• 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.

[Deuce]

Smash Journeyman
Joined
Mar 28, 2006
Messages
219
Location
Socal
Why do people start with a small set of stages from the get go ? Errrr, I don't know.... Maybe because Smash has been around for 16 years and people know what they do and do not want in a stage ? It's not bottom up "exclusive" like you say, just that even with different characters, different physics and different mechanics the rules of Super Smash Bros stay the same and stages (just like items) play the same role they've played in the previous 3 games.

Yikarur Yikarur Ditto minus CS and Delfino.
Oh so you're willing to just stick with the status quo because its been that way for so long and it must be correct, right? Hmmmm maybe we should bring back slavery and feudalism because that system was in place for ages. That is literally one of the worst arguments ever.

Your justification in regards to how isn't bottom-up selection is totally irrelevant. The methodology across games may have remained the same but WITHIN the game is what I'm referring to in regards to consistency. How is the stage list not bottom-up when people are literally arguing using points such as "why add stages for the sake of adding stages" and empirical evidence from Project M polling that given a relatively higher number of feasible stages people would opt for a smaller stagelist for the sake of being small. To reiterate, people using opposite methodologies in regards to character selection vs stage selection, and this has happened all 3 games which is more likely than not one of the reasons why many outsiders find our ruleset so arcane.
 

Pyr

Smash Lord
Joined
Jul 7, 2014
Messages
1,053
Location
Somewhere Green
I've followed this thread for a long while and I've never seen so many words amount to nothing for a discussion. The above is a flawless waste of keystrokes. I mean, it has all the hallmarks of uselessness in the context of discussion:

  • Reference something completely off topic as a supporting argument.
  • Do the above in hyperbole
  • Provide nothing to add to the discussion and instead go off on a tangent.
  • Provide no supporting evidence, despite saying it exists.
  • Compare 2 things that are ultimately unrelated.
  • Say something is "irrelevant" or wrong without justifying the statement or proving so.
I mean, in the first section, you say that slavery is bad, then say it's the worst argument ever. Justification for slavery is, but what's worse is trying to play the little word game of having that comparison be melded with the actual topic. It's the sign of someone who has a poor argument.

To keep this even slightly on topic, I'd just like to say that, no matter what you believe the stage-list should be, you're going to have a hell of a time defeating a decade of work and analysis of what makes a stage legal. This includes playtesting and all. And no, saying that "it's wrong" and trying to compare it to slavery will not cut it.

Edit: Cause I re-read a few things in the last couple of pages: Pirate Ship for life. Still one of my favorite stages. Sad that it'll be banned mostly because of the bombs.
 
Last edited:

Amazing Ampharos

Balanced Brawl Designer
Writing Team
Joined
Jan 31, 2008
Messages
4,582
Location
Kansas City, MO
I'm not so sure a decade of work and analysis ever really happened. I think the prior given argument that traveling top players only practice for what's legal everywhere as a practical optimization of their practice routines and then push for tournaments everywhere to ban down to what they practice on to maximize their personal advantage is a much better explanation for stage rules in most places. I'm not sure said top players even ever consciously think through what they're doing; it's just a natural consequence of human nature.

I'm also fairly convinced people have never really put in a solid efforts to learn on stages. The word "jank" as far as I'm aware means "a game mechanic I don't want to understand", and honestly, just look at how Skyloft and Wuhu Island were given basically no chance at all with the only reason being, as far as I can tell, that they're new transforming stages and a lot of people didn't want to learn all of those different landing stops and all of that general stuff. Moving to further ban all moving stages is just moving more toward that direction of trying to reduce what's in the game and what players need to think about. Then you have the way Peach's Castle was given no real chance at all mostly because it's just different (despite the fact that it's actually pretty fair and really strategically deep)...

My area has been a lot more stage liberal than most, and honestly, having 13 legal stages and striking from all of them has done nothing but good for us (giving each side a hefty four bans for the counterpicking phase). Sometimes people make striking errors or don't ban stages they needed to ban, but when both players are playing competently, it just adds more overall fairness to the process. Problems with it taking too long are imaginary; when you actually run that ruleset, things move along just fine.

My personal favorite ruleset at this point is:

Battlefield
Final Destination
Delfino Plaza
Skyloft
Halberd
Lylat Cruise
Castle Siege
Town & City
Smashville
Duck Hunt
Wuhu Island
Dreamland 64
Peach's Castle 64

With a note that Pokemon Stadium 2 is definitely the best stage left off the list; its bad forms are relatively pretty inoffensive, but if we need 13 procedurally and have 14, they're the best reason I can find to pick the odd stage out. Kongo Jungle 64 is also good enough to be legal but is pretty match-up polarizing so not that tough of an exclusion, and I think Mario Circuit is also a bit too obstructive with the walls but a relatively reasonable stage to consider as well. Honestly most of the rest of the stages in the game are "okay" but tend to be a lot swingier or more match-up polarized than these and thus generally inferior. We did test out Pirate Ship; the stage is much better than it was in Brawl but still doesn't really play all that well, and we did test out Windy Hill Zone at great length to conclude the stage is sometimes okay but often a pretty poor gameplay experience.

I have no illusions that this is likely to be legal in many more areas than my local area (even within my locality, which stages we use do fluctuate a lot; this is just the list used when I'm in control of the list). I just don't see the actual downside that would occur if this list were used everywhere; to me, it looks like it would do nothing but make the game better. I'll also say that, when you use a larger list, every stage really does get picked, and it's always really interesting to see how players end up valuing things when given significant choices. I'll also say I've seen more stupid, abusive stuff on Smashville than on any of those other stages; it's increasingly crazy to me how much people love that stage when so much dumb stuff happens so easily on it...
 

Ansou

Smash Ace
Joined
Oct 28, 2014
Messages
506
Location
Stockholm, Sweden
NNID
Ansoulom
3DS FC
4897-5959-9210
Kongo Jungle 64 is also good enough to be legal but is pretty match-up polarizing so not that tough of an exclusion
I agree with your reasoning in general, but is Kongo Jungle 64 really more match-up polarizing than Halberd? Or are you talking about Little Mac specifically?
My experience with those stages is that Kongo Jungle 64 is generally really bad for some characters while Halberd is really good for some other characters. Maybe there are match-ups that I've missed but a dedicated Little Mac main can always ban Kongo Jungle 64 because he/she knows what character he/she will play, but you can never be completely sure which character your opponent will pick in game 2 and 3, meaning that you can't safely know if you should ban Halberd or not.

My point is: Aren't the polarizing match-ups on Kongo Jungle 64 less relevant than the polarizing match-ups on Halberd?
 
Last edited:

Yikarur

Smash Master
Joined
May 29, 2007
Messages
4,595
Location
Germany
Kongo Jungle is pure circle camping. I do this at every event that has it legal and no one of those TO's have allowed the Stage ever again.
 

Routa

Smash Lord
Joined
May 14, 2015
Messages
1,208
Location
Loimaa, Finland
Kongo Jungle is pure circle camping. I do this at every event that has it legal and no one of those TO's have allowed the Stage ever again.
You know you can circle camp on nearly every stage as Wario... But in my opinion circle camping isn't a problem. It usually gets striken or ban by the player with character with poor mobility. Only thing that annoys me is the barrel, but it does not have a major impact to the game (unless you slam with Dorf).
 

