• Welcome to Smashboards, the world's largest Super Smash Brothers community! Over 250,000 Smash Bros. fans from around the world have come to discuss these great games in over 19 million posts!

    You are currently viewing our boards as a visitor. Click here to sign up right now and start on your path in the Smash community!

Requesting Feedback - A Potential Alternate Rule Set

DerfMidWest

Fresh ******
Joined
Mar 31, 2011
Messages
4,063
Location
Cleveland, OH
Slippi.gg
SOFA#941
hyrule is another stage that should be banned.

we should work out a hypothetical banned stage list for this ruleset.

I propose:
-hyrule
-brinstar depths
-flatzone
-big blue
-icicle mountain

I like the idea of having a lot of stages, but there are some stages that are just insta-wins for certain characters (or they are flatzone/depths/Icicleland, which shouldn't exist)
 

Jolteon

I'm sharpening my knife, kupo.
Joined
Aug 9, 2006
Messages
6,697
Location
England
Too much of this topic if hypothetical (I do think Hyrule has glaring foreseeable problems, though).

I'm going to try a variation of this and see what I like about it.
 

danieljosebatista

Smash Journeyman
Joined
Jul 18, 2011
Messages
241
Location
Evanston, IL / Miramar, FL
Unless he's losing. There is no reason to approach (unless camping is unviable, which isn't usually the case in Melee) when you're down and there is no timer forcing you to make that up.
That's true, but even if he doesn't approach, he's still losing. He's free to run away as much as he wants running simply won't win the game for you. Also, I think people are really caught up in their defensive mindsets and forget that often times, running or camping too much actually puts you in an awful position. As a fellow Marth player, I'm sure you agree that you'd take 50% of damage from laser camping if it means one grab on fox. Barring stages like hyrule, I don't see what the loser stands to gain from running away when he is down. He will eventually put himself in a bad position
 

oliman

Smash Journeyman
Joined
Dec 2, 2008
Messages
274
Location
The 216
i love extra stages, but this goes too far. fox could potentially dominate on many of these stages (im thinking hyrule, the big yoshi stage, etc). the timer also may be a little too short.
 

1048576

Smash Master
Joined
Oct 1, 2006
Messages
3,417
why not just pick the seven stages that each round will use? neutals + stadium + brinstar seems fine.
 

Divinokage

Smash Legend
Joined
Aug 6, 2006
Messages
16,250
Location
Montreal, Quebec
i love extra stages, but this goes too far. fox could potentially dominate on many of these stages (im thinking hyrule, the big yoshi stage, etc). the timer also may be a little too short.
But then you could fight fire with fire or choose another character appropriate with your stage selection or his stage selection. With that many stages, I think there needs to be a rule where someone is limited to only CPing a stage or a character.. if not for sure there's gonna be only Fox as it was already proven years ago.
 

ph00tbag

C(ϾᶘϿ)Ͻ
Joined
Mar 16, 2007
Messages
7,245
Location
NC
Okay, so I really just take issue with the hypothesis that increasing the number of available stages will increase the viability of non-viable characters. I feel like a broken record, but it apparently can't be reiterated enough that Fox, Falco and Sheik are the reason most banned stages are banned in the first place. You're welcome to test your hypothesis, but as far as I can tell the root cause of the suggestion is a willful ignorance of at least five years worth of data to the contrary.

Other than that, I don't really see a problem with the ruleset.
 

Kal

Smash Champion
Joined
Dec 21, 2004
Messages
2,974
I am of the same opinion: anything presently banned for being broken will end up banned for the same reason in this new ruleset. It's still important to do some testing I think.
 

QERB

Banned via Warnings
Joined
Jul 8, 2006
Messages
437
Location
Central Jersey
this sounds new and exciting but also scary at the same time. i would be down to try it out for a little to see how i like it tho
 

oukd

Smash Lord
Premium
Joined
Apr 21, 2010
Messages
1,464
Too much hypothesizing in this thread...run mock tourneys or something to see how it turns out. Personally I think it's a solid idea, just needs to rough out the specifics.
 

-ACE-

Gotem City Vigilante
Joined
Sep 25, 2007
Messages
11,536
Location
The back country, GA
Hypothesized that this would suck. Then I playtested it. It sucks.

3 stock 5 minutes would be a lot more interesting to test at a tourney, for ****s and giggles imo.
 

KrIsP!

Smash Champion
Joined
Oct 8, 2007
Messages
2,599
Location
Toronto, Ontario
Hypothesized that this would suck. Then I playtested it. It sucks.

3 stock 5 minutes would be a lot more interesting to test at a tourney, for ****s and giggles imo.
I played 3 stocks 5 minutes and it honestly felt no different from a regular match...at all other than it was shorter. I'd be in favor of testing that more than anything else mentioned.
 

ph00tbag

C(ϾᶘϿ)Ͻ
Joined
Mar 16, 2007
Messages
7,245
Location
NC
I don't really care much about stock count. I think four stocks is fine, but if people want to experiment with fewer stocks and more games, that's a fair experiment.

I do think a shorter timer might be in order. Smashers just need to stop getting their panties in a twist about time-outs.
 

phish-it

Smash Champion
Joined
Apr 4, 2004
Messages
2,096
Location
Mahopac, NY
Interesting.... I'm all for giving it a shot, although a 4 minute timer sounds more appealing to me, (the shorter the time limit the more applicable camping and running the clock out). There are some stages that would be really imbalanced for this that have already been mentioned.

Although it adds some diversity I don't really see it favoring low tier character as someone mentioned earlier, I see it is buffing fox instead. If he can't waveshine you off a walk off edge or infinite you against a wall he can run away/in circles and laser camp you until the clock runs out. So..... ban fox and the rule set would be perfect!/ imnotserious


However, if the players get the right amount of stage bans it could work.
 

DerfMidWest

Fresh ******
Joined
Mar 31, 2011
Messages
4,063
Location
Cleveland, OH
Slippi.gg
SOFA#941
so I played this ruleset crap last night with my friends...
its not very fun...
the games are just too short.

I do like the more stages and stuff and the general idea behind this, but 2 stock is just not enough.

also we kinda found out that laser camping fox is a problem.
Fox is kinda ******** good with these rules because he can easily time out the game and he's good on every damn stage <_<

I do like the idea behind this though... maybe if it were a little bit longer?
like 3 stock 4 or 5 minutes or something? Bo5 rather than Bo7.

you really just aren't given enough time to really enjoy the game. Matches lasted like 1 minute, unless we just camped each other out. It was stupid.


also, I suggest giving the player multiple stage bans...
and a bunch of stages NEED to be banned for this to work.

Icicle mountain, Hyrule, Mushroom kingdom, Depths, Flatzone, Termina, and a few other stages lead to constant problems.
---
we never got around to playing doubles with this ruleset :\
instead we just used standard rules, but went to whatever stage we wanted lol.

For crews I think it should just be the regular rules that we have in place now.
 

Kal

Smash Champion
Joined
Dec 21, 2004
Messages
2,974
Ever since this thread has been made, this song has been playing in my head. I'm pretty sure this signifies the end of us all. This will probably be the ruleset used on a December 20th national tournament, with Cactuar winning the event and revealing himself as Lucifer at midnight, just when the world begins to end.

The above assumption is Central Time, by the way.
 

DerfMidWest

Fresh ******
Joined
Mar 31, 2011
Messages
4,063
Location
Cleveland, OH
Slippi.gg
SOFA#941
I loved that movie.
but yea, this ruleset buffs fox too much, atm, which is not necessary... especially since our current one is pretty much trying to nerf him a bit...
 

Frisbie

Smash Journeyman
Joined
Oct 26, 2010
Messages
405
Location
Houston
I definitely think that the time needs to be bumped up. in an apex match between shroomed and hbox, 2 minutes passed before the first stock was taken, which would make it very easy for hbox to float around for a minute. i think four or five minutes would be better. also it would make it easy for fox to time out like anyone on hyrule. that's the only thing that strikes me as being a problem right off the bat. other than that, i am very excited to test out this new rule set
 

ES Lite

The Real Slim Shady
Joined
May 23, 2008
Messages
627
Location
Easton, PA (ES)
I was about to type a post explaining how 2 stocks is too low, but then realized through half of it, that 2 stocks is understandable, but not desirable. If you SD in the beginning or get gimped, the enemy has a 66% chance of winning now (considering both players are exactly the same in skill)

With 3 stocks, there is 1 stock available for error. If the same situation were to happen with 3 stocks, the enemy has a 60% of winning while the other enemy has 40%, which is a lot better than 66% and 33%.

Also, comebacks will have a more significant value. If you have 1 stock against 3, you have to overcome 2 stocks, instead of just overcoming 1.

Just my opinion.
 

ph00tbag

C(ϾᶘϿ)Ͻ
Joined
Mar 16, 2007
Messages
7,245
Location
NC
I think Cactuar's point is that fewer stocks are balanced by more games. Ultimately, it comes down to whether you want more or less emphasis on each game.
 

Roneblaster

Smash Hero
Joined
Apr 16, 2009
Messages
6,041
Location
#MangoNation
@cactuar

In most traditional fighters you can camp by playing defensively, but if you are running away then you are forced into a corner or to jump which most of the time is a really bad situation. Smash has more freedom when it comes to movement. Running away, especially on many stages due to platforms, becomes a viable stalling tactic. This changes the overall metagame of how matches are played in general.

At the beginning of a match the low timer encourages aggression, but because the timer is so short, that means that once you gain any solid amount of percentage lead, then you can just run away for 30 seconds to a minute and win. If you have a half lifebar advantage on your opponent in a traditional fighter and plenty of room to retreat, and there is only 10 seconds on the clock... what will you do? Any good player would go for the timeout. In smash, because you have so many movement options, on many stages they can run for much longer without risking much.

Look at it this way, the matches will have a different dynamic. It will be fight until you get ahead, then avoid the enemy for a short time. Even if you don't play like that, you will have a hard time deciding hmm... 1 min left and I'm up 80% what will I do? In a tourney match when money is on the line take a guess. The new metagame will consist of running away at the end of matches which is like... lamer than ever to be honest.

Is this the metagame that this ruleset is trying to realize? because if not then it doesn't accomplish what was originally intended and to be honest it seems a lot less competitive. AKA I compete and think for a small portion of a match (30 seconds to a minute depending on how long it takes to gain a considerable lead) and then after that I try to avoid you and run away :)

Look for the tierlist to change based off of how well a character can avoid the opponent instead of being based off of how well they are able to KO. Characters like Pika and Mewtwo etc will get a large bump. Characters who are high tier because of their ability to get KOs won't be so much better because a character's ability to keep away is much more important now. If Jiggs lands a single upthrow rest he can then just run away the whole game. Expect to see a lot more shino stalling, planking, running away. Chaingrab heavy characters... wobbling even used to stall out excessive seconds of time off the clock etc so that after a single grab, instead of just being guaranteed 1 stock, they are almost guaranteed the match due to eating up the clock in the process.
Id be willing to try new rulesets out, but this guy is 100% correct and i think his hypotheticals would become reality more often than not.

:phone:
 

PolishSmash

Smash Journeyman
Joined
Nov 17, 2011
Messages
210
Location
New York, U.S.A.
I'll test these out with my friends but I hope we are not changing the rules just to change something in the metagame because I think the ruleset we have now is fine and shouldn't be fixed.

Remember: Don't fix something that is not broken.
 

Van.

Smash Ace
Joined
Jul 13, 2010
Messages
744
Location
St. Pete, FL
If we ever do seriously consider making this change, we should disable new accounts for a day and have an anonymous poll, it would be sad if one overeducated intellectual elitist made such an obviously undesirable change come to fruition because he's better at arguing than the whole community combined.

Also if people are comfortable with the idea of 4 stock matches and want them to continue being the standard, that's a perfectly acceptable reason not to amend the ruleset. We shouldn't have to win a debate with ****n clarence darrow just to get what we want

there is no way that over half the community would be okay with this ridiculous ruleset.
 

twizzlerj

Smash Journeyman
Joined
Jul 30, 2011
Messages
349
Location
Freehold NJ
This idea has gotten out of hand it shouldn't ever become a standard just something for a side and maybe friendlies.
 

Kal

Smash Champion
Joined
Dec 21, 2004
Messages
2,974
Hey, this is really interesting guys. I looked up the definition of alternate:

[COLLAPSE="Definition: Alternate"]1: occurring or succeeding by turns <a day of alternate sunshine and rain>
2
a : arranged first on one side and then on the other at different levels or points along an axial line <alternate leaves> — compare opposite
b : arranged one above or alongside the other​
3: every other : every second <he works on alternate days>
4: constituting an alternative <took the alternate route home>[/COLLAPSE]
Also, Cactuar, you are overeducated and better than the rest of us (collectively, no less) at arguing. Congratulations. Had I known this ahead of time, I wouldn't have engaged you in the Tentative MBR Ruleset thread.
 

Bing

Smash Master
Joined
Nov 8, 2010
Messages
4,885
Location
St.Catharines, Ontario, Canada
Big Blue is banned because you touch the ground and you die.... There are a few more stages that should be banned, like Hyrule because people would just camp the **** out of the bottom of the stage. And its enormous so people can just camp the bottom.

Otherwise its worth a shot, I mean, Im a little against only having 2 stocks because when theres a skill camp thats mildly large, it makes for seemingly even more one sided matches(generally takes a noob 2 and a half to 3 full stocks to take one of a pros. Mind you, thats not really wants important, thats just for pride purposes XD.

No Items for sure. Or we're heading back to 2003 metagame combined with 2012 which could be... stupid. If so with items, only certain ones on like... Very Low. And even that Im against...
 

VA

Smash Hero
Joined
May 18, 2006
Messages
5,004
Location
Brighton, UK
It seems odd. I was trying it out today and when I took the first stock I couldn't help but grab the edge and shino stall forever....
 

Warhawk

Smash Lord
Joined
Nov 11, 2011
Messages
1,086
Location
Mt. Pleasant/Highland, MI
I just feel like this ruleset will really just make for more camping... I do like the 3 stock 5-6 min rulesets being proposed though and more stages sounds nice.
 

Varist

Smash Lord
Joined
Feb 7, 2011
Messages
1,603
Location
Austin

-ACE-

Gotem City Vigilante
Joined
Sep 25, 2007
Messages
11,536
Location
The back country, GA
More stages = fox vs fox ftw

You know, creating a stagelist centered around making Ganon more tourney viable would decrease overall accident forgiveness. :troll:
 

RaphaelRobo

Smash Champion
Joined
Oct 24, 2011
Messages
2,833
Jiggs should plank on Big Blue.

Also, I am in favor of the ganon-based stagelist.
 
Top Bottom