning tools. He just has great spacing/approach.

You're making an absolute conclusion based off of a literal lack of both experience and knowledge of the games mechanics (which have differentiated greatly enough between games for you to be foolish to assume any one thing will be like the other).

Other more typical fighting games are hugely different from Smash in how they are played, it's like comparing apples and oranges (they're both fruit or fighting games but they are vastly different in how you eat them and how they taste or how they play and how they are made).

Much like comparing and judging Smash 4's competitive viability with any sort of ruleset to Melee/Brawl at this point, take your own advice. How do you like them apples and friggin' oranges?

 

[Road Death Wheel]

You don't have to be snotty, but really it has nothing to do with who you trust. What if he told you the earth was flat, would you believe that too? I actually live and play here and Japan, and it's still very much a primarily Final Destination play-style. You don't have to take my word for it at all, I am actually not prone to correct ignorance, I don't mind it. I'm just telling you how it is. You can believe whatever fantasy hero changing the world fairy tale you like.



There's also no denying that every single fighting game has a roster full of checks and balances (particularly in regards to zoning), and in all of the examples I would use, the stage means absolutely nothing.



It most certainly is not, seems like a statement of the obvious.

Doesn't Mew2King play Marth most dominantly when on FD? Marth doesn't have any zoning tools. He just has great spacing/approach.

You're making an absolute conclusion based off of a literal lack of both experience and knowledge of the games mechanics (which have differentiated greatly enough between games for you to be foolish to assume any one thing will be like the other).



Much like comparing and judging Smash 4's competitive viability with any sort of ruleset to Melee/Brawl at this point, take your own advice. How do you like them apples and friggin' oranges?

Dayum bro you kind of make me feel bad that your English is a whole lot better than mine. (you know because it my first language Xd)
But on another note i know your new around here so it might be a bit before people start taking your word. But seriously you come off as incite full unlike another newbie to smash boards.

 

[Admiral Pit]

The fact that FD only can buff characters would irritate me. That's like giving ICs, Diddy, Falco (who are top tiers), and D3 buffs if this actually was a rule in Brawl. *eyetwitch*

So here's my idea: Start with the most basic of 3 stages, with Battlefield and FD being 2 of them, and we can choose to expand on that later on or not after research. But ensure that we get used to the characters themselves so they may not have a game-breaking abusive tactic, take example from Brawl again, D3's old CG on a stage with a wall, but you get the idea. But the tough part on having multiple stages in the ruleset besides determining which ones are legal or not is the fact that we have to work on the 3ds version first, then the WiiU since they do have different stages and all, but I think it can be done through extensive research on the characters and stages. It'll take time, but the variety can be worth it.

 

[Road Death Wheel]

The fact that FD only can buff characters would irritate me. That's like giving ICs, Diddy, Falco (who are top tiers), and D3 buffs if this actually was a rule in Brawl. *eyetwitch*

So here's my idea: Start with the most basic of 3 stages, with Battlefield and FD being 2 of them, and we can choose to expand on that later on or not after research. But ensure that we get used to the characters themselves so they may not have a game-breaking abusive tactic, take example from Brawl again, D3's old CG on a stage with a wall, but you get the idea. But the tough part on having multiple stages in the ruleset besides determining which ones are legal or not is the fact that we have to work on the 3ds version first, then the WiiU since they do have different stages and all, but I think it can be done through extensive research on the characters and stages. It'll take time, but the variety can be worth it.

how do we know that it would only buff certain characters?
How do we know CG is back?
We are talking about this if every character was balanced for FD (not saying its true)

 

[RascalTheCharizard]

As a player who always seems to end up maining characters who stage strike FD as soon as possible, I say with the outmost of bias "no". Or at the very least "sure, but I won't play if we do because I'm a poor sport. "

 

[mimgrim]

There's also no denying that every single fighting game has a roster full of checks and balances (particularly in regards to zoning), and in all of the examples I would use, the stage means absolutely nothing.

In most other fighting games that stage doesn't have as much of an impact as in Smash. Again bad example.

It most certainly is not, seems like a statement of the obvious.

Doesn't Mew2King play Marth most dominantly when on FD? Marth doesn't have any zoning tools. He just has great spacing/approach.

You're making an absolute conclusion based off of a literal lack of both experience and knowledge of the games mechanics (which have differentiated greatly enough between games for you to be foolish to assume any one thing will be like the other).

Marth is one of the best zoners in the game, wtf are you talking about?

His sword gives him great range, which actually is very important to zoning, not to mention his absurd grab. To try and elaborate however; zoning is the act of keeping your opponent away and limit their approaches, and thanks to the range of his sword, and his incredible DD game in Melee, he is a constant threat to approach because of how good he can limit your options and keep you out with his incredible range.

Maybe you should learn more about the game and it's characters before you claim that I don't have any experience or knowledge of the game.

Much like comparing and judging Smash 4's competitive viability with any sort of ruleset to Melee/Brawl at this point, take your own advice. How do you like them apples and friggin' oranges?

History repeats itself.

It happened in 2 games that were rather different from each. Pretty ****ing fair comparison when you think about it like that.

how do we know that it would only buff certain characters?
How do we know CG is back?
We are talking about this if every character was balanced for FD (not saying its true)

If this, if that, if everything.

We have literally nothing to base on how FD only will work in Smash 4 except based on past history.

Past history suggests that FD is not a optimal stage to be the only viable one, the very first game didn't have a true FD, however in the two games after it, it hasn't been enough.

 

[Canuckduck]

Again, I personally regard Final Destination and Battlefield as the quintessential competitive Smash Bros. stages.

Limiting the competitive environment to just Final Destination will heavily give characters with longer range and projectiles an advantage over ones who do not (example = Fox>Bowser)

I'll also reiterate my original idea: in addition to a "Final Destination" form for each stage, give each stage a "Battlefield" form. This will not only make these two stages more expansive, but will also allow Smashers in the "For Glory" lobby to play on both Final Destination and Battlefield. Personally, this would incline me to play that instead of the "For Fun".