Xeze

Smash Ace
Joined
Aug 18, 2008
Messages
715
Location
Portugal
NNID
XezeMaster
3DS FC
3969-6256-6191
Kongo Jungle 64 for doubles is fine, we use it in our scene. For singles it's a bit too much.
 

teluoborg

Smash Otter
Joined
Mar 12, 2008
Messages
4,060
Location
Paris, France
NNID
teloutre
Routa Routa No you can't, or you don't understand what circle camping is. None of the legal stages have platforms that are hard to reach like KJ has.
I'm not so sure a decade of work and analysis ever really happened. I think the prior given argument that traveling top players only practice for what's legal everywhere as a practical optimization of their practice routines and then push for tournaments everywhere to ban down to what they practice on to maximize their personal advantage is a much better explanation for stage rules in most places. I'm not sure said top players even ever consciously think through what they're doing; it's just a natural consequence of human nature.
Agreed that it's more a natural selection than thorough research, but you shouldn't be too quick to come to the conclusion that no one has put any thought into it besides following what the top players said.

I'm also fairly convinced people have never really put in a solid efforts to learn on stages. The word "jank" as far as I'm aware means "a game mechanic I don't want to understand", and honestly, just look at how Skyloft and Wuhu Island were given basically no chance at all with the only reason being, as far as I can tell, that they're new transforming stages and a lot of people didn't want to learn all of those different landing stops and all of that general stuff. Moving to further ban all moving stages is just moving more toward that direction of trying to reduce what's in the game and what players need to think about. Then you have the way Peach's Castle was given no real chance at all mostly because it's just different (despite the fact that it's actually pretty fair and really strategically deep)...
That's just your biased opinion towards stage conservatives. What you see as "a game mechanic I don't want to understand" can be seen as "an intrusion that doesn't fit my ideal competitive scenario" and while both are subjective the second one isn't nearly as lazy.
It's a common misconception that when people don't want to play on a janky stage it's because they're too lazy to learn how it works. Maybe it's the case for stupid people, but there also are intelligent people that do not want to play on Halberd because they do not want the outcome of a match to depend on who the laser/claw targets. Some stage features are simply too intrusive for those people and I understand them. There is nothing wrong for not wanting the result of a tournament to depend on things like Delfino's ceiling changes.
And people did not give Peach's Castle a chance because the bottom platform clearly gives a positional advantage, and if you want to approach someone that's camping there you have to take an absurd amount of risks.

My area has been a lot more stage liberal than most, and honestly, having 13 legal stages and striking from all of them has done nothing but good for us (giving each side a hefty four bans for the counterpicking phase). Sometimes people make striking errors or don't ban stages they needed to ban, but when both players are playing competently, it just adds more overall fairness to the process. Problems with it taking too long are imaginary; when you actually run that ruleset, things move along just fine.

My personal favorite ruleset at this point is:

Battlefield
Final Destination
Delfino Plaza
Skyloft
Halberd
Lylat Cruise
Castle Siege
Town & City
Smashville
Duck Hunt
Wuhu Island
Dreamland 64
Peach's Castle 64

With a note that Pokemon Stadium 2 is definitely the best stage left off the list; its bad forms are relatively pretty inoffensive, but if we need 13 procedurally and have 14, they're the best reason I can find to pick the odd stage out. Kongo Jungle 64 is also good enough to be legal but is pretty match-up polarizing so not that tough of an exclusion, and I think Mario Circuit is also a bit too obstructive with the walls but a relatively reasonable stage to consider as well. Honestly most of the rest of the stages in the game are "okay" but tend to be a lot swingier or more match-up polarized than these and thus generally inferior. We did test out Pirate Ship; the stage is much better than it was in Brawl but still doesn't really play all that well, and we did test out Windy Hill Zone at great length to conclude the stage is sometimes okay but often a pretty poor gameplay experience.
Genuine question here because I'm curious : you must have played with both typs of stage lists (13 with FLSS and short with only 5/7 stages) ; do you observe a change in competitive results ? Are there people that get better with a bigger stage list or inversely ?

I'll also say I've seen more stupid, abusive stuff on Smashville than on any of those other stages; it's increasingly crazy to me how much people love that stage when so much dumb stuff happens so easily on it...
Well that's just your experience, mine is the complete opposite and I've both seen and lived stupid stuff on every stage but smash ville. The worst this stage has is early kills when the platform reaches its stopping point and increased follow ups from a throw when it's performed from the moving platform. In all cases it's way less offensive than being killed by a blastzone size change.
 

Routa

Smash Lord
Joined
May 14, 2015
Messages
1,208
Location
Loimaa, Finland
As far as I know circle camping means circling around the stage without getting hit. And by this definition it is possible to circle camp on nearly every stage. Ofc it also depends from your foes speed and everything, but in theory and in practice it is possible. I remember seeing a match where Wario circle camped Pikachu in SV till he got Waft and started to rack % to about 60% and KOed Pikachu with Waft. Gotta find that video and link it. But it is hard to circle camp on stages with high mid plathform like BF. The question is is it effective strategy? Depends from MU and stage, but most of the time no.
 

[Deuce]

Smash Journeyman
Joined
Mar 28, 2006
Messages
219
Location
Socal
I've followed this thread for a long while and I've never seen so many words amount to nothing for a discussion. The above is a flawless waste of keystrokes. I mean, it has all the hallmarks of uselessness in the context of discussion:

  • Reference something completely off topic as a supporting argument.
  • Do the above in hyperbole
  • Provide nothing to add to the discussion and instead go off on a tangent.
  • Provide no supporting evidence, despite saying it exists.
  • Compare 2 things that are ultimately unrelated.
  • Say something is "irrelevant" or wrong without justifying the statement or proving so.
I mean, in the first section, you say that slavery is bad, then say it's the worst argument ever. Justification for slavery is, but what's worse is trying to play the little word game of having that comparison be melded with the actual topic. It's the sign of someone who has a poor argument.

To keep this even slightly on topic, I'd just like to say that, no matter what you believe the stage-list should be, you're going to have a hell of a time defeating a decade of work and analysis of what makes a stage legal. This includes playtesting and all. And no, saying that "it's wrong" and trying to compare it to slavery will not cut it.

Edit: Cause I re-read a few things in the last couple of pages: Pirate Ship for life. Still one of my favorite stages. Sad that it'll be banned mostly because of the bombs.
Do you not know what an analogy is? Both of you are specifically mentioning that "a decade of analysis and work" has been used to make a stage legal, and I'm saying that its more a decade of people saying "well this is how it was last year". You are writing this off for no reason, there are a great many times where we have challenged the system that is in place and have been successful. Sorry I used slavery as an example, I thought you knew a tiny bit about world history; my mistake. Based on what you've said I bet you didn't even read the context of the discussion which was in the post last page and just decided to blurt out the first thing that came to your mind based on my last response. In fact it certainly looks that way considering your edit.

