I have a huge problem with the current stage ruleset.

[Laijin]

So I've been gone from the scene for about a year 1/2 and I return to find out the stage rulesets have been modified. Kongo Jungle 64 is no longer a legal counter pick and neither are Brinstar or Rainbow Cruise. What is this garbage? Is the community suddenly so scared of ANY stage hazards now? Even though the stages I listed barely have any stage hazards.

Those stages were perfectly fine. I don't want to go on a huge rant here, but I want a valid explanation as to why Pokemon Stadium is literally the only counter pick stage now because I'll be up front and honest about how I feel, this is pretty huge load of bull****.

And now for some of my favorite posts in the thread(to save you time from having to scroll through the thread):

This is ridiculous, in that a number of banned stages are perfectly viable in "competitive viability." There is no internal logic as to why the randomness of Yoshi's Story is preferable to the randomness of Brinstar - if anything, the randomness of Brinstar is easier to predict and handle, and 8-10 stages beyond what are available now were never proven to be significantly worse than what's on the current list. It is 100% the preference of the people in charge, which is always a blend of top players and TOs. If you want to get intellectual about it, one should generally try to keep the things that make a game unique rather than eliminate what we think shouldn't be in there. Not that you can't take the latter tactic, but then you're taking control over the spirit of the game.

This is how you define a ruleset with internal logical consistency: http://www.smashboards.com/showthread.php?t=308701

It has goals, key value drivers, and it follows the rules it sets up for itself. Is it perfect? No, but it gives a foundation for game theory discussion where everyone knows what the foundation is. The current ruleset has no such basis - it's simply an amalgamation of "what people want" and "no jank." If it has been defined somewhere, then I would like to see it.

Again, there's nothing wrong with that, but let's not pretend like there's anything intellectually pure about it.

I always viewed the stage list as another level of depth in melee. Knowing how to use a stage vs your opponent always seemed similar to knowing character matchups.

I feel like people overstate how winnable or unwinnable a matchup is, in the same way they overstate how much stages affect matchups. Countless matches in tournament are won by a person playing the character with the believed disadvantage, due to him either being a better player or having greater knowledge of the matchup (stage). I think you can use the same logic that most people in this thread have used about stages to say that you should ban characters to make the game more balanced.

The fact is most stages never reached a point where someone was consistently beating a much better player with more knowledge of the stage just because they were playing a specific character. To me that would be a broken stage, but it was mostly speculation, theory, and players not valuing stage knowledge that led to stage bans. This has always made me a little sad.

Disagree. Actually, disagree with almost everything you've said in this thread. Why is public expression in a grassroots community based on a forum considered an ineffective tool? Why are we garnering support from a very minor fraction of the player base? To further skew their influence? The competitive scene does not cater to a handful of players.

Why are the stages banned? We had them legal for years and they posed no threat to our tournament operations. Lots of players still want them legal, the abuse of them was extremely limited to pocket cases to the point of being negligible, they had no negative ramifications on our tournament logistics and offered no variance in results. This suggests that they are banned for the only good reason left: simply because some players do not want them legal. This is fine if the majority of the community agrees on this point, but that decision was made without consulting the player base at large.

Why is counter picking needed? This is a loaded question. Of course it's not needed, but it still shapes the face of what competitive play looks like. I would like for my game to not look like street fighter. I believe that additional stages test skill with real returns and margins for one to gain an advantage on the opponent. On this point, I feel that "Battlefield Only" is a particularly terrible idea for only testing players' abilities to waveland at a specific platform height, play to a specific subset of rules for edge games, eliminate other strategies with depth like chaingrabs, and so on. The addition of a counter pick system is one of my sources of the intricate depth that draws players to this game over alternative games.

I can keep going if you want, but it wouldn't really matter. The point is that sound logical arguments exist to keep the prior system and that dropping it was a matter of preference, a preference that was never really checked with any feedback to/from the community. This is not a decision that was particularly necessary.

And here is something different to think about that has been bought up a few times in this thread.

Both sides appear to be in a deadlock so Idk if we will come to a solution about freeing some unbanned stages but I feel the thread brought up another point that we seem to be more in agreement on which is the role of the neutral stages in relation to removing bans. This quote got me to start thinking a little bit differently.

My beef with the counterpicks is that with stage bans, the list becomes incredibly limited.... If the starter stages are as neutral and as winnable as they are articulated, then you shouldn't be able to ban them.

A valid point. I want to extend this point into the relevance of neutral stages and question if such a thing actually exists in Smash. Through this analysis, maybe it will help both sides have a common ground so we start to resolve the "stage argument" regarding bringing back more stages:


It seems that while reading through this thread what defines the quality of a stage (neutral/counterpick/banned) has been mixed up and is not consistent which leads me to believe that there is no such thing as neutral stages. Atm competitive smash matches are based around this qualification of "neutral vs counterpick" stages since every set must begin with 1 of the chosen 5 "neutral" stages. This begs the question, "What factors determines what makes a stage neutral or counterpick?"

The obvious first answer is one where the stage itself is of neutrality where it doesn't directly influence the match by "fighting back" with the players so to speak aka the moving stages or hazards. If one were to go by this definition of a neutral stage then it is proven by comparing FD to Stadium but it is disproven by comparing FD to Yoshis. If direct stage influence puts FD and Stadium in 2 different categories, then why are FD and YI in the same category? This is one inconsistency and is a point against the idea of neutral stages existing.

The second possible answer would be that stage layout plays a big factor in determining a stages quality in relation to matchups and a character's innate ability to exploit it. Example would be that Stadium is a CP because Fox dominates on that stage or that Hyrule/Great bay is banned because characters can exploit it by playing keep away. Once again, if you apply this to the "Neutral stages" you will see an inconsistency.
*If you compare FD to BF you will find that while both are labeled as "neutral" they are completely opposite of each other on the neutral spectrum depending on the match up. Case in point: IC does way better with platforms vs flat stage so in their eyes, FD and BF do not give them the same odds even though they are in the same category
*Compare Dreamland to Yoshis: Both Tri-plat stage however the size makes a huge difference on the MU. Case in point is Falcon who excels more in bigger stages or Peach whose longevity is reduced in YI vs DL.

So is there really such thing as a "Neutral" stage or is every stage actually better qualified as a CP? It would seem that the latter is the case.

__________
TL;DR: This analysis further validates DoH's idea that we should remove bans and maybe it will make us think differently about the current state of a smash set. Some further ideas to think about are:

-Should there be a list of Neutral Stages at all?
-Should we limit the first match of a set to a handful of 5 arbitrary, predetermined stages instead of limiting the stage choices on a MU by MU basis?
-What new stages can be added based on the perspective of all stages being CP to varying degrees?
-If both characters can equally exploit a stage that currently banned, should it still banned or should it be legal on a case by case basis?

 

[Renth]

Agreed .

 

[Laijin]

My biggest concern at the moment is this new stage ruleset actually becoming the official ruleset for EVO. That would be a huge let down and only reinforce certain stereotypes about our community.

 

[MountainGoat]

So what exactly is your argument? We should keep those stages in because we shouldn't be afraid of stage hazards? What benefit is there to playing goofy random stages?

 

[Laijin]

What benefit is there to playing goofy random stages?

They are called counter picks for a reason and I don't really see how they are "goofy". They are perfectly valid stages, otherwise we wouldn't have been playing on them for so many years.

 

[-ACE-]

battlefield only.

 

[Jockmaster]

The thing about those stages is that in their case, the stage has a MUCH greater affect on gameplay than the ones we subscribe to now

Also, why do we NEED counterpicks? Everyone claims to love having more of them but what are they good for? Giving certain characters a ******** advantage?

 

[Cactuar]

The reason those stages were removed has nothing to do with fear. The majority of the tournament scene has wanted to move towards having a full set of matches where the stage does not contribute in a major way to either player having an advantage/disadvantage.

 

[Vudujin]

Counter-picking was a part of the game that wasn't a part of the fight. It closes the gaps between the tiers in some cases. All 3 of those stages are fine. Let's not forget why you get bans. It's actually shocking how many times I've been told by the opponent that they don't care to ban anything in a set.

 

[Cactuar]

I generally disagree that they close the gap between tiers. The advantage that a player tends to gain from using those stages is mostly from the opponent not knowing how to play on those stages, which is incredibly common, as nearly everyone plays the standard 5 or 6 in practice and in casual play. The argument is often made that "they should learn the stages then", but that statement doesn't address how big of a waste of time it would be to have players do that, as the ability to play on those stages generally contributes nothing to the player's ability to play on the stages that they will spend 99.9% of their time on, and how "learning the stage" generally implies just finding a single/few mechanics to abuse on that stage and completely focusing your game on it.

The counterpick stages are boring once you get past the idea of them being "different".

 

[Laijin]

The reason those stages were removed has nothing to do with fear. The majority of the tournament scene has wanted to move towards having a full set of matches where the stage does not contribute in a major way to either player having an advantage/disadvantage.

That is why its called Counter Picking. Some characters are better on some stages than others. If your character has a particular disadvantage on a stage, that is why you are able to ban that stage. The three stages that was previously counter picks(Rainbow Cruise, KJ64 and Brinstar) did not give any SUPER major significant advantages to certain characters like other previously legal but ended up being completely banned stages did(Corneria, Kongo Jungle, Poke Floats, Mute City, etc etc).

Literally the only valid reason for getting rid of these stages is that the random handful of melee players who came up with the decision don't like the stages. Thats about it. You can't really honestly say with a straight face "majority of the tournament scene" when there wasn't any sort of vote or anything with the community. That is entirely a baseless assumption.

 

[Cactuar]

Why do you think counterpicking is necessary?

 

[Laijin]

Why do you think counterpicking is necessary?

Shouldn't that be a pretty obvious answer? If I'm playing Young Link vs (insert any character here), why wouldn't I want more space to throw my projectiles at them? So I'd ban FD/Yoshi/(insert small stage here) and counter pick a level that gives me plenty of space to camp(Dreamland, Kongo Jungle 64, Rainbow Cruise, etc etc).

Some characters perform better on some stages, while others on other stages. That is a pretty obvious answer.

 

[Cactuar]

Right, you want to be able to create advantage for yourself and disadvantage for your opponent.

We still want the ability to choose between having forced tight space, which we get with FoD and Yoshi's, mid sized noninteractive stage, which we get with battlefield, and big stages to allow space for heavy retreating/room to camp, which we get with DL, PS to some extent.

What value do you feel the other three stages are providing that you can't get with the neutrals?

 

[Vudujin]

It's fun!!!!!!!!!

 

[Cactuar]

Great, so play those stages in casuals. While we do want the players to have fun, this is about the competitive scene, so you have to consider having consistent balanced play at the same time.

 

[Laijin]

Right, you want to be able to create advantage for yourself and disadvantage for your opponent.

We still want the ability to choose between having forced tight space, which we get with FoD and Yoshi's, mid sized noninteractive stage, which we get with battlefield, and big stages to allow space for heavy retreating/room to camp, which we get with DL, PS to some extent.

What value do you feel the other three stages are providing that you can't get with the neutrals?

Well you have yet to give a good reason why those stages are illegal. Just cause people don't like it isn't really a good reason, nor is "Well its a waste of time for them to play on it" isn't a good reason either. If its a legal tournament stage, then its their responsibility to know how to navigate around the level.

Really man? Its pretty clear why those stages are different but I guess i'll give a short explanation since you probably have not played on those stages in years or somethin'. I can only really speak for myself when it comes to these levels.

Kongo Jungle 64 has much higher platforms than any of the neutral stages you listed. The rotating platforms in the center help with camping way more than Dreamland or Pokemon Stadium. If you're trying to play campy, its pretty clear KJ64 is the best counter pick. Being a Young Link player myself, its a very easy decision as to why I prefer this over Dreamland or PS.

Rainbow Cruise is easily the largest level out of the counter picks. It lets you run away AND camp, something other stages don't have it. This was an alternative to the banned Poke Floats, which was banned because of the wall I'm guessing? I'm not sure why that was banned either tbh

Brinstar is pretty unique. Its pretty self explanatory why this is different than the other neutrals. The platforms are pretty useful, small ceiling and sides lets even spacies kill easily on here. It has something for everyone.

 

[Vudujin]

Those 3 stages are all consistent enough to be played in tourney. . . . because they already have been.

Here's what those stages offer that the others don't

KJ64- Rewards players who can recover creatively: Recovery is a staple skill based aspect of this game
It's like a variant of Yoshi's with Randall except the large size of the stage and the unique platform structure make it entirely different. The platforms and the barrel are on a timer so nothing's random.

Brinstar-This is the stage that pretty much shrinks some of those tier gaps. Every fast-faller is amazing and this stage punishes hard if you fall off it. This gives people who use a bad character an opportunity to either force a switch or enjoy throwing a spacey off of the stage. NEW ELEMENT that no other stage brings to the table. Lava timings are predictable as all hell.

Rainbow Cruise-This stage forces a cat and mouse vibe. This is the only fair moving stage. Being that it's fair and was once a counter-pick it should remain the same. The stage moves slowly, predictably, and in such a way where anyone could have an amazing advantage depending on a player's platforming skill which is also a staple skill element in the competitive scene.

If you don't think recovering, survival, and platforming skill should be rewarded in a tournament setting then I'd be speechless until I thought of something to say.

 

[Cactuar]

KJ64 was banned because it promotes stalling, not camping. We have tournament sets between high level players demonstrating this. It isn't something we encourage.

Rainbow Cruise is banned for similar reasons to Pipes, which is the super low ceiling issue for roughly 1/3rd of the stage rotation.

You are going to have to make a more convincing argument for brinstar being legit than "the platforms are useful and spacies can kill on this stage the same way they would on other stages."

"If it's a tournament legal stage, then it's their responsibility to know how to navigate on it."
Given that we determine, as a community, what stages are legal by communicating with TO's, this statement is perfect. The general consensus that TOs have gotten from their local communities have been that the players do not want to learn to navigate on those stages, and, just like that, those stages are no longer tournament legal.

I think you don't understand how the process here really works. The stage list the MBR puts out is a reflection of the direction TOs and tournaments have been going. We do not dictate to the TOs. They make (or should be making) those decisions based on what their local community wants.

The result of those stages being legal in tournament was that players didn't want them to stay legal. Regardless of "reasons", if the players don't want it, and the TO is convinced, it gets changed. You really shouldn't use "they are fair because they were once used in tournament" as a point in your argument.


If you want to make the argument that those stages should be legal again, you start with your locals. If you are trying to get an event like Evo to make those stages legal, you need to be talking to the TOs that host national scale events and getting some agreement from people who hold weight. These things still come down to "popular opinion".

 

[Jockmaster]

We should no introduce counterpick stages simply to manually balance the cast. Yeah it sucks that YLink and Mario are bad characters, but giving them a stage that just gives them a stupid advantage simply from the jankness of the stage is NOT a competitively sound idea.

We have the stage list that we subscribe to know pretty much because of the fact that it is impossible to settle on one "most balanced" stage (and with the influence of those who want more stages simply for some arbitrary "variety"). Think about it, the idea of counterpicking is absurd in a competitive environment. You are knowingly giving yourself an unfair advantage to beat an opponent. Yes, having more stages is fun and all, but they shouldn't be legally played just because MUH FUN

 

[JPOBS]

Battlefield only
M2K clause: m2k is allowed to counterpick FD as marth.

^most fair/entertaining ruleset

 

[Vudujin]

Oh well. I suppose your right. I honestly just liked those stages while they lasted.

 

[leffen]

IIT random, under average players complain about the stagelist and demand answers instead of looking through the millions of topics on the same subject


seriously, find a top player that wants a bigger stagelist and I'll be surprised.

 

[Cactuar]

Yeah, there's not much else to be said. If you want this kind of change, you need to talk to high-top level players directly and gather support for it. Flailing around on the forums, complaining that it isn't the way you want it to be, doesn't accomplish much.

 

[Gea]

We should no introduce counterpick stages simply to manually balance the cast. Yeah it sucks that YLink and Mario are bad characters, but giving them a stage that just gives them a stupid advantage simply from the jankness of the stage is NOT a competitively sound idea.

It all depends on your philosophy. We should not ban stages simply to manually balance the cast. It works both ways. I'm also kind of... intrigued by Cactuar's posts. Why are you trying to give a justification on banning the stages when you've already said it's more about what TOs (and hopefully the actual players) prefer to play on more than any other reason?

Regardless, I understand why things are the way they are and why certain players prefer certain things over others. I think KishPrime has the right idea and we should embrace what the game offers as long as it doesn't become overcentralizing. I also sort of feel like a small stagelist makes for a currently problematic ruleset for longer sets (best of 5 and 7), but that's another discussion entirely and I would agree that artificially extending the stagelist to lessen that awkwardness isn't ideal. I will say that right now none of our stages have non-solid edges or a high ceiling with close sides.

Also honest question: Did anyone besides PinkShinobi stall on Kongo Jungle? Obviously that's the most famous set, and I've always been curious if there were more that I was unaware of.

 

[leffen]

if you have an iq point or two you can imagine what would happen with peach/ics/ganon/doc vs fox/falcon/falco on that stage lol.

 

[stelzig]

Smasher89 enjoys camping on it (not with ice climbers obviously) to time people out easily. Maybe partly to prove a point too, but idk. It is smasher89 lol.

Kongo Jungle 64 has much higher platforms than any of the neutral stages you listed. The rotating platforms in the center help with camping way more than Dreamland or Pokemon Stadium.

Exactly why this stage is only somewhat fine in teams where camping for 8 minutes isn't as easy.

 

[Laijin]

KJ64 was banned because it promotes stalling, not camping. We have tournament sets between high level players demonstrating this. It isn't something we encourage.

Rainbow Cruise is banned for similar reasons to Pipes, which is the super low ceiling issue for roughly 1/3rd of the stage rotation.

You are going to have to make a more convincing argument for brinstar being legit than "the platforms are useful and spacies can kill on this stage the same way they would on other stages."

"If it's a tournament legal stage, then it's their responsibility to know how to navigate on it."
Given that we determine, as a community, what stages are legal by communicating with TO's, this statement is perfect. The general consensus that TOs have gotten from their local communities have been that the players do not want to learn to navigate on those stages, and, just like that, those stages are no longer tournament legal.

I think you don't understand how the process here really works. The stage list the MBR puts out is a reflection of the direction TOs and tournaments have been going. We do not dictate to the TOs. They make (or should be making) those decisions based on what their local community wants.

The result of those stages being legal in tournament was that players didn't want them to stay legal. Regardless of "reasons", if the players don't want it, and the TO is convinced, it gets changed. You really shouldn't use "they are fair because they were once used in tournament" as a point in your argument.


If you want to make the argument that those stages should be legal again, you start with your locals. If you are trying to get an event like Evo to make those stages legal, you need to be talking to the TOs that host national scale events and getting some agreement from people who hold weight. These things still come down to "popular opinion".

You know, the same argument could be used for some of the neutrals. Fountain of Dreams gives a significant advantage to some characters because of the platforms and low ceiling. Why don't we ban that stage?

Dreamland is huge and gives a HUUUGE advantage to characters with really good recovery. Peach, Samus, Jigglypuff, etc etc are all way better on here than some other characters. Why not ban that stage cause of the massive advantage it gives to those characters?

I'm to basically demonstrate how ridiculous sounding this argument is. If players don't want to learn a stage, then like I said that is their fault. I don't really believe its the "general consensus" of the entire community. I honestly think its probably more like 50/50. Yes its up to the TOs, but I certainly don't want to see this very limited ruleset at a national like EVO or something.

IIT random, under average players complain about the stagelist and demand answers instead of looking through the millions of topics on the same subject


seriously, find a top player that wants a bigger stagelist and I'll be surprised.

Calling people you've never seen before "random under average players" adds literally nothing to the conversation and only makes you look like a ****. Go away. Nobody likes you. Why do you still even post on swf?

 

[Cactuar]

So prove that its only 50/50. Start talking to the high and top level players and see what they want.

 

[UltiMario]

Brinstar is a legit as **** stage. It had the biggest hazards of the "recently" banned counterpicks but in terms of not giving huge advantages in some match-ups is was easily the most balanced in that regard.

Needs to be at EVO 2013/Apex 2014.

 

[Gea]

if you have an iq point or two you can imagine what would happen with peach/ics/ganon/doc vs fox/falcon/falco on that stage lol.

I'm asking to see tournament footage of that. The only footage we have that I am aware of is of a Peach vs a Ganon. I'm not even currently campaigning for the stage, I'm asking to see the stalling the stage encourages.

 

[leffen]

You can complain at me "not knowing" you or whatever, but you have no idea if I actually know how hilariously average you are (protip: youtube)


Face it, you're not smart enough and you don't have enough influence to convince ANYONE with complicated principles or your discussion skills over smashboards. This subject has already been dealt with a million times, and its your responsibility to convince top players, host tournaments and come up with tournament footage that shows that stalling/degenerate types of play CAN'T happen.

Saying "I want tournament footage" really shows how out of touch you are. You aren't the people who decide, and the absolute majority of all TOs/Players DON'T want a bigger stagelist, thus the burden of proof is actually on you, maybe that's unfair but that is the way it is, and you need to accept it if you wanna achieve anything.

Oh, and there is tournament footage, but that isnt even needed, thats the whole point.

 

[Gea]

I'll try to remember that next time I request to see some tournament footage with no motive other than wanting to see it, I may not have proper clearance. Thanks for the reality check, Leffen.

 

[leffen]

That wasnt in response to you, you sensitive little random.

 

[Gea]

I was the only person requesting any footage. sir professional.

 

[Laijin]

Really hard to take you seriously if you throw insults in your posts. It basically invalidates your opinion

 

[leffen]

Not when they are true.

and that is a wonderful way of not having to answer my legit points lmao

 

[UltiMario]

You can complain at me "not knowing" you or whatever, but you have no idea if I actually know how hilariously average you are (protip: youtube)


Face it, you're not smart enough and you don't have enough influence to convince ANYONE with complicated principles or your discussion skills over smashboards. This subject has already been dealt with a million times, and its your responsibility to convince top players, host tournaments and come up with tournament footage that shows that stalling/degenerate types of play CAN'T happen.

Saying "I want tournament footage" really shows how out of touch you are. You aren't the people who decide, and the absolute majority of all TOs/Players DON'T want a bigger stagelist, thus the burden of proof is actually on you, maybe that's unfair but that is the way it is, and you need to accept it if you wanna achieve anything.

Oh, and there is tournament footage, but that isnt even needed, thats the whole point.

I remember when this exact argument very nearly down to a tee was used for not banning stages.

Logical fallacies ftw

 

[BTmoney]

I'll try to remember that next time I request to see some tournament footage with no motive other than wanting to see it, I may not have proper clearance. Thanks for the reality check, Leffen.

Lol. It's not your fault. I don't think you could have stated your position more neutrally.

 

[Laijin]

Not when they are true.

and that is a wonderful way of not having to answer my legit points lmao

I dont really want to talk to someone who can't have a conversation without throwing out insults. Also I have no idea who you are, so basically you are a random scrub to me who can't have a proper conversation. I should just add you to my ignore list tbh