Proposed Standardized Ruleset

[Scatz]

Can you link me to this stage? I'd love to try it out and see it for myself. If I find it's good enough I might just revamp the aesthetics a bit and it can be adopted into PM. Maybe not for the next patch but definitely a consideration for the future.

And yeah it's pretty easy to edit anything about stages...this has been my main focus on the team for years now.

There's so much stuff I want to respond to but I have no time because I need to be studying, so I'll come back tomorrow for a lengthier reply. Keep the discussion up and thanks for everyone's input.

Here's the link to the mod: http://forums.kc-mm.com/Gallery/BrawlView.php?Number=205035

I definitely would like to have a discussion on the stage sizes & blastzone lengths/heights. Changing those to help differentiate the currently similarities would add in much more discussion. Can't wait to hear your responses.

 

[SOJ]

The potential problem I see with the Training Room stage though is that it can't be set on the Random Stage Select. That means if you're pressing Y on the SSS it will always automatically ban that stage. We'd have to put it on another slot and I can't think of a slot I'd like to sacrifice for it. Also it gets rid of a stage that people have found a lot of use in with doing lab work. I'll have to think about this one more.

Edit: Would Drac's work as the last stage if we fixed up the problems with it?

 

[TreK]

You could just use the stage layout in another universe completely if your tests reveal that it is indeed a worthwhile stage layout and that you want people to have the opportunity to play on it during tournaments.

The one thing I'm kinda not too sure about is that having the center of stage is a huge advantage, and being under a platform is a huge advantage. Combine the two and it could turn out to be one very snowbally stage.

But back to stages that are actually in 3.5 right now : #FreeSkyworld

 

[EmptySky00]

I actually have no idea about the stage, I've seen it before but the side boundaries were walls which is no bueno. You might be able to pick up a jank version of it from @ E EmptySky00 and fiddle with it from there. the TL;DR is that we need a large stage with no issues for a leaner tournament play experience, so a modified DL64 would also work.

I'm pretty sure I've gotten enough feedback for a preliminary start for a rule set, I'll clean this one up and re-introduce it in the next couple of days.

http://i.imgur.com/IDnlCcb.jpg

? http://www.mediafire.com/download/ccicgmfmz5wx9ya/PM Training Room.zip

Edit: nvm I'm late as usual.

 

[SOJ]

Not gonna lie it looks pretty ugly lol. I'd rather just remake another stage into that design than include that into the build, but the layout looks promising.

 

[Deleted member]

The potential problem I see with the Training Room stage though is that it can't be set on the Random Stage Select. That means if you're pressing Y on the SSS it will always automatically ban that stage. We'd have to put it on another slot and I can't think of a slot I'd like to sacrifice for it. Also it gets rid of a stage that people have found a lot of use in with doing lab work. I'll have to think about this one more.

Edit: Would Drac's work as the last stage if we fixed up the problems with it?

tbh it would be much better to address the issues with DL64 imo

edit: or that ^

 

[Narpas_sword]

having a large stage that isnt jsut a big battlfield would be nice.

But again, we should be making a stage list on what we have NOW, not what may be in the next build.
then when our stagelist is made, the Devs can make the build with that in mind, improve what is needed etc.

 

[TheGravyTrain]

I think Skyworld is the best bet for the final starter. Granted, this is coming from someone with no competitive experience, I just don't see the issue with it. Either that or Dreamland, but so many people complain about its blastzones. Skyworld has much more reasonable blastzones.

 

[Player -0]

Skyworld is too much of a counterpick to be considered in my opinion. It promotes camping to a pretty big degree, completely bones bigger/slower characters, and favors quick, campy characters with a pretty good recovery too much.

I still think Lylat would be one of the better considerations for a neutral. What are the decided neutrals right now? (We're doing 5 neutrals right?)

 

[Leafeon]

having a large stage that isnt jsut a big battlfield would be nice.

But again, we should be making a stage list on what we have NOW, not what may be in the next build.
then when our stagelist is made, the Devs can make the build with that in mind, improve what is needed etc.

I've determined that the indisputable, most best stagelist only consists of three stages.
Yoshi's Story, Battlefield, and Dreamland.

 

[Narpas_sword]

5 with 1-2-1 striking seems legit.
though not sure how the 'neutral spread' works out with 5 stages instead of 7.

5 you usually take 1 small, 3 med, 1 large.
7 would be 2S -3M-2L

There really isnt much that comes under 'large' other than DL64 though...