I'm not so sure a decade of work and analysis ever really happened. I think the prior given argument that traveling top players only practice for what's legal everywhere as a practical optimization of their practice routines and then push for tournaments everywhere to ban down to what they practice on to maximize their personal advantage is a much better explanation for stage rules in most places. I'm not sure said top players even ever consciously think through what they're doing; it's just a natural consequence of human nature.
Exactly.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Feb 14, 2015
Messages
1,926
Location
Sudbury, Ontario, Canada
NNID
Ridleylash
3DS FC
1736-1657-3905
Kongo Jungle is in a weird spot, because it's in design a good counterpick stage. That barrel on the bottom ****s it all up, though; I could have gotten a hype-ass combo with Ganondorf on a Shiek, finish it with a DAir and then the barrel swoops in, shoots Shiek back up so she can combo me back and then I get juggled and spiked to my doom because the barrel's on the other side of the stage.

It's basically down to luck if that barrel saves you or not. Sure, we had Randall in Melee, but Randall was both predictable and slow, making it easier to land on him and harder for him to screw up a spike or gimp. The barrel's predictable, but it's going at like 50mph, which makes it hard to land in. And spinning, which means it could just as easily finish you off as it can save you if your jamming the attack button.

Honestly, I think a decent stagelist is as such (including Omegas unless noted);

STARTER PICKS
  • Battlefield
  • Pokemon Stadium 2
  • Dream Land 64
  • Town and City
  • Smashville
  • Omega Norfair
  • Omega Pirate Ship
  • Omega Delfino Plaza
  • Omega Port Town Aero Dive
  • Omega Boxing Ring
  • Omega 75m
  • Omega Palutena's Temple
  • Omega Temple
COUNTER-PICKS
  • Omega Final Destination
  • Omega Pyrosphere
  • Halberd
  • Peach's Castle 64
  • Castle Seige
  • Wuhu Island
  • Pirate Ship
  • Omega Wily's Castle
  • Omega Gaur Plains
  • Omega Wrecking Crew
  • Omega Orbital Gate
  • Delfino Plaza
  • Omega Pokemon League
  • Omega PAC-LAND
BANNED
  • Pyrosphere (hazard interferes with gameplay)
  • Final Destination (visually distracting)
  • Wrecking Crew (gimmick interferes with gameplay)
  • Suzaku Castle (has walkoffs)
  • Wily's Castle (hazard interferes with gameplay)
  • Norfair (hazard interferes with gameplay)
  • Gaur Plains (hazard interferes with gameplay)
  • Orbital Gate Assault (moving stage, has multiple hazards, visually distracting)
  • PAC-LAND (moving stage, has multiple hazards)
  • Kalos Pokemon League (has multiple hazards, visually distracting)
  • 75m (walkoffs, multiple hazards, small amounts of fighting space)
  • Temple (same reasons as always)
  • Port Town Aero Dive (hazards, moving stage)
  • Boxing Ring (has walkoffs)
  • Palutena's Temple (way too goddamn big. Also has multiple hazards)
  • Kongo Jungle 64 (barrel is too fast to predict and thus is an element of luck)
 
Last edited:

Neutricity

Smash Apprentice
Joined
Aug 8, 2012
Messages
128
Pokemon Stadium 2 is great.

I think Wuhu Island and Skyloft are garbage. I'd like to test out Peach's Castle 64 for the lolz. If you have footage then please share.
 

teluoborg

Smash Otter
Joined
Mar 12, 2008
Messages
4,060
Location
Paris, France
NNID
teloutre
As far as I know circle camping means circling around the stage without getting hit. And by this definition it is possible to circle camp on nearly every stage. Ofc it also depends from your foes speed and everything, but in theory and in practice it is possible. I remember seeing a match where Wario circle camped Pikachu in SV till he got Waft and started to rack % to about 60% and KOed Pikachu with Waft. Gotta find that video and link it. But it is hard to circle camp on stages with high mid plathform like BF. The question is is it effective strategy? Depends from MU and stage, but most of the time no.
I might need to see the replay but I'm pretty sure what you are talking about is air camping, not circle camping. For you to be able to circle camp you need to sit across an unpassable obstacle from your opponent. A very simple example of that are the solid platforms on Luigi's Mansion/Gamer where you can't reach your opponent through them. The same problem appears in Kongo Jungle in a more abstract form : instead of a solid obstacle you simply have a gigantic space. If you're sitting at the left of the bottom platform and your opponent is on the top right platform there is no way for you to reach him before he can switch platforms.
That is circle camping, abusing your aerial mobility to make it hard for your opponent to approach is not because you cannot stay in the air forever.

Oh so you're willing to just stick with the status quo because its been that way for so long and it must be correct, right? Hmmmm maybe we should bring back slavery and feudalism because that system was in place for ages. That is literally one of the worst arguments ever.

Your justification in regards to how isn't bottom-up selection is totally irrelevant. The methodology across games may have remained the same but WITHIN the game is what I'm referring to in regards to consistency.
That's hypocirsy. Unless you want tournaments to use items, coin mode or 1v1v1 format you're just using the word "consistency" because it's convenient for you.
You don't really want people to see the new smash from a new angle and try out new things, you want them to see it from your angle.
What's ridiculous is that even if we let that hypocrisy aside, the simple fact that you think you are the first generation to ask questions regarding the ruleset and assume that everyone before you has just been sheepingly following the trend is either tremendously egocentric or very very ignorant.
You are not trying to end slavery. You are not fighting the system. You are not looking for consistency. You are just trying to impose your views on others.
 
Last edited:

Pyr

Smash Lord
Joined
Jul 7, 2014
Messages
1,053
Location
Somewhere Green
Do you not know what an analogy is? Both of you are specifically mentioning that "a decade of analysis and work" has been used to make a stage legal, and I'm saying that its more a decade of people saying "well this is how it was last year". You are writing this off for no reason, there are a great many times where we have challenged the system that is in place and have been successful. Sorry I used slavery as an example, I thought you knew a tiny bit about world history; my mistake. Based on what you've said I bet you didn't even read the context of the discussion which was in the post last page and just decided to blurt out the first thing that came to your mind based on my last response. In fact it certainly looks that way considering your edit.
It's like you make "missing the point" your job. teluoborg teluoborg said it really well, though. You don't want discussion. You want people to agree with you. Using insults as main points just furthers the fact that talking with you would be fruitless.
 

RIP|Merrick

Absolute Trash
Joined
Mar 30, 2014
Messages
492
Location
Michigan
NNID
Merricktherox
3DS FC
4339-2630-2726
Sorry to intrude here, but I absolutely can't stand when people play the "People just don't like what they don't know" card when constant debates and arguments occur because people omit Halberd. Of course there will and still always will be someone who is either misinformed or unwilling to learn a stage despite all the resources being out there to learn, not to mention the game itself you can just pop in and study up through various play sessions. But there are also just as many who know the exact amount of damage particular hazards deal, or the undersides of a stage layout, or the time until a stage does a thing. We've studied up, we know, we've played with it in tournaments for months. Stop assuming we haven't.

I dunno, it just really has been bugging me lately when people use the "lack of knowledge" thing as a basis for an argument. Please stop. Can we all just assume everyone in this thread knows the stages and how they work and every little nuance about them?

Stop flaming someone and making them feel like trash because they omit Halberd or whatever. And it goes for people who start wars for those that run less traditional rulesets. How about we just let us all run what we feel is right for our respective audiences (obviously those coming out to compete) if it works and people enjoy them?

Now for something different. Does it bother anyone else the way the lip of the Halberd Deck is? I swear the underside of that eats up recoveries that shouldn't. I wish you just naturally glided upward along it like in most stages, but I see people getting caught underneath that time and time again. I mentioned it several pages ago in this thread, but it seems kind of an issue. Anyone else notice that every so often? I'll try to show a video later of what I'm talking about, but the time to get to that one particular transition is admittedly kind of tedious in terms of just studying it up efficiently.
 

KeithTheGeek

Smash Ace
Joined
Nov 3, 2013
Messages
576
Location
VA
NNID
bkeith
3DS FC
5026-4475-8239
It's definitely a thing that happens, but I don't honestly think getting caught under the lip is really that big of a deal compared to the other problems the stage has. We didn't ban Lylat or FD in Brawl (or heck, Halberd) for that reason.

The real problem with the stage (hazards aside, which an observant player can watch for and work with) is it's ceiling. Hazards and a lipped ledge are sort of just the icing on the problematic cake.
 

MrGame&Rock

Smash Ace
Joined
Jan 10, 2012
Messages
780
Location
Washington, DC
NNID
SpenstarHD
It's definitely a thing that happens, but I don't honestly think getting caught under the lip is really that big of a deal compared to the other problems the stage has. We didn't ban Lylat or FD in Brawl (or heck, Halberd) for that reason.

The real problem with the stage (hazards aside, which an observant player can watch for and work with) is it's ceiling. Hazards and a lipped ledge are sort of just the icing on the problematic cake.
And the claw hazard. The laser and cannonball are completely fine IMO, but the claw's pretty annoying.
 

RIP|Merrick

Absolute Trash
Joined
Mar 30, 2014
Messages
492
Location
Michigan
NNID
Merricktherox
3DS FC
4339-2630-2726
Oh no, I'm not saying anything for or against that stage because of that particularly odd lip, just thought I'd point it out to see if anyone else had an awkward time maneuvering around that annoyance.

Speaking of annoyance, so the East side of our state is running a new stagelist where they're still going by the starter/counterpick distinction that include

Starter Stages: Battlefield, Final Destination, Lylat Cruise, Smashville, Town & City
Counterpicks: Dreamland 64, Duck Hunt

Also, instead of even allowing 1111 Miis as an option when voting, it was essentially an all or nothing type deal I guess, and instead of the middle ground they're being outright banned. I dunno, so many things, but it never made logical sense ever to me to limit people to less stages when they could access them all game one. Also the Mii ban is so dumb, but you know, nothing I can do but politely but strongly disagree with them. It's not like West Michigan will be forced to this, we'll continue to let all custom Mii sets be legal as well as using FLSS.

I just can't help but feel a tad annoyed that my lengthy post on why FLSS was, while liked, had no real discussion at the time it was posted and was generally ignored. And now I see people bickering that Lylat is a starter stage because it's "jank", lol.

Oh well. I honestly don't think I'll be attending any East tournaments for some time because I was interested in playing even 1111 Mii Brawler, but if I can't even play that character anywhere else in our state but our own West MI tournaments...bleh.

Reading some of the comments, some of these people literally want the likes of Dreamland and Town & City banned without reason.
 
Last edited:

teluoborg

Smash Otter
Joined
Mar 12, 2008
Messages
4,060
Location
Paris, France
NNID
teloutre
^
The only reason to have a CP list when your stage list is this small is when you have an even number of stages.

And good riddance Delfino, I'll see you again in friendlies (if I ever stop playing them on SMM).
 

MrGame&Rock

Smash Ace
Joined
Jan 10, 2012
Messages
780
Location
Washington, DC
NNID
SpenstarHD
Delfino isn't dead until Nebulous Smash 4 says it is. And they still have legal miis, (default system mii, freedom of moves) and legal Halberd, Delfino, and Castle Siege.
 

Amazing Ampharos

Balanced Brawl Designer
Writing Team
Joined
Jan 31, 2008
Messages
4,582
Location
Kansas City, MO
I agree with your reasoning in general, but is Kongo Jungle 64 really more match-up polarizing than Halberd? Or are you talking about Little Mac specifically?
My experience with those stages is that Kongo Jungle 64 is generally really bad for some characters while Halberd is really good for some other characters. Maybe there are match-ups that I've missed but a dedicated Little Mac main can always ban Kongo Jungle 64 because he/she knows what character he/she will play, but you can never be completely sure which character your opponent will pick in game 2 and 3, meaning that you can't safely know if you should ban Halberd or not.

My point is: Aren't the polarizing match-ups on Kongo Jungle 64 less relevant than the polarizing match-ups on Halberd?
A lot of run-away tactics are pretty strong on Kongo. People in this topic who are talking like the run-away is unbeatable, to me, seem like they don't have enough experience on the stage; unless you are literally using Little Mac, it's possible to catch people on KJ. It's really not like Temple at all. That being said, catching people can be hard, and that can give people some solid advantages. The really huge blastzones relative to every other stage are also about equally polarizing to Halberd's small blastzones so, when everything is put together, Kongo is clearly more polarizing than Halberd. That being said, with appropriate stage procedure, you can play around Kongo well enough that it doesn't really make problems for tournaments that use it since plenty of MUs are fine on Kongo.

Routa Routa No you can't, or you don't understand what circle camping is. None of the legal stages have platforms that are hard to reach like KJ has.
Agreed that it's more a natural selection than thorough research, but you shouldn't be too quick to come to the conclusion that no one has put any thought into it besides following what the top players said.
That's just your biased opinion towards stage conservatives. What you see as "a game mechanic I don't want to understand" can be seen as "an intrusion that doesn't fit my ideal competitive scenario" and while both are subjective the second one isn't nearly as lazy.
It's a common misconception that when people don't want to play on a janky stage it's because they're too lazy to learn how it works. Maybe it's the case for stupid people, but there also are intelligent people that do not want to play on Halberd because they do not want the outcome of a match to depend on who the laser/claw targets. Some stage features are simply too intrusive for those people and I understand them. There is nothing wrong for not wanting the result of a tournament to depend on things like Delfino's ceiling changes.
And people did not give Peach's Castle a chance because the bottom platform clearly gives a positional advantage, and if you want to approach someone that's camping there you have to take an absurd amount of risks.
There's a lot of baggage to address here.

I'm not convinced the term "intrusion" means any more than "jank". What defines an element that is intruding versus one that is a "natural" part of the game? If there were no stage, everyone would just fall off the bottom blast zone and the winner would be whoever can stall in the air the most. Is the ground not interfering with that? Do platforms interfere with movement by the same logic? How is a ceiling's position an interference? If Delfino has a low ceiling at one time, maybe it is an interference that Final Destination does not. If I really like platforms, can I call it an interference that Final Destination doesn't have them since it's interfering with my natural game plan?

What you said about Peach's Castle sums it up for me. Of course being on the bottom (and in the center) offers you a positional advantage. Being in the middle of Final Destination offers you an advantage. Standing under BF's platforms can offer you an advantage. Charizard standing under Duck Hunt's tree can get a great advantage with his uthrow. Getting positional advantages by exploiting stage features is a core aspect of smash gameplay, and all players on all stages will be doing it all of the time. I just don't understand the alleged difference between what moving and transforming stages have and what static stages have. When I play, I don't use a different mental process to decide "I should stand under a platform" versus deciding "I should move the Halberd laser targeting me to the ledge". It's all just stage position optimization based on the current context. To me, static stages are intrinsically more egregious than moving ones because moving stages don't allow anyone to become entrenched in a position and offer different characters different advantages at different times while static stages allow for the really big advantages.

It just seems really arbitrary to me to decide some stage elements are "bad", "janky", "interfering", or whatever words will be used. I see stages have several real impacts on matches: they offer character advantages/disadvantages, they can have random elements that increase match variance, and they can (if particularly poorly designed) cause slippery slope wherein whoever is winning has a big advantage over whoever is losing (Jungle Hijinx is the main stage with this strange and undesirable property). To me, as long as a stage is reasonably well balanced across match-ups and reasonably non-swingy, it should be legal. I am totally unconvinced Delfino or Skyloft or any of those are more swingy than static stages, and I'm entirely convinced they're actually more character balanced.

Genuine question here because I'm curious : you must have played with both typs of stage lists (13 with FLSS and short with only 5/7 stages) ; do you observe a change in competitive results ? Are there people that get better with a bigger stage list or inversely ?
I wish I could give a better answer than the truth. The truth is that our city is very large so events in different areas of the city (with the different TOs) often have pretty different pools of players which limits my ability to gather that data; I can only think of a relative handful of players who have traveled around a bit more. Largely it only comes into play in two situations: a player is really unfamiliar with stages that are legal or a stage list has so few and such poorly selected starters that it really screws someone's main. I've counterpicked Skyloft on people who responed with "I don't know what that stage does", and they always predictably play pretty badly on it (somehow I never feel guilty; if I think they don't know all of the stages well, I'm going to ignore character advantages and go for something I suspect they aren't familiar with without hesitation). On the other side, we have had several local tournaments that had the starter list of FD/BF/SV/T&C/DL. This really hurts our local Sonics since Sonic is really disadvantaged by three of those stages; as long as the opponent is smart enough to strike FD and T&C, Sonic is forced to a bad stage game one which really does cause those players to lose to people they should beat.

Well that's just your experience, mine is the complete opposite and I've both seen and lived stupid stuff on every stage but smash ville. The worst this stage has is early kills when the platform reaches its stopping point and increased follow ups from a throw when it's performed from the moving platform. In all cases it's way less offensive than being killed by a blastzone size change.
Have you ever seen someone use the Smashville camping strategy? Use a character with a good grab game and fight against someone who has a bad (or non-existent) projectile and a lackluster ability to approach from the air. Get a 30% or more lead, get on the platform, stay on the platform, and start playing for a time-out. The movement of the platform makes it way easier to keep up for a long time, way stronger than sitting on a non-moving platform on BF or something. It's really dumb, and it makes a lot of MUs really stupid. If you thought Sonic was good on SV in my previous paragraph, this is why he's not (his ability to deal with this is one of the worst). I'm always amazed at how rarely people do this, and I'm always amazed at how powerful this is for me when I go for it. Combined with the (substantial) other shenanigans that platform allows (and how strongly character polarizing it is), I see it as the stage of all plausibly legal stages most likely to produce poor gameplay. I really don't think it should be banned, but I don't think it's much better than "good enough".
 

MrGame&Rock

Smash Ace
Joined
Jan 10, 2012
Messages
780
Location
Washington, DC
NNID
SpenstarHD
A lot of run-away tactics are pretty strong on Kongo. People in this topic who are talking like the run-away is unbeatable, to me, seem like they don't have enough experience on the stage; unless you are literally using Little Mac, it's possible to catch people on KJ. It's really not like Temple at all. That being said, catching people can be hard, and that can give people some solid advantages. The really huge blastzones relative to every other stage are also about equally polarizing to Halberd's small blastzones so, when everything is put together, Kongo is clearly more polarizing than Halberd. That being said, with appropriate stage procedure, you can play around Kongo well enough that it doesn't really make problems for tournaments that use it since plenty of MUs are fine on Kongo.
Kongo Jungle is in my rotation for my friendlies, and yeah neither of us can get away with runaway tactics on this stage. It could be because of how much mobility Yoshi and Puff have in the air. (though I do not like this stage for Yoshi very much, at least against Puff) We also discovered that it's a great stage for Jigglypuff in general. The ceilings are high, the ground is sharkable, and the barrels don't seem to play much of a role in general with us. I actually rank it above Halberd and Castle Siege, though honestly if we didn't have a relative shortage of high ceiling stages I might be singing a different tune.


On the other side, we have had several local tournaments that had the starter list of FD/BF/SV/T&C/DL. This really hurts our local Sonics since Sonic is really disadvantaged by three of those stages; as long as the opponent is smart enough to strike FD and T&C, Sonic is forced to a bad stage game one which really does cause those players to lose to people they should beat.
Does Sonic prefer a starter set that trades DL64 for Lylat Cruise? Because I sure as heck do, given Smash 4's version of Dreamland
 

[Deuce]

Smash Journeyman
Joined
Mar 28, 2006
Messages
219
Location
Socal
It's like you make "missing the point" your job. teluoborg teluoborg said it really well, though. You don't want discussion. You want people to agree with you. Using insults as main points just furthers the fact that talking with you would be fruitless.
I made my points, you didn't even read them and decided on one post that the whole discussion was off topic. So yes it is in fact pointless arguing with someone who closes his mind off to an entire discussion while focusing on one VERY minute point. Funny how you're trying to make it sound like I want people to agree with me when you're the one tagging people in your posts. Hilarious.

That's hypocirsy. Unless you want tournaments to use items, coin mode or 1v1v1 format you're just using the word "consistency" because it's convenient for you.
You don't really want people to see the new smash from a new angle and try out new things, you want them to see it from your angle.
What's ridiculous is that even if we let that hypocrisy aside, the simple fact that you think you are the first generation to ask questions regarding the ruleset and assume that everyone before you has just been sheepingly following the trend is either tremendously egocentric or very very ignorant.
You are not trying to end slavery. You are not fighting the system. You are not looking for consistency. You are just trying to impose your views on others.
Who said anything about coin mode or FFA? Also, it would in fact be a solid argument for item inclusion, if all items were not actually randomized and some polarizing. You call it being egocentric, when actually you're being closed minded. Why are we thinking the glass is half empty for one set of criteria and half full for another set? It's a legitimate question and your answer is literally "because we've been doing it for so long, they must have done it right." And if someone has asked the question before and it came with an answer, why not respond with that rather than what you said? Do you have an actual answer or is it because it actually hasn't been addressed?

