3.5 Ruleset

[Kered13]

Choosing from the two remaining stages = Banning one and playing on the last remaining

Think about it a little

That's not the point. The instructions call for a 1-2-2(1*)-1 ban process, which would be appropriate for a 7 neutral stage list. This is clearly either a typo or a copy-paste error from a previous rule set.

*Text says 2, number says 1, no idea what was actually intended.

 

[steakhouse]

So, I just had an idea.

Project M is unique in that it has a ton of viable competitive stages. It also has the problem of often having stagelists that are not balanced very well.

The problem with just including every single competitive stage is that you have to also have like 3 or more bans, which makes the counterpicking process long and difficult because you have to consider every single one of the many, many stages in the context of that particular match-up and then ban the ones that you'd rather avoid in that match-up. Large stagelists cause stage selection to be very time-consuming a lot of the time, and tournaments with large stagelists often go late. That's why smaller stagelists are preferred, even though almost all of them have balance issues.

Since PM is in such a unique situation with its stages, what if we revised and streamlined the counterpicking process for Project M? Here me out and keep an open mind:

Instead of the winner banning x number of stages, and then the loser selecting a counterpick out of the remaining stages, what if instead the loser first selects like 3 stages that he would like to play on in that match-up, and then the winner bans 2 of the 3 (or picks 1 of the 3, same thing).

In this way, the counterpicking would be much less time-consuming, since it wouldn't be a matter of trying to anticipate what the opponent will want to play on and then banning those stages, but would instead be about the opponent picking their top options right off the bat and you just decide which one is the lesser of evils. Since the process would be much simpler, potentially every single competitive stage could be included in the stagelist instead of trying to limit it to a small amount and trying to balance it by omitting many popular stages. This way, every character would have several strong stages, and it might be well balanced.

Does this make sense, or am I speaking nonsense?

what if you're Fox and Marth picks FD, Yoshi's and GHZ ? good luck

 

[steakhouse]

Lylat in neutral

lylat is too good for jugglers like toon link, jigglypuff and falcon to be neutral

 

[Ripple]

why do people think that some characters deserve to not have a hard time when being counterpicked?

in fact, why even have bans? if your character sucks on a lot of stages then you probably should either not pick that character or just accept the fact they suck

 

[GHNeko]

because without bans counterpicking could skew matches to such a ridiculous degree that you might as well not even play the match lol

exaggeration of course

but the banning aspect of counterpicking is to limit advantages and keep things fair so that player skill retains the most weight as a deciding factor in a match


this is also why people are so overly obsessive about viable characters

 

[steakhouse]

in fact, why even have bans? if your character sucks on a lