• 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!

Meta Stage Legality Discussion Thread:

Status
Not open for further replies.

Noa.

Smash Master
Joined
Jan 2, 2008
Messages
3,758
Location
Orlando, Florida
Here's another way to view how more conservative players view stages. Stages change the amount of reward an option will provide.

Every stage does this. They affect different options, and they affect these options in variable amounts.

For example, FD skews the amount of reward that Sheik gains from hitting an opponent with a single needle at high percent. Usually when a character is hit with a single needle, they can just land on a platform and approach sheik from there. But on FD characters are forced to reset to the ledge, or they have to land on the ground and Sheik is practically guaranteed to land another single needle. FD doesn't change the damage or knockback of sheik's single needle, but it does change what options opponents have against it. With less options for counter play available to opponents, the reward on Sheik's single needles at high percent is increased on FD. FD also allows Sheik to do a fair strong a bit more times than on other stages because it's longer. Again, the reward for a fair string is affected by stage selection.

Evey stage does this to an extent. They all increase or decrease the reward for certain options.

Ness is playing against Rosa on smashville. She knocks him offstage without a double jump. Usually this results in Ness's death because if he tries to recover with Pk Thunder, Rosa will just use Gravitational Pull and gimp Ness. Thankfully for Ness, the smashville platform floats towards him and he can just land on it. In this situation the reward for Rosa successfully knocking Ness offstage without a double jump was decreased. Usually this would result in a stock, but smashville prevented that.

All stages influence the amount of reward for different moves. Hyrule Temple and other stages that allow circle camping increase the reward of Fox's blaster so much that he wins the match by landing it only once if he's more mobile than the other character. Circle camping increases the reward of getting the percent lead way too drastically.

Caves of life like the one on Gamer reduce the rewards of kill moves drastically. They prevent kill moves from doing their job, and increase the duration of matches since it's hard for characters to achieve the ultimate reward, which is taking a stock off of their opponent.

Halberd, Castle Siege, and Delfino Plaza skew rewards in ways that most players feel is too drastic.

Halberd's low ceiling is disgustingly low. While Rosa uair to double jump uair usually just provides some nice damage, in this stage it can kill opponents sub 30 or 40%. On this stage Rosa is rewarding for landing a rising uair with a stock at practically any percent, instead of just percent like on most stages. Zss's uair uair upB doesn't always end up killing opponents, but on this stage it is basically guaranteed now matter how you DI. You might even reach the blast zone before Zss finishes her boost kick. On most stages it can be very difficult for Zss to kill with uair uair upB without reading DI well and baiting out delayed airdodges, but she's always guaranteed a KO on this stage with that combo. Town and City does this as well but to a less extreme extent. While maybe 10% of Town and City's screen may pose a KO threat from Rosa's uair, on Halberd maybe like 20% of the screen can end in a KO for Rosa. Halberd's low ceiling allows for KOs to happen at much much Lower percents than other stages.

Delfino does the same with the changes in its boundaries, but the change in reward here is much bigger than Halberd. Ness's u throw will kill at any percent during a transition if he's on a platform. Now I know Ness is guaranteed KOs from grabs at high percents, but being able to KO any character at any percent under these conditions is a little extreme. Any character with decent base knockback on a vertical move can get a KO at any percent with these boundaries. Thankfully the transitions don't last too long so it doesn't happen all the time. But when it does happen it certainly doesn't feel particularly earned. The boundary changes skew the risk and reward ratio of vertical moves quite drastically, even if it's only for a short portion of the Match.

Temporary walk offs increase the reward off of moves that have a high amount of knockback even at mid percents.

Lots of players just feel that these stages change the reward ratios of certain moves way too drastically. But it's just down to personal preference. Everyone has a different idea of what is acceptable for how much a stage affects gameplay. Some are just more conservative than others.
 

MajorMajora

Smash Ace
Joined
Jul 15, 2014
Messages
709
All that, and not a single reason is given as to why changing the risk reward of moves is a bad thing. It definitely gets people to think about not only which stage the choose, but how they play when on the stage, which gives the game depth. And I'm not sure if people think that different levels of risk regard have a higher quality, and the one on BF/SV/FD have the highest quality, but that is a pretty big assumption to make, and even if it is true it's even harder to prove that the change outweighs the competitive depth of the added stages. The other thing I can guess is that it's "too good", but until I see X (in this case X=Rosalina's dominating on halberd) in the top 8's of majors or something to that effect, it's not so good that we should ban it to balance the game ourselves. Believing the game would be broken if we didn't hover over it banning things that we see as problematic is not only paranoid but incredibly arrogant.
 
Last edited:

T4ylor

Smash Journeyman
Joined
Oct 9, 2014
Messages
204
The way I see it, it's because the majority of people want both of the players to be in complete control. When they lose a stock, they want it to be from a direct action from the other player, otherwise it doesn't feel right. It feels like it was the stage that killed you, that the stock you lost was not earned. Competitive scenes focus on the game being player vs. player. When that happens in Smash, you get a list of neutrals that incorporates that idea. Those stages are now the norm. Halberd's ceiling is much lower than these stages, so it isn't thought of as normal. So when people lose their stock much earlier than on the other stages, it brings a similar feeling to getting killed by some stage boss/hazard. It could've been avoided if the stage was not played on. I think this is why the games start out with a more liberal stage list, but become more conservative as the game grows older.

Also, the last match I saw a Rosalina dominating on Halberd, in a major, was Larry vs Dabuz. Larry counter picked the stage and lost a stock at sub-50% by getting grabbed, thrown, and hit by a couple of up airs. It's probably because of instances like this that most end up banning the stage. I know I will always ban it because I've had several instances of it not being an unfavorable match up against the character they've already played me as, but then they swap to a pocket Rosalina in game 3 and win with a kill off the top when I'm at around 30%.
 

MajorMajora

Smash Ace
Joined
Jul 15, 2014
Messages
709
The way I see it, it's because the majority of people want both of the players to be in complete control. When they lose a stock, they want it to be from a direct action from the other player, otherwise it doesn't feel right. It feels like it was the stage that killed you, that the stock you lost was not earned. Competitive scenes focus on the game being player vs. player. When that happens in Smash, you get a list of neutrals that incorporates that idea. Those stages are now the norm. Halberd's ceiling is much lower than these stages, so it isn't thought of as normal. So when people lose their stock much earlier than on the other stages, it brings a similar feeling to getting killed by some stage boss/hazard. It could've been avoided if the stage was not played on. I think this is why the games start out with a more liberal stage list, but become more conservative as the game grows older.

Also, the last match I saw a Rosalina dominating on Halberd, in a major, was Larry vs Dabuz. Larry counter picked the stage and lost a stock at sub-50% by getting grabbed, thrown, and hit by a couple of up airs. It's probably because of instances like this that most end up banning the stage. I know I will always ban it because I've had several instances of it not being an unfavorable match up against the character they've already played me as, but then they swap to a pocket Rosalina in game 3 and win with a kill off the top when I'm at around 30%.
But has it been sweeping the nation, dominating all majors? Remember, Rosalina was just as strong in the past killing off the top, and the character people were complaining about was Diddy, and halberd was hardly part of the discussion. Rosalina on halberd is good. Not a reason to ban something.

And really, banning something because something doesn't feel right? That is the most pathetic excuse for banning something other than maybe 'just cause' or 'I don't like the game it came from', and other things to that effect. Well, I don't like facing yoshi, it doesn't feel right, so I think he should be banned. Does that seem reasonable? Seriously, people are only ever going to be killed by the stage if they lack experience. It's due to a lack of knowledge or a slip up. It's the same as an SD: it still is about comparing the player skill of 2 players, so it's still competitive. We don't reset a match whenever someone SD's because he didn't die to the other player. He died to the stage: specifically, the stage not being under his feet at the time and being somewhere else instead.
 

T4ylor

Smash Journeyman
Joined
Oct 9, 2014
Messages
204
Well most people are not dealing with Rosalina on Halberd, because they're outright banning the stage.

As for your other response, it may be a poor excuse, but people en masse have power. It's the people that make or break a game.
 

MajorMajora

Smash Ace
Joined
Jul 15, 2014
Messages
709
Well most people are not dealing with Rosalina on Halberd, because they're outright banning the stage.

As for your other response, it may be a poor excuse, but people en masse have power. It's the people that make or break a game.
A: So obviously people have a work around to keep it from being a huge problem. No need to use the ban hammer to solve something that we've already solved with the current rules.

B: I'm arguing that it is a bad reason, I'm not arguing that it's not being used. If I argued that I would be directly contradicting the fact that it is being used, which is the thing I was complaining about in the first place. I'm really not sure why people always feel the need to point this out whenever I disagree with the majority opinion. I'm not asking why it hasn't changed, I know why, I just think it should.
 

ParanoidDrone

Smash Master
Joined
Jan 26, 2008
Messages
4,335
Location
Baton Rouge, LA
I still die to the claw on Halberd sometimes, but it never makes me "feel bad" in a way that's any different from dying to a meteor or something. It's my own fault for not paying enough attention to notice the claw moving, note to self that I should focus more and move on.
 

Krysco

Aeon Hero
Joined
Feb 27, 2014
Messages
2,005
Location
Ontario, Canada
NNID
Krysco
3DS FC
2122-7731-1180
Halberd's low ceiling is disgustingly low. While Rosa uair to double jump uair usually just provides some nice damage, in this stage it can kill opponents sub 30 or 40%. On this stage Rosa is rewarding for landing a rising uair with a stock at practically any percent, instead of just percent like on most stages. Zss's uair uair upB doesn't always end up killing opponents, but on this stage it is basically guaranteed now matter how you DI. You might even reach the blast zone before Zss finishes her boost kick. On most stages it can be very difficult for Zss to kill with uair uair upB without reading DI well and baiting out delayed airdodges, but she's always guaranteed a KO on this stage with that combo. Town and City does this as well but to a less extreme extent. While maybe 10% of Town and City's screen may pose a KO threat from Rosa's uair, on Halberd maybe like 20% of the screen can end in a KO for Rosa. Halberd's low ceiling allows for KOs to happen at much much Lower percents than other stages.
I find it interesting how the two characters you mentioned were top/high tier characters, furthering my thoughts that the conservative stage list is made to hinder the better characters. DK, Robin, Mewtwo and Charizard also have powerful vertical kill moves/confirms and they are far lower so they may prefer going to Halberd.

Also, not directed to you in particular but to anyone who reads this but with this whole 'stage borders' issue, namely the ceilings, I have a hypothetical question. If Yoshi's Story from Melee (the Battlefield rip off with Randall) were added as dlc and wasn't changed borderwise, would you guys argue for it being neutral, counterpick or banned? I ask because, the stage is generally considered a fine stage in Melee (which admittedly lacks many good stages) and I'm just wondering how far the borders issue goes when it comes to Sm4sh.
 

MrGame&Rock

Smash Ace
Joined
Jan 10, 2012
Messages
780
Location
Washington, DC
NNID
SpenstarHD
I find it interesting how the two characters you mentioned were top/high tier characters, furthering my thoughts that the conservative stage list is made to hinder the better characters. DK, Robin, Mewtwo and Charizard also have powerful vertical kill moves/confirms and they are far lower so they may prefer going to Halberd.

Also, not directed to you in particular but to anyone who reads this but with this whole 'stage borders' issue, namely the ceilings, I have a hypothetical question. If Yoshi's Story from Melee (the Battlefield rip off with Randall) were added as dlc and wasn't changed borderwise, would you guys argue for it being neutral, counterpick or banned? I ask because, the stage is generally considered a fine stage in Melee (which admittedly lacks many good stages) and I'm just wondering how far the borders issue goes when it comes to Sm4sh.
Legal, but CP if we're not using FLSS. In this engine, the small changes Yoshi's has from BF just aren't enough, so its placement as a starter would give characters who prefer BF-like stages an edge.The same as my opinion on Dreamland honestly.
 

Noa.

Smash Master
Joined
Jan 2, 2008
Messages
3,758
Location
Orlando, Florida
All that, and not a single reason is given as to why changing the risk reward of moves is a bad thing. It definitely gets people to think about not only which stage the choose, but how they play when on the stage, which gives the game depth. And I'm not sure if people think that different levels of risk regard have a higher quality, and the one on BF/SV/FD have the highest quality, but that is a pretty big assumption to make, and even if it is true it's even harder to prove that the change outweighs the competitive depth of the added stages. The other thing I can guess is that it's "too good", but until I see X (in this case X=Rosalina's dominating on halberd) in the top 8's of majors or something to that effect, it's not so good that we should ban it to balance the game ourselves. Believing the game would be broken if we didn't hover over it banning things that we see as problematic is not only paranoid but incredibly arrogant.
Changing the risk reward of moves is not an intrinsically bad thing. I already stated that every stage does this, even Smashville and FD. I just stated that some stages have a bigger influence on it. Some stages influence it too strong. I already stated that large stages like Hyrule Castle and caves of life like the one on Gamer influence the risk reward of moves to unhealthy proportions. No one would seriously argue that either of those stages should be legal. I mean some people say they like Gamer but I hope they don't seriously mean it. But it is possible for a stage to skew the risk reward too much, and that it would have to be banned.

I didn't say it was right or wrong to ban Halberd, Castle Siege, or Delfino Plaza. I was only stating why some people don't like those stages and why they would want them banned. Everyone has different boundaries on what they consider to be too influential from a stage.

I don't think either stage list is necessarily superior. A larger stage list and a smaller stage list both are competitive rulesets. They focus on different ratios of player skill, character skill and stage skill is all. Whichever you prefer is personal preference, and I don't think it's really easy to convince people to change their preference. It's not like people are arguing about whether or not singles or doubles should be the preferred standard. Both kinds of tournaments are popular and coexist. I don't think most players feel too strongly that one is competitively better than another. It is true that singles is more popular, but that's because it's more accessible compared to doubles. A TO should just create a stagelist that caters to the preferences of their local scene.

I didn't talk on how these stages affect character balance. A specific stage list will favor certain characters over others no matter what, but I don't think that any of the aforementioned stages make a character too strong or imbalanced. Though such a thing can be a legitimate reason for banning a stage. If a subset of characters is particularly strong on a certain stage, it might be better to ban that stage out.

It just comes down to how much you value a player's skill with stages. How large a role should it play in the ruleset? I don't think there's a right or wrong answer really. Just a different preference.
 

Fuerzo

Smash Apprentice
Joined
Mar 25, 2015
Messages
152
NNID
Erudites
Listen, I do not care for this thread anymore because we're talking circles around preferences, and it's a battle that the people wanting "less" have already won,
How? If the people who wanted "less" have already won, then why are there still 10 legal stages? There is no debate around Wuhu Island or Skyloft at this point--the controversy is over Delfino, Halberd, and Castle Siege. The political concept of the Overton Window very much applies here--the community on Smashboards that wants Mario Circuit and Pokemon Stadium 2 in tournaments is a vocal fringe minority. If you want "more", you're fighting to keep Delfino/Halberd/CS.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overton_window
 

Fuerzo

Smash Apprentice
Joined
Mar 25, 2015
Messages
152
NNID
Erudites
Because many regions are quickly diminishing to 7.
SoCal is, but Delfino, Castle Siege, and Halberd are still legal in the majority of scenes at this point. That's where the battleground is, whether you like it or not.

(this would all be so much easier if we just had a hazards off button...oh Sakurai :()
 
Last edited:

MrGame&Rock

Smash Ace
Joined
Jan 10, 2012
Messages
780
Location
Washington, DC
NNID
SpenstarHD
SoCal is, but Delfino, Castle Siege, and Halberd are still legal in the majority of scenes at this point. That's where the battleground is, whether you like it or not.

(this would all be so much easier if we just had a hazards off button...oh Sakurai :()
If we had a hazards off button we'd be talking about Port Town Aero Drive and Mushroom Kingdom U, two of the worst stages that would be AMAZING if not for their hazards
 

Magik0722

Smash Champion
Joined
Dec 5, 2005
Messages
2,088
Location
San Antonio TX
New GA Power Rankings is out as of two minutes ago:


GA Power Rankings Top 10:

  1. SWS Fatality (Captain Falcon)

  2. TheReflexWonder (Wario/Falco)

  3. Scatt (Mega Man)

  4. Neos (Rosalina and Luma)

  5. Wrath (Sonic)

  6. Lord Mix (Bowser)

  7. Kodystri (Ness)

  8. DRN (Sheik)

  9. Player-1 (Diddy)

  10. Micaelis (Yoshi)
wrong thread, reported.
 

SMAASH! Puppy

Smash Legend
Joined
Feb 13, 2015
Messages
12,560
Location
Snake Man's stage from Metal Blade Solid
If we had a hazards off button we'd be talking about Port Town Aero Drive and Mushroom Kingdom U, two of the worst stages that would be AMAZING if not for their hazards
Would we still be talking about those stages being legal if the hazards off button only meant directly damaging, and buffing hazards? (Like Nabbit, and the Microgames in WarioWare Inc.
(My guess would be yes, but there would be more people saying no to said stages.)
 

RIP|Merrick

Absolute Trash
Joined
Mar 30, 2014
Messages
492
Location
Michigan
NNID
Merricktherox
3DS FC
4339-2630-2726
If Mushroom Kingdom U was just the transitional portions along with their main base layouts it would be fantastic.
 

MrGame&Rock

Smash Ace
Joined
Jan 10, 2012
Messages
780
Location
Washington, DC
NNID
SpenstarHD
And Port Town is a travelling stage on par with or even better than Skyloft/Wuhu, except for the cars that ruin everything
 

Ajimi

Smash Cadet
Joined
Aug 14, 2015
Messages
74
Location
France
Jpot and Noa. posts were interesting (from a fairly liberal point of view), thanks.

In the event that we exclude travelling stages, I'd still wonder about Kongo Jungle and Peach's Castle in addition to the 7 "universally legal". Their archetype is pretty standard (static with no real hazard) but still unique and interesting in their layout. And to my knowledge, none has been proven broken as of yet.
 

Fuerzo

Smash Apprentice
Joined
Mar 25, 2015
Messages
152
NNID
Erudites
And Port Town is a travelling stage on par with or even better than Skyloft/Wuhu, except for the cars that ruin everything
It probably would still have to be illegal for the sole reason that the traveling platform lacks grabbable ledges.
 

jcx

Smash Journeyman
Joined
May 10, 2015
Messages
268
Location
CA, USA
Jpot and Noa. posts were interesting (from a fairly liberal point of view), thanks.

In the event that we exclude travelling stages, I'd still wonder about Kongo Jungle and Peach's Castle in addition to the 7 "universally legal". Their archetype is pretty standard (static with no real hazard) but still unique and interesting in their layout. And to my knowledge, none has been proven broken as of yet.
Kongo's never had any issues besides circle camping. That's why it's only legal in Doubles. Peach's, though, heavily favors horizontal KOs because of the ramps and bumper.
 

ParanoidDrone

Smash Master
Joined
Jan 26, 2008
Messages
4,335
Location
Baton Rouge, LA
And Port Town is a travelling stage on par with or even better than Skyloft/Wuhu, except for the cars that ruin everything
Main platform's ledges can't be grabbed, I can see people crying foul for that reason. (It's why Mute City was banned in Melee AFAIK. Well, that and a silly Armada game vs. a...Falco, I think?)
 

Illuminose

Smash Ace
Joined
Mar 6, 2015
Messages
671
kongo has camping issues (barrel and high platforms) and the blast lines are way too far
 

dav3yb

Smash Journeyman
Joined
Dec 7, 2014
Messages
431
kongo has camping issues (barrel and high platforms) and the blast lines are way too far
i've yet to see the barrel be an issue, and if you know how to time it right, you can punish someone coming out of it pretty well.
 

Ghostbone

Smash Master
Joined
Sep 20, 2010
Messages
4,665
Location
Australia
i've yet to see the barrel be an issue, and if you know how to time it right, you can punish someone coming out of it pretty well.
Errr
They're invincible the entire time untill they can act, and that's not even the main issue with the barrel (being used for continuously running away and camping, or just being off screen and randomly moving and interfering with recoveries/gimps)
 

Illuminose

Smash Ace
Joined
Mar 6, 2015
Messages
671
The camping is relevant but I fail to see how it being objectively too big is worth banning over.
being too big means that it takes too long to close out stocks which leads to longer games/timeouts

this is especially a major issue when you combine the camping issues
 

Infinite901

Smash Ace
Joined
Feb 21, 2015
Messages
523
Location
Long Island, NY
NNID
Infinite901
3DS FC
3282-4624-0341
being too big means that it takes too long to close out stocks which leads to longer games/timeouts
Why is that a bad thing? It'd a perfectly fine reason for people to counterpick Melee-Dreamland or 64-Peach's Castle. Or, hell, 64-Kongo Jungle! Why has that changed? Just because this game is more defensive? I'm sure if Dremland 64 brought back the Melee blast lines it would still be legal. Why is KJ64 different in that respect?

Tbh I even think KJ64 may even be bannable solely due to the cannon. The blastlines have nothing to do with it.
 

Illuminose

Smash Ace
Joined
Mar 6, 2015
Messages
671
Why is that a bad thing? It'd a perfectly fine reason for people to counterpick Melee-Dreamland or 64-Peach's Castle. Or, hell, 64-Kongo Jungle! Why has that changed? Just because this game is more defensive? I'm sure if Dremland 64 brought back the Melee blast lines it would still be legal. Why is KJ64 different in that respect?

Tbh I even think KJ64 may even be bannable solely due to the cannon. The blastlines have nothing to do with it.
Because Melee has much better kill potential. Even on DL64 in Melee, you could have characters killing at reasonable percents generally. The kill potential in this game isn't as good, put very simply. DL64 with Melee boundaries would most likely have been banned, in fact I remember that sentiment being expressed on Twitter before the stage was released.

edit @below: now you're just being difficult...
 
Last edited:

Infinite901

Smash Ace
Joined
Feb 21, 2015
Messages
523
Location
Long Island, NY
NNID
Infinite901
3DS FC
3282-4624-0341
Because Melee has much better kill potential. Even on DL64 in Melee, you could have characters killing at reasonable percents generally. The kill potential in this game isn't as good, put very simply. DL64 with Melee boundaries would most likely have been banned, in fact I remember that sentiment being expressed on Twitter before the stage was released.
I think you miread. I didn't think Melee-Dreamland would be legal - I can guarantee it would be legal even with those blast line. I guarantee it.
 

RIP|Merrick

Absolute Trash
Joined
Mar 30, 2014
Messages
492
Location
Michigan
NNID
Merricktherox
3DS FC
4339-2630-2726
DL64 with Melee boundaries would most likely have been banned, in fact I remember that sentiment being expressed on Twitter before the stage was released.
Assuming Dreamland 64 did have Melees size and blastzones a lot of research would have to go into whether characters lasting much longer would make it healthy and if timeouts were an issue, which would have been likely. Personally I wish this stage had it's current horizontal blastzones, but with a much longer vertical blastzone similar to Melee, be a good counterpick for characters who rely on vertical kills, god forbid Rosalina and Illuminati.

Tbh I even think KJ64 may even be bannable solely due to the cannon. The blastlines have nothing to do with it.
Assuming the barrel cannon was no longer a thing, I think the next thing that would make this stage more widely accepted would be if the base bottom platform was completely solid. It is a nitpicky thing, yeah, but if you think about it, a lot of the current stages people take issue with in this game (Delfino Plaza, Halberd) have underside platforms that allow you to shark from underneath and recover from there as well. I highly doubt that would be the sole reason for banning any stage, but it is worth keeping in mind.

The large base stage, combined with the equally massive platforms and usually getting free recoveries due to the amount of space and options (undersides, barrel, etc) available make it a huge burden killing anyone properly when they should have probably died entire percents ago. Not to mention the cannon refreshing your jumps, multiple jump characters love it., the invincibility and just the keep away factor. I even find characters like Ganondorf needlessly hard to kill at times when he should have died but the freaking cannon saves characters like him, and he can legit camp like everyone else or at least make things miserable to approach with these added keepaway options.
 
Last edited:

KeithTheGeek

Smash Ace
Joined
Nov 3, 2013
Messages
576
Location
VA
NNID
bkeith
3DS FC
5026-4475-8239
I...can't say I've ever seen anyone complain about sharking before. Removing the barrel and scaling down the stage some is really all it needs.
 

RIP|Merrick

Absolute Trash
Joined
Mar 30, 2014
Messages
492
Location
Michigan
NNID
Merricktherox
3DS FC
4339-2630-2726
Oh those aren't my complaints in terms of sharking, but rather what I often hear when I discuss these things with our states top players which is rather silly and admittedly a pretty scrubby mentality when determining the legality of these things. And I agree, get rid of the barrel at the very least (hazard toggle please) and this would make this stage infinitely better. Or even lessen the effect of it, probably starting with not being a literal hitbox when you shoot out haha.
 
Last edited:

Ajimi

Smash Cadet
Joined
Aug 14, 2015
Messages
74
Location
France
And if we go for "only" 7 stages, what would be the best striking system ?

2-3-1 ?
1-3-2 ?
1-1-1-2-1 ?
1-2-1-1-1 ?
Other ?

In each case the first player has both the first and last strike, and each player has the same number of strikes.
 

RIP|Merrick

Absolute Trash
Joined
Mar 30, 2014
Messages
492
Location
Michigan
NNID
Merricktherox
3DS FC
4339-2630-2726
We strike 1-2-2-1 here, but we're always open to suggestions if there is anything that could theoretically be better.
 

Fuerzo

Smash Apprentice
Joined
Mar 25, 2015
Messages
152
NNID
Erudites
We'd have to go 5 starter and 2 counterpick--striking first is a disadvantage and striking last is an advantage, so the 5 starter system ensures that the same person does both to cancel it out. Duck Hunt and one of either Dream Land or Lylat would be the counterpicks.
 

Ajimi

Smash Cadet
Joined
Aug 14, 2015
Messages
74
Location
France
Well I just provided four examples with the "strike first and last" rule, so I don't see why we'd have to go 5 starters only ?
 
Last edited:

Illuminose

Smash Ace
Joined
Mar 6, 2015
Messages
671
5 starters provides a better striking number than 7 stage FLSS. We already have a tried-and-true striking method for 5 stages that works really well and is simple so there's no real point to trying to make something else work that ultimately is more difficult to understand and use.
 

Ajimi

Smash Cadet
Joined
Aug 14, 2015
Messages
74
Location
France
Why is it better ? Why is it easier "to understand and use" ? It's exactly the same thing, just with different numbers.

To my knowledge the two rules for a fair striking are 1) same number of strikes for each player and 2) the player who strikes first also strikes last. If there are others rules, I'd genuinely want to know. But right now all my examples respect those rules, I just wanted to know which one is preferred since several options are possible with 7 stages.
 
Last edited:

teluoborg

Smash Otter
Joined
Mar 12, 2008
Messages
4,060
Location
Paris, France
NNID
teloutre
1-2-2-1 and 2-3-1 are both striking formats that have already been tested and they work perfectly. The striking method has never been an issue, people adapt to the rules whenever they are enforced.

I don't think either stage list is necessarily superior. A larger stage list and a smaller stage list both are competitive rulesets. They focus on different ratios of player skill, character skill and stage skill is all. Whichever you prefer is personal preference, and I don't think it's really easy to convince people to change their preference. It's not like people are arguing about whether or not singles or doubles should be the preferred standard. Both kinds of tournaments are popular and coexist. I don't think most players feel too strongly that one is competitively better than another. It is true that singles is more popular, but that's because it's more accessible compared to doubles. A TO should just create a stagelist that caters to the preferences of their local scene.
This is perfect. It has everything I've been trying to express since those discussions started.

In the future whenever someone tries to proove that their stagelist is the better one I'll redirect them to this post, thank you for your hard work.


I still die to the claw on Halberd sometimes, but it never makes me "feel bad" in a way that's any different from dying to a meteor or something. It's my own fault for not paying enough attention to notice the claw moving, note to self that I should focus more and move on.
While it's true that you can react to the claw's attack and it's your fault for getting hit, this mechanism still rewards your opponent for no reason at all. He gets rewarded with anything from a punition of your dodge/roll/shield to a kill for not having been the one targetted and this is more similar to mario party than competitive smash. The simple RNG of the target choice of the claw can have a major impact on the outcome of a game, especially at high level of play where mistakes will be way less numerous and capitalization will be on point.

To me this is similar to Brawl tripping where you were rewarded/punished by the game for no reason other than luck.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom