[VIC] 3 Stock'd ~ Melbourne 2010 ~ Nope

[Haydino]

idk why you say it's more balanced to favour high-tiered characters, it makes no sense (to me) when you just say that high-tier characters should be favoured because they're better characters...

Its not that they will be favoured but that they are "high-tiered" for a reason.

Like C~Dog said we dont want to favour anyone its just that a good character is going to be good anyway.

If a stage affects the match up so much that a top tier character is at a disadvantage to a low tier, if this isnt the case usually, then that stage is unfair.

Edit: Im not saying that if the stage is unfair it should be banned though. Because the Counterpick system is one that purposfully tips the 'fairness' to one side anyway but for starters it should be as 'neutral' as possible.

 

[Shaya]

Practically, we try and consider starters and counterpicks with the top/high tiers in mind. Because its by no surprise the best characters are the ones that do best on standard starters.
We dont change things to make things easier for them, we change things to make it fairer. As in, it is borderline outrageously stupid to have a stage striking system with only 3 stages as FD, SV and BF. Whilst logically they make sense (whilst thinking in terms of neutrals in that the three promote flat/plat play common in smash), they undoubtably favour the living ****ing daylights out of Diddy, Falco and Ice Climbers.

 

[Nova]

I forgot a shout out:

The epic hailstorm
You ruled, seriously, screw smash. That was the highlight of my trip, running through hail to get a Pizza.

Also, I strongly oppose the idea of 7 neutrals (nothing to do with the hatred for the number). It's just ridiculous and will be tedious.
If you're even still talking about it.
W/E though.

 

[luke_atyeo]

Scabe doesn't need high tiers.

for srs.

its true, I was there.

 

[earla]

may i please have any videos of me put up from the most recent 3 stock'd.

are there going to be more than one tournament a month?

cheers

 

[TakFR]

If you truly played to win you would do this with High Tiers aswell, they are high for a reason; It's not whether they need to do it, It's about maxing out your chances of winning. It is a tournament isn't it? Everyone should be trying to win.

Sorry Tak I always seem to be quoting your messages; Nothing personal .

It is true to to win in this game you pretty much have to resort to camping, hence why it's looked down upon so much. I was refering to the fact that by playing a bottom tier you HAVE TO camp, looked down upon or not, but yeah we are on the same page here and i'm not arguing with you don't worry =).

Also it's fine that you're quoting someone that doesn't even play this game =P

 

[abhishekh]

7 neutrals is fun.

Gogogo.

 

[CAOTIC]

http://www.smashboards.com/showthread.php?t=268560

 

[Attila_]

i only just thought about it, but 7 neutrals are stupid. it means you could strike all three of the actual neutral stages if you want. stupid stupid stupid. and halberd is NOT neutral at all.

 

[M]

3 neutrals, 7 neutrals -whatever. You'll all end up on Smashville anyway. =P

 

[dean.]

i only just thought about it, but 7 neutrals are stupid. it means you could strike all three of the actual neutral stages if you want. stupid stupid stupid. and halberd is NOT neutral at all.

If the fairest stage between two characters isn't Battlefield/Smashville/Final Destination, they shouldn't have to play there game 1. Although there are no 'neutral' stages in Brawl, increasing the number of starters does allow it so there's less chance of a lop-sided stage matchup happening.
For example, Halberd may not be neutral, but adding it to the list allows for the option to choose it. Although it is unpopular, I'm sure that there are some matchups where it provides more balance than FD/SV/BF.
It also gives more meaning to 'if you don't like it, strike it' with three strikes for each player.

I hardly ever play on Smashville.

 

[Leisha]

I always end up on smashvile because i just hate yoshis, + i try not to pick battlefield since its not one of my favourite stages to play on lul

 

[C~Dog]

Just because Battlefield, Smashville, and Final Destination are all Neutrals stages doesn't mean that they form a good set of Starter stages on their own.

 

[Attila_]

Just because Battlefield, Smashville, and Final Destination are all Neutrals stages doesn't mean that they form a good set of Starter stages on their own.

But choosing stages that hard counter certain characters doesn't help the situation, either.

 

[Nixernator]

What chars are hard countered by lylat, yoshis, halberd and PS1? No seriously that would be useful information to have.

 

[Splice]

But choosing stages that hard counter certain characters doesn't help the situation, either.

Thats why both players have 3 strikes, so they can get the most even choice out of whats available. And if they cant get rid of all the stages that don't favour them in the MU with their strikes, they are probably very low tier or they are Vsing Meta Knight, no offense to MK mains intended.

@Dean: What you said was totally revlevant. Edit out the part of your post where it says people can ignore it.

 

[Dekar289]

Battlefield, Smashville, and Final Destination

just these 3 as neutrals imo
1 strike each

i like yoshi's too though

 

[Attila_]

ok, to try and demonstrate my point of the affect of more/less neutrals, let's us the example of ice climbers vs mk. this is a mu i know relatively well and hence make a pretty good judgement in where each character would like to play.

under the 7 neutrals system:

ICS : FD, SV, BF, PS1, YI, Lylat, Halberd : MK

so they would end up playing on ps1, which is most definately not where the ics want to be. stage changes, a dodgy lip and lots of running room can make things hard.

under the 5 neutrals system:

ICS: FD, SV, BF, PS1, YI : MK

now they're playing on battlefield. i'd say it favours MK slightly, but it's much fairer on the ics. they stand a much greater chance of winning here.

under the 3 neutrals system:

ICS: FD, SV, BF : MK

now they play on SV, which is probably the fairest of them all. mk can run to the platform, but ics stay close and a grab should mean death. the mu is still in mks favour, but this stage is the fairest way to go about it. why should we help mk out when he's the clear best anyway?

work with a similar system to this and you'll quickly see that more neutrals makes life harder for almost anyone who isn't mk.

 

[Jei Jei]

I agree.

3 starter stages. Shut up.

 

[Nova]

Yeah 7 neutrals is stupid.
Don't do eeeet.

 

[Splice]

3 neutrals benefits Diddy and D3 and ICs more than 5 or 7 im pretty sure. Haven't gone through it all that much, but with only one strike, Diddy and D3 and IC's are going to get either FD or Smashville, which are both quite good for all of them, ok well I'm not sure about IC's i've forgotten what I knew about them lol.

Battlefield for chars who benefit from platforms.
Final Destination for chars who benefit from no platforms.
Smashville is sorta a hybrid, but leans more towards the no platforms = benefit type.

So characters that really really like no platforms (Diddy and D3 and maybe IC's too) do enjoy the 3 starter stage thing more than others. Not too much of a problem I think.

So in that aspect 3 starters isn't too much of a problem.

I don't think 7 starters has that many problems either, IC's vs MK was a pretty good point from Attila, (although I don't think PS1 is as bad as you make it seem for them if they play it safe during stage transformations) but unless there quite a few of these situations just as match-changing, I don't think it would totally erase 7 starters from being a good idea.

Because the best things about 7 starters is variety.
We'd learn more because there are different tactics for all stages that can be used, and I think the scene needs experience against a wider range of scenarios, including stages and more importantly characters but that's another thing...

Anyway I assume Connor will run a tourney with 7, and then a tourney with 3, so we can accurately decide which we had more striking-problems for our characters (and I don't mean personal preference, if you aren't used to a stage you should get used to it, buuut w/e) or more fun with, rather than just talking about it, without much experience in either ruleset. Then we can decide.

 

[Afropony]

I'd rather have 3 starters then 7, maybe we should have a poll :D.

 

[C~Dog]

Did you guys all forget that we can have five starters or something?

 

[Attila_]

i included the 5 stage system in my example too. i was pretty fine with the result there too. 7 stages benefits mk more than anyone else. have your variety on your cps.

 

[Dekar289]

i think the game benefits mk

 

[Shaya]

I will actively call anyone ******** who thinks Smashville, Final Destination and Battlefield by themselves as 3 starter stages is close to fair for most of the cast.

Oh look at me, I dont main diddy kong, oh look my opponent does, yay @ them getting their [second] best CP on the starter stage 100% of the time.
YAY BALANCE.

With 5 stages in rotation, I would still not feel Final Destination is a fair starter.

The term neutral stage is a misnomer. It doesnt work in this game. Just because its flat doesnt make it neutral. Some characters strengths are so over amplified by some of these supposibly neutral stages that most of the cast are FORCED to ban the stage against them to not avoid an auto-loss.
gg.

If there are 7 starters, what is the ISSUE with someone striking the supposibly three true neutrals. Just because those three stages have the least interference in terms of regular game play doesnt mean they make the first match of a TOURNAMENT SET (read: its the most important one due to the counterpicking system) fair/neutral/whatever. Just because you play all your friendlies and practice on FD, SV and BF only does not mean they are fair for starters.
Rage
RAge
RAGe
RAGE
RAGEEEEEEEEE

 

[tibs7]

When diddy starts getting *****/figured
out, I guarantee you will
change your mind about the starters.

 

[Attila_]

but by that token, shaya, anything that isn't flat favours mk, who is already heavily favoured by general game mechanics and processes. why help him further?

i figure that it's more a personal preference than an actual right-or-wrong thing... like ive said heaps of times, yi is the worst stage for lucas/ness, and the best stage for wolf/dk, and of course halberd is broken for snake/mk, and lylat is awesome for pit/mk.

i dont really think fd is 'awesome' or the 'best' for anyone (although i know people argue it's diddy/ics' best stage, i disagree), but it isnt good for mk, whicb is nice. it isnt horrible for him either, though, unlike a few of the 7 are for a large number of the cast.

depends where you wanna draw the line.

 

[Leisha]

Yoshis island is stupid imo =<

Destroy the level :3

But yeah, I think having 7 neutrals is a bit excessive. 5 is enough imo, no halberd or PS1

 

[M]

No stage isn't good for MK.

 

[luke_atyeo]

lololol wat, ps1 is way better then lylat cruise.

imo 5 stages, but cbf argueing and everyone will be too busy doing the same to care

 

[Leisha]

Mmm, maybe. But in terms of camping, PS1 has far too much of it due to stage transformations n such. But then again, Lylat cruise isn't really a stage I fancy. Well as for stages, just as long as halberd isnt neutral, ill be happy.

MK is just too much ****, nuff said =<

 

[T.REX]

ban MK

problem solved

 

[Vermy]

Just to speed things up.....
(And quite frankly put a muzzle on some of you)

We are having 5 stages. Smashville, Battlefield, Final Destination, Yoshi's Island (Brawl) and Pokemon Stadium 1. Conor was supposed to post this before he went to bed, but he didn't. You're all free to continue discussing it amongst yourselves, but be aware that our minds will not be swayed.

Thanks for playing.

 

[luke_atyeo]

if it means anything to anyone, my ideal list that I use at tourneys is the same, 5 starters with ps1

 

[Vermy]

Thanks for the support Luke <3 as always. In <3 and hate.

 

[abhishekh]

ban MK

problem solved

could stop MKs from being able to strike/counterpick.

---

And although MK doesn't really do bad on any stage, there are stages he's not going to want to go on against certain characters. Like FD against ice climbers, norfair with link and just green greens in general.

Or something like that.

 

[Vermy]

could stop MKs from being able to strike/counterpick.

---

And although MK doesn't really do bad on any stage, there are stages he's not going to want to go on against certain characters. Like FD against ice climbers, norfair with link and just green greens in general.

Or something like that.

Wow. I don't know where to begin.

A) T-Rex was trolling/joking.
B) MK is nigh untouchable on Norfair.
C) Link has much, MUCH better CP options.
D) No, wait he doesn't, HE'S LINK.
E) Norfair is banned.
F) Green Greens is banned.
G) You're stupid, stop being stupid.


GRAAAAAARRGGGGHHHGGHH

 

[Siyro]

Or just do what I do and stop taking the game so seriously. ie. I will be representing a new character and I have moved down the tier list not up, haha.

 

[Vermy]

I'm a TO. I'm one of the only people that has to take Brawl seriously.