I've determined that the indisputable, most best stagelist only consists of three stages.
Yoshi's Story, Battlefield, and Dreamland.

bans are done by allocating the stages 1,2 and 3

you then both select a number by holing out the amount of fingers on a hand to ban your choice, and reveal simultaneously (ala Rock Paper Scissors)

if two different stages are banned, play on the one that wasnt.
if you both ban the same, just go to battlefield. even if it was teh one you both banned.

 

[TheGravyTrain]

Skyworld is too much of a counterpick to be considered in my opinion. It promotes camping to a pretty big degree, completely bones bigger/slower characters, and favors quick, campy characters with a pretty good recovery too much.

I still think Lylat would be one of the better considerations for a neutral. What are the decided neutrals right now? (We're doing 5 neutrals right?)

But wouldn't every large stage do that? You could say similar things about small stages, that it favors big hitbox characters too much, favors bigger/slower characters, etc... That is why we have striking. If a hypothetical starter list of WW, BF, SV, PS2, and Skyworld, the heavy would strike skyworld and probably ps2 (though it depends which one) and the opponent would probably strike WW and one of the others.

 

[Player -0]

Skyworld's top platform is a lot higher than a lot of character's first AND second jump. Combined with the fact that it's super long and the platforms of Skyworld are on the far left/right they're not in an ideal position for characters to get to them conveniently to get to the top platform. After they manage to get the platform (if at all), they have to get to the top platform. Also the ground has no platforms to help characters get in versus campy/projectile characters, this further promotes the campiness.

I think Skyworld is a solid CP but as a neutral it's not that great.

 

[PsionicSabreur]

I'm pretty sure Skyworld's top plat is almost the exact same height as DL's, and BF's is higher up than both of them. Maybe the campy-ness comes from the top plat being larger itself, or from it being less accessible from the sides?

 

[Player -0]

Even if that's true, as I said, there are platforms "very" close to the top platform that can be used to access this top platform without too much trouble. The side platforms are also farther horizontally than BF's. Something less prominent but still has an effect is that the clouds can be off setting to players and slow down their movement, especially if they're not used to a stage like it.

Spoiler

 

[jtm94]

I will say Skyworld's top platform does feel very high up for some reason. I think it's mostly due to it being more difficult to just ladder up to it as you could on Battlefield.

I disagree with extremities of PS2, or GHZ being removed imo. PS2's ceiling isn't even extreme, just marginally lower. Very few stages have similar characteristics in terms of close side blast zones/high ceiling or vice-versa and most are just a standard rectangle of moderate ceiling and moderately far out sides just scaled up or down slightly.

I think a design similar to the Training Room stage mention could be an interesting idea. What would the ideal blast zone sizes for it be? Just a standard neutral with Battlefield-like blast zones? Something to serve a slightly large blast zone feel with a marginally higher ceiling and standard side blast zones? I think the latter sounds good if it were used. Also it could be made to replace any stage. There are several forgettable stages in Brawl that can be removed without second thought.

My own personal favorite stage that could be potentially added with some work is this one:

What are potential fixes for Dreamland/Dracula? I myself haven't had any issues on the ledges of Dreamland, but no matter what the blast zones are exponentially large. Whispy Woods is still a nuisance making the camera shake and Dracula's still feels pretty long + the platforms have some weird transitions like all 3 stacked on top of each other and them all very close diagonally.

 

[Sandfall]

My own personal favorite stage that could be potentially added with some work is this one:

What are potential fixes for Dreamland/Dracula? I myself haven't had any issues on the ledges of Dreamland, but no matter what the blast zones are exponentially large. Whispy Woods is still a nuisance making the camera shake and Dracula's still feels pretty long + the platforms have some weird transitions like all 3 stacked on top of each other and them all very close diagonally.

We won't be adding any Smash 4 stages, or stages based off them.

 

[DrinkingFood]

I mean so assuming PMDT is fully on board with this, does our final start list look like:
SV
BF
PS2
GHZ
Something like that weird training room edit up there (medium sized?)

I don't mind too terribly but that starter list only has one stage with a top plat/tri plat layout. I would almost say it's a little bland actually. Replacing GHZ with YS would fix that. But the randall jank tho

 

[Narpas_sword]

id go with wario ware over green hill.

but then again, small stages arent what i play on, so i dont know.

DP for the 5th =D

 

[DrinkingFood]

Lots of people don't like either DP or WW tho. I'd rather expend strikes on stages because they give the opponent an advantage, not because they are jank, I feel most people probably think that way when it comes to starters

 

[Narpas_sword]

i'd hardly call WW jank.

especially compared to the YS cloud.

 

[MegaMissingno]

Edit: Would Drac's work as the last stage if we fixed up the problems with it?

Hell yes please. I love Drac's, and I really wish it could be legal.

 

[jtm94]

We won't be adding any Smash 4 stages, or stages based off them.

Oh that stage is? I did not know.

It's just a platform layout from Delfino placed on top of FoD. You could even remove the top platform of FoD and fix the two lower platforms. It's incredibly easy to replicate that design in PM.

I also agree at the lack of tri plat stages making the neutrals feel bland.

DP isn't too bad if the sides didn't push you away and prohibit sweetspotting.

Very few stages in PM can really be called jank, it's just preference in most cases. If people don't like the stage then there is no reason to use it, but it's hard to justify/cut stages that are so close to usable.

 

[Rizner]

Can we not make a current stage list with future plans? Even if the pmbr is on board, it takes a long time for patches. We should make a list with what's current and say ideally, we would transition stage x for future stage y.

Also, I prefer ys or ww to ghz for a starter. And I'd put fod as the "starter until we have more stages created to consider".
Also if dracs was fixed up, I like what it offers as a stage.

 

[Jacob29]

Umbreon are you going to update the OP?

or are you still going with 3 starters? even though a lot of people have shown how subpar that is.

 

[SOJ]

Umbreon are you going to update the OP?

or are you still going with 3 starters? even though a lot of people have shown how subpar that is.

This is what's currently on the table:

one problem at a time imo, singles stage list should happen first.

since most people here seem to be okay with GHZ i think we need to find a 5th stage for striking. atm my vote is to ask the dev team for a larger stage with no obvious flaws (probably the training room mod or something similar), since norfair distant planet skyworld and dreamland are all pretty flawed imo

im also not too sure about lylat. the way i see the stage list (strictly subjective to me) is that BF SV PS are starters, NF and SW should obviously be banned for promoting degenerate gameplay, which defaults DL and DP to being "big stages", WW and GHZ to being "small stages", and LC, FD, FoD, YI all become more of strategic counterpicks. the issue with LC i think is the same as mute city in melee- there's nothing really wrong with it, but its kind of a jank stage that 90% of people don't want to play on anyway. the best strategy for LC is going there because everyone else hates it. not exactly the best reason to keep a stage imo.

as an aside, i also dont think we want more than 2 big/small stages of each type within a stage list limited to 2 bans. so heres where im at atm

starter-

GHZ
PS
BF
SV
TR (training room, we can get it added pretty easily, or just something similar that is a larger stage that not everyones hates)

CP-

FD
FoD
YI
WW
DP

that gives us 10 stages, which is good variety, strong but not degenerate CP options, people get to keep 5 starters, and a range of axis you can approach a real opponent in a real bracket.

thoughts anyone?

 

[Narpas_sword]

i still think GHZ is a weird choice for small.

I wont complain too much, as the high ceiling will probably save me more as samus, and i wont be so quick to ban it like i do Yoshis.

But as far as stage size and blastzones go, it's almost identical to FoD.
WW and Yoshi are much smaller. GHZ and FoD fit in a more small-med group.
Would FoD then also be a contender for the small stage?

FoD, BF, SV, PS2, DL64?

 

[Player -0]

FoD is almost identical to BF besides a bit smaller horizontal blastzones and lower bottom ones.

Not really sure about FoD vs. GHZ.

 

[DMG]

Just nix the entire small-big paradime. I want to go to Joe's stage size thread, find every stage from 5-10 ish range, make like 2 varying copies of each stage there, and use a starter list of that. I hate trying to conceive of balance for stage sizes when characters sometimes have shifting or conflicting advantages (Small stages, Falcon kills at 50% and on Dreamland, he runs circles around many chars).

Put everyone on medium stages. In fact, someone should make a shrunk FD or a SV clone with no platform. Part of the inbalance is due to stage size, no plats probably functions better with a smaller stage and could be acceptable.

People can try to full stage strike as well, but if the argument is that chars like Bowser need enough small stages that the opponent can't just gg ban to function, striking from the full list is bound to give the other player more leniancy on dealing with big/small stages anyways. 11-13 legal stages, 5-6 strikes. Most stage list might have 3-4 small stages. Guess he's not viable?? eee

 

[Narpas_sword]

FoD is almost identical to BF besides a bit smaller horizontal blastzones and lower bottom ones.

Not really sure about FoD vs. GHZ.

Fod width is a fair bit smaller than BF.
The width and height of GHZ and FoD are near exact though (bottom zone is deeper on fod)

FoDW - GHZ w = 17 units ish (done in head, rounded to whole numbers)
BFW - FodW = 50 units - ish

people should definitely be using @JOE! 's unity tool

 

[TimeSmash]

Why no Dreamland 64? :<

EDIT: It's a great stage with huge blastzones in both directions and tons of offstage space. Meaning that it's one of the few stages where you can counterpick against characters with short distance recoveries. The gameplay on this stage is generally slower and less intense, but banning this stage alongside Skyworld gives characters like Peach and Samus essentially no stages where they can fully utilize their character's strengths.

#TeamYOU

I'd have to say I agree with this. While it does tend to have longer matches, it gives lighter characters a chance to shine, and the wind still gives it a nice edge. People with strong horizontal recoveries also favor this stage. Though it tends to favor lighter characters more, that's the whole point of a counterpick isn't it? Counter is literally in the word.

 

[Jacob29]

This is what's currently on the table:

ah cheers man I musta missed that

 

[Narpas_sword]

#TeamYOU

I'd have to say I agree with this. While it does tend to have longer matches, it gives lighter characters a chance to shine, and the wind still gives it a nice edge. People with strong horizontal recoveries also favor this stage. Though it tends to favor lighter characters more, that's the whole point of a counterpick isn't it? Counter is literally in the word.

are you saying it should be in counterpicks, not starters then?

 

[jtm94]

I like FoD, but people will argue that the platforms give it a CP role.

The entire small vs big debate is dumb. Blast zones aren't all that matter, stage surface area is a huge part of it too. Too small and you can't move, too big and the slower character loses. That's primarily why I don't like PS2 as all that neutral. FD also doesn't deserve to be neutral 1. because no plat. and 2. because it's almost Dreamland big. Even if we shrink the blastzones on Dreamland the stage still will not feel neutral.

I don't think the neutral stages need big or small stages at all. We only need them in CPs because as DMG said some characters rely on them.

to be constructive my thoughts on what's on the table:
starter-

GHZ On the small side, but it has a BF-sized ceiling and I like that.
PS I don't like how big it is, but it's tried and trued as a decent stage
BF perfect
SV perfectly fine
TR I would be fine with something like FoD. Lylat. Metal Cavern. Or something like Smashville with a center platform that doesn't move in this spot.

CP-

FD Good for CGs and large blast zones/stage size good for recovery
FoD Solid, arguable a suitable neutral with dynamic tri-plats
YI Another small stage
WW I like this stage
DP The weird slopes on the sides are an issue.

 

[TimeSmash]

are you saying it should be in counterpicks, not starters then?

Yeah, I'd rather have it in counterpicks, but I'm not exactly against it being a starter. Either way, I just wouldn't want it to be straight out banned.

 

[Narpas_sword]

Can we stop putting 'training room' in our lists?

Make a list on what we have. If SOJ says hes going to repurpose a stage for a Neutral, then we can have a 7 page thread arguing on how it should be, then include it once it's made.
For now though we need a list that will work for PM3.5. not PmFutureBuild

Also, why is FoD considered counter-pick with it's moving platforms, but GHZ is neutral?

We've got GHZ and FoD - both near enough the same side and ceiling blast-zones, and both the same size main stage. difference in platforms and bottom blast-zone. Both, in my mind, are a 'small-med' size

BF and Smashville have virtually the same blast-zones and main stage. Obviously platforms are the big difference here.

PS2 is a large platform, with wider blast-zones, but lower ceiling. (compared to BF)

If you use those 5, you have 2 small-med, 2 med (if we define BF as medium) and 1 Wide.
Essentially 5 medium/near medium stages that are all pretty fair.

Nothing really small (Yoshi, WW).
Nothing Huge (DL64).
Nothing too janky (come on, we can all cope with moving platforms).
And nothing you really go 'ban that instantly vs x character' as far as i can tell.

GHZ (Small,Med)
FoD (Small,Med)
BF (Med,Med)
SV (Med,Med)
PS2 (Large,Med)

 

[Player -0]

If discussing stages I propose having two details noticed for the size. First, the actual stage size. Second, how far the blastzones are from the stage. This would be accomplished by having a comma and then the blastzone information.

Ex:
Metal Cavern (Small, Large)

This would allow for more clarification when people mean big or small. I see a lot of "That stage is actually small!" when sometimes the blastzones make it big.

^

 

[DrinkingFood]

FoD I guess I could get behind as the fifth stage. I don't think most people hate it as much as I do. I'll just strike it every time lol.

 

[Strong Badam]

I'm just poking in to remind everyone that the term "Neutral" is obsolete and has been since 2009-ish with the advent of stage striking. We use the term "starter" and are trying to make a set of stages that, when struck from, results in a more or less fair starting stage for most matchups. Not a set of stages that are all fair in all matchups.

 

[Narpas_sword]

SO yea, definitely liking this:

But switching FD and Fod

No way should FD be a starter