Anyways, Peach's Castle 64 and KJ 64 both are stages that don't have any elements that call for outright banning unlike other stages. The stronger lower platform in the former changes so it's more difficult to camp one of the corners. Circle camping doesn't appear to be an issue for KJ64 with the exception of characters who have difficulty chasing like Mac.
 
Last edited:

Zage

Smash Journeyman
Joined
Mar 23, 2008
Messages
397
Location
Maryland
Kongo Jungle is in a weird spot, because it's in design a good counterpick stage. That barrel on the bottom ****s it all up, though; I could have gotten a hype-*** combo with Ganondorf on a Shiek, finish it with a DAir and then the barrel swoops in, shoots Shiek back up
While I'm against Kong Jungle. That's a really poor reason to ban a stage. It's a counter pick stage, and as such it would make sense to take characters with good spikes to it.......to counter them.
 

Yikarur

Smash Master
Joined
May 29, 2007
Messages
4,595
Location
Germany
A lot of run-away tactics are pretty strong on Kongo. People in this topic who are talking like the run-away is unbeatable, to me, seem like they don't have enough experience on the stage; unless you are literally using Little Mac, it's possible to catch people on KJ. It's really not like Temple at all. That being said, catching people can be hard, and that can give people some solid advantages. The really huge blastzones relative to every other stage are also about equally polarizing to Halberd's small blastzones so, when everything is put together, Kongo is clearly more polarizing than Halberd. That being said, with appropriate stage procedure, you can play around Kongo well enough that it doesn't really make problems for tournaments that use it since plenty of MUs are fine on Kongo.
I'm known in my country as "ruleset abuser" and every time a stage is allowed that I don't agree with for degenerative reasons I totally abuse it. I've convinced multiple people that Kongo Jungle should not be legal.

"It's possible to catch people on KJ"

yes, it's possible in like "getting 1 hit every 60 seconds". It's stupid. If you get the stock lead you have most likely won. If you play the circle camp game chances are you're not going to get hit by a kill move are pretty high plus if you get hit by the weaker once they usually don't kill until 200% because of the huge blast zones. And those hits are really rare already.
This stage should never be allowed. You can force a time-out on the stage every time you play. It's absurd.
In theory, every match played optimally on this stage should end in a timeout -> one degenerative strategy over gameplay.
 

KeithTheGeek

Smash Ace
Joined
Nov 3, 2013
Messages
576
Location
VA
NNID
bkeith
3DS FC
5026-4475-8239
Ideally we shouldn't need rules to fix flaws (perceived or otherwise) in our stages and characters. Otherwise you end up with the giant mess that was Brawl's ruleset.
 

RIP|Merrick

Absolute Trash
Joined
Mar 30, 2014
Messages
492
Location
Michigan
NNID
Merricktherox
3DS FC
4339-2630-2726
I'm known in my country as "ruleset abuser" and every time a stage is allowed that I don't agree with for degenerative reasons I totally abuse it. I've convinced multiple people that Kongo Jungle should not be legal.
That's just how you gotta do it man; if someone doesn't agree with something, abuse the crap out of a particular tactic and go out of your way to prove how miserable a stage can be with some abuse; exactly what our Sheik player Miloni did months ago along with a few others and we haven't run it since.

I'd love to someday document why certain stages are degenerate on my channel, are at least point out things that make it, in my opinion, anti-competitive.

Because lets face it, most people in the Smash community are just dumb; they write off something as "jank" immediately when they can't think of any other thing to say on a stage. Visuals are key. If I can point out clearly WHY certain stages may not be meant for competitive with hard facts about percentage of damage from hazards, blast zone data, and overly degenerate spots that give characters overly powerful tactics they can abuse, all the better.

Recently in the state people are calling out Halberd, Delfino Plaza, and Castle Sneeze jank because I don't know. I have an idea why, but nobody else is willing to dig deeper into why other than that it just is. If anyone would be interested in such a thing that maybe would like to help me out via wi-fi in actual matches or just testing or something, I would totally love to give it a shot! I'm almost always around a computer due to what I do professionally, and I'd love to compile and explain the advantages as well as disadvantages of stages in a competitive setting, all bias aside.
 

TheAnomaly

Smash Cadet
Joined
Feb 19, 2015
Messages
55
Location
Barbados
I'm known in my country as "ruleset abuser" and every time a stage is allowed that I don't agree with for degenerative reasons I totally abuse it. I've convinced multiple people that Kongo Jungle should not be legal.

"It's possible to catch people on KJ"

yes, it's possible in like "getting 1 hit every 60 seconds". It's stupid. If you get the stock lead you have most likely won. If you play the circle camp game chances are you're not going to get hit by a kill move are pretty high plus if you get hit by the weaker once they usually don't kill until 200% because of the huge blast zones. And those hits are really rare already.
This stage should never be allowed. You can force a time-out on the stage every time you play. It's absurd.
In theory, every match played optimally on this stage should end in a timeout -> one degenerative strategy over gameplay.
I would love to see recordings of this. Personally I find it hard to catch someone stalling not impossible but perhaps my opponents are not using the best stalling strategy.
 

topspin1617

Smash Apprentice
Joined
Apr 7, 2009
Messages
154
Location
Florida
NNID
topspin1617
3DS FC
0318-7760-0788
Sorry to intrude here, but I absolutely can't stand when people play the "People just don't like what they don't know" card when constant debates and arguments occur because people omit Halberd. Of course there will and still always will be someone who is either misinformed or unwilling to learn a stage despite all the resources being out there to learn, not to mention the game itself you can just pop in and study up through various play sessions. But there are also just as many who know the exact amount of damage particular hazards deal, or the undersides of a stage layout, or the time until a stage does a thing. We've studied up, we know, we've played with it in tournaments for months. Stop assuming we haven't.

I dunno, it just really has been bugging me lately when people use the "lack of knowledge" thing as a basis for an argument. Please stop. Can we all just assume everyone in this thread knows the stages and how they work and every little nuance about them?

Stop flaming someone and making them feel like trash because they omit Halberd or whatever. And it goes for people who start wars for those that run less traditional rulesets. How about we just let us all run what we feel is right for our respective audiences (obviously those coming out to compete) if it works and people enjoy them?
This SO much.

I didn't come here to advocate for or against any particular stages. As far as the quoted post, I like Halberd but can see why some don't.

I favor having as much as reasonably possible legal... that is, I think a stage (or character, or custom move) should have a solid argument against it for a ban to be considered. Start with the entire stage list and eliminate stages that just don't work, as opposed to starting with nothing and trying to designate a few "good" stages.

And of course there will never be unanimity, because different people view things in different ways. That's why we have rational discussions about these things... that accomplishes so much more than just flaming people you disagree with.

But the main reason I quoted this post is because it's ridiculous when people claim "you just want X stage banned because you can't be bothered to learn how it works". That just misses the mark by so much. While I'm sure there exist players like that, I would think the majority of top players (or players in general) have a good understanding of each stage's mechanics (I'm no pro, but honestly this game isn't that complicated, and I've literally never thought to myself that I don't want to play on a stage because I don't UNDERSTAND it).

The question isn't whether we're coddling the top players by only using stages they "understand". As if the top players would suddenly fall by using a new stage... 99/100 times they'll adapt to the new challenge much better than most other players anyway. Rather, the question is looking at each stage and asking if there's something about it that is legitimately unfair, whether that be overly intrusive hazards, mechanics that are highly luck based, allowing for lame easy camping strategies, etc.

This argument to me is the same as when people say the only reason ZeRo has been so dominant is because he uses top tier characters. People argue he uses them as a crutch, and they actually say he wouldn't be able to win with other characters. Which is an asinine opinion to me; I'd bet money that ZeRo could wreck with a LOT of characters.

Can we just put an end to this type of argument? "The top players are incapable of handling change!" is at the same time unhelpful and blatantly false. Let's discuss REAL reasons for stage bans.

I suppose I'll finish up with my own question. Where do people see our latest stages ending up? Mario Maker is an obvious ban. I like Pirate Ship (especially because it has Song of Storms lol), but it clearly has a lot of annoying hazards. That said, I actually think most of them are fine... probably my main issue is that stupid catapult that just flings you to your death.

I know a lot of people dislike Hyrule Castle 64... is it because of the extremeties of the stage allowing for a lot of camping? I don't see the tornado as a huge problem, so my guess is that it has more to do with the stage layout itself.

Finally... I feel like Peach's Castle 64 has potential. Being able to grab the ledges now is HUGE imo. I could definitely see the stage being allowed as a counterpick.
 

ParanoidDrone

Smash Master
Joined
Jan 26, 2008
Messages
4,335
Location
Baton Rouge, LA
But the main reason I quoted this post is because it's ridiculous when people claim "you just want X stage banned because you can't be bothered to learn how it works". That just misses the mark by so much. While I'm sure there exist players like that, I would think the majority of top players (or players in general) have a good understanding of each stage's mechanics (I'm no pro, but honestly this game isn't that complicated, and I've literally never thought to myself that I don't want to play on a stage because I don't UNDERSTAND it).
The problem is that I have asked some people why they don't like certain stages (and customs but that's a separate topic), and that's almost exactly the logic they used to defend their stance: "I don't want to deal with learning it", "it's too much to learn", etc.

Bit hard to take claims to the contrary seriously that way.

To be clear, there are plenty of valid reasons to dislike stages. But those reasons rarely crop up when I ask people in my city. And when I press for details ("Why don't you like X?") it's not uncommon for their responses to give away a lack of understanding.

I realize you mention that yes, some people do think this. But unless someone has Zero's ear to ask him directly why he dislikes stages X/Y/Z, we're left to speculate.
 
Last edited:

Myed

Smash Apprentice
Joined
Jan 7, 2015
Messages
89
Location
Mourning the loss of New Pork
NNID
13sora
3DS FC
1306-7973-7040
The problem is that I have asked some people why they don't like certain stages (and customs but that's a separate topic), and that's almost exactly the logic they used to defend their stance: "I don't want to deal with learning it", "it's too much to learn", etc..
Or they cite things that just aren't true.
'Wuhu has that glitch with Ness's grab on the boat'
'You can't grab the ledge on Peach's Castle, so no one can recover'
'The transformations on Wuhu are random, so it could theoretically be Beach 10 times in a row, making it a permanent walkoff for over a minute'
Those are all untrue, have been passed off as fact, and only serve to demonstrate the person's lack of knowledge on what they're talking about.


To respond to the rest of the original post:
Pirate Ship does stand a lot better than Brawl now that the rock isn't a walkoff and the hazards don't have fixed knockback. However, Rudder-stalling for timeouts is a real problem.


If it does become legal, it'll most likely have to have a rule banning rudder-stalling, but I doubt that's going to happen.
 

Ghostbone

Smash Master
Joined
Sep 20, 2010
Messages
4,665
Location
Australia
If nothing else, rudder stalling certainly breaks Pirate Ship. It's even better than in Brawl because you took hoop damage in Brawl while doing it, and the stage eventually forces you up when you hit the rock or the hurricane comes along (at which point you were at 150%).
In this game you're still forced up but it's still obviously way too potent of a time out strategy. We don't clutter our ruleset up with tonnes of restrictions in an attempt to make stages legal (we don't ban circle camping and legalise temple, we ban stages that enable circle camping), so just banning rudder stalling isn't an option (are you going to have a referee at every station to catch players out as well?), we already made a similar mistake in Brawl by banning scrooging and having an LGL instead of just banning the damn bat.

It's not like the stage doesn't have other problems as well, it's just not at all a candidate for legality.
 
Last edited:

topspin1617

Smash Apprentice
Joined
Apr 7, 2009
Messages
154
Location
Florida
NNID
topspin1617
3DS FC
0318-7760-0788
To respond to the rest of the original post:
Pirate Ship does stand a lot better than Brawl now that the rock isn't a walkoff and the hazards don't have fixed knockback. However, Rudder-stalling for timeouts is a real problem.


If it does become legal, it'll most likely have to have a rule banning rudder-stalling, but I doubt that's going to happen.
If nothing else, rudder stalling certainly breaks Pirate Ship. It's even better than in Brawl because you took hoop damage in Brawl while doing it, and the stage eventually forces you up when you hit the rock or the hurricane comes along (at which point you were at 150%).
In this game you're still forced up but it's still obviously way too potent of a time out strategy. We don't clutter our ruleset up with tonnes of restrictions in an attempt to make stages legal (we don't ban circle camping and legalise temple, we ban stages that enable circle camping), so just banning rudder stalling isn't an option (are you going to have a referee at every station to catch players out as well?), we already made a similar mistake in Brawl by banning scrooging and having an LGL instead of just banning the damn bat.

It's not like the stage doesn't have other problems as well, it's just not at all a candidate for legality.
Huh, I had actually never heard of rudder stalling before. Tried to look it up on Youtube... is it the second thing they show off in this video? That's definitely a huge issue, and that alone would warrant the ban.


The problem is that I have asked some people why they don't like certain stages (and customs but that's a separate topic), and that's almost exactly the logic they used to defend their stance: "I don't want to deal with learning it", "it's too much to learn", etc.

Bit hard to take claims to the contrary seriously that way.

To be clear, there are plenty of valid reasons to dislike stages. But those reasons rarely crop up when I ask people in my city. And when I press for details ("Why don't you like X?") it's not uncommon for their responses to give away a lack of understanding.

I realize you mention that yes, some people do think this. But unless someone has Zero's ear to ask him directly why he dislikes stages X/Y/Z, we're left to speculate.
Eh... yeah, again (and as you acknowledge I said), I'm sure players exist who will say that, but that would just be a clear signal to me that person is not to be taken seriously.

And that kind of "logic" shows up in basically any competitive game. When you have to make a ruleset to allow for fair competitive play, people always want to claim you're really just hand-holding the top players who are somehow incapable of adapting to change or anything new. Happens in fighters, shooters, racers. Happens in TCGs (a LOT). Hell, even in regular sports. And it's pretty much always bogus reasoning.

So... I'm sure many people have anecdotal experience of talking to a person who says something like that, but I'd wager that the vast majority of time, if someone things a stage should be banned, they have a better reason than "I can't be bothered to learn it". Their reason itself could be debated, but surely most people realize "I don't want to learn the stage" is a completely unviable argument for a ban on anything.
 

ParanoidDrone

Smash Master
Joined
Jan 26, 2008
Messages
4,335
Location
Baton Rouge, LA
Eh... yeah, again (and as you acknowledge I said), I'm sure players exist who will say that, but that would just be a clear signal to me that person is not to be taken seriously.

And that kind of "logic" shows up in basically any competitive game. When you have to make a ruleset to allow for fair competitive play, people always want to claim you're really just hand-holding the top players who are somehow incapable of adapting to change or anything new. Happens in fighters, shooters, racers. Happens in TCGs (a LOT). Hell, even in regular sports. And it's pretty much always bogus reasoning.

So... I'm sure many people have anecdotal experience of talking to a person who says something like that, but I'd wager that the vast majority of time, if someone things a stage should be banned, they have a better reason than "I can't be bothered to learn it". Their reason itself could be debated, but surely most people realize "I don't want to learn the stage" is a completely unviable argument for a ban on anything.
In a vacuum, sure, we can stipulate that most people won't use "I don't wanna" as a reason. But now that we've had numerous national tournaments with more or less the same stage list, there is next to no incentive for anyone to bother learning any stages beyond the ones that have already been established. Unless you're already in a fairly liberal region, in which case I envy you.

I'm honestly at a bit of a loss as to how to spark interest. True story: After some joking around in friendlies, I picked Gamer for a stage. (I checked first, they were cool with this.) I never got hit by Mom once. My opponent's deaths were all from Mom. Now, Gamer is obviously not a paragon of good stage design (although it's fun as hell IMO), but I think it illustrates an issue that will crop up repeatedly: Calling a stage "good" carries with it the fundamental assumption that both players understand how the stage operates. Less played stages are less understood by most people except the ones trying to get some interest going. Trying to play some sample matches on these stages results in one player having a stage knowledge advantage and the other having a disadvantage. And that opens the door to stage johns and does not help the case for the stage in question.
 

topspin1617

Smash Apprentice
Joined
Apr 7, 2009
Messages
154
Location
Florida
NNID
topspin1617
3DS FC
0318-7760-0788
In a vacuum, sure, we can stipulate that most people won't use "I don't wanna" as a reason. But now that we've had numerous national tournaments with more or less the same stage list, there is next to no incentive for anyone to bother learning any stages beyond the ones that have already been established. Unless you're already in a fairly liberal region, in which case I envy you.

I'm honestly at a bit of a loss as to how to spark interest. True story: After some joking around in friendlies, I picked Gamer for a stage. (I checked first, they were cool with this.) I never got hit by Mom once. My opponent's deaths were all from Mom. Now, Gamer is obviously not a paragon of good stage design (although it's fun as hell IMO), but I think it illustrates an issue that will crop up repeatedly: Calling a stage "good" carries with it the fundamental assumption that both players understand how the stage operates. Less played stages are less understood by most people except the ones trying to get some interest going. Trying to play some sample matches on these stages results in one player having a stage knowledge advantage and the other having a disadvantage. And that opens the door to stage johns and does not help the case for the stage in question.
Well, of course there is currently no incentive if no other stages are currently being used.

But again, it's a huge leap to go from there to "so therefore nobody WANTS to allow more stages". Sure, I totally understand that working with what you already have is easier. At the same time... it's not like we're banning Mewtwo, Roy, Lucas, and Ryu because "omg they're new and I don't want to learn how to deal with them!" So why should we assume people view stages that way in general?

To be fair, I can make a legitimate argument for every single stage that's banned. That's not to say I FAVOR the ban in every case, but one can at least understand it. You're almost making it sound like people are taking totally fair, totally neutral stages and banning them just because "ugh I don't want to learn how often that platform goes by!"

This is precisely what legitimate debate is for. If there's a particular stage that you really feel should be legal, make your argument. But when someone replies with a reasonable rationale for a ban, you can't stick your fingers in your ears and yell "lalala I can't hear you I know you really just don't like change!"

As for your example... Gamer is a horrible stage. Other than the Mom, the stage design allows some of the most annoying camping possible. I'm not saying it can't be fun... but there's a difference between "fun" and "competitively fair". For example, probably my favorite stage in Smash Wii U is Kalos Pokemon League. I absolutely love playing on it. I'd still never want to play a tournament match on it.

Also, I think you're overstating the effect of stage knowledge when you say

Calling a stage "good" carries with it the fundamental assumption that both players understand how the stage operates. Less played stages are less understood by most people except the ones trying to get some interest going.
To an extent, the notion that less played stages will be understood by fewer people is obviously true. But as I said before, even the most ridiculous stages are pretty simple to "understand". Gamer? Don't stand in the cone of light. Now I understand the stage. You have to be open to the possibility that "stage johns" actually ARE legitimate complaints.

And this is all coming from someone who likes variety and would like to see as many fair stages as possible legal.
 

MrGame&Rock

Smash Ace
Joined
Jan 10, 2012
Messages
780
Location
Washington, DC
NNID
SpenstarHD
At the same time... it's not like we're banning Mewtwo, Roy, Lucas, and Ryu because "omg they're new and I don't want to learn how to deal with them!" So why should we assume people view stages that way in general?
But a lot of people want to ban characters just because they're new and don't know how to deal with them. Except instead of Mewtwo Roy Lucas Ryu it's Mii Brawler Mii Swordfighter and Mii Gunner
 

Ansou

Smash Ace
Joined
Oct 28, 2014
Messages
506
Location
Stockholm, Sweden
NNID
Ansoulom
3DS FC
4897-5959-9210
To an extent, the notion that less played stages will be understood by fewer people is obviously true. But as I said before, even the most ridiculous stages are pretty simple to "understand". Gamer? Don't stand in the cone of light. Now I understand the stage. You have to be open to the possibility that "stage johns" actually ARE legitimate complaints.
Yeah sure, you might "understand" the stage's concept in general by knowing that you should avoid the light but it's not really that simple. You need to have actually played on the stage quite a bit to know exactly how you should avoid the light. Which is probably why ParanoidDrone ParanoidDrone never even got hit by Mom but the other people died by it all the time. So even if you understand the basic concept of the stage, you need to actually learn how to deal with it which takes a bit more effort. I'm guessing that's what people mean when they say that they don't want to bother learning the stages.

And yes, this argument is definitely used. In many cases it comes in the form "I don't want stage awareness to be a part of the game. You should only have to worry about your opponent and not about the stage." In other cases it might be "There is too much to learn for newer players, making the entry barrier larger." Or they just make arguments that simply shows a lack of understanding of the stage.

No, we should not assume that most people are scrubs and argue this way. But the sad truth is that many people do. I would definitely want to ignore arguments like this, but when the TOs go by the loudest opinions or majority, it just doesn't really matter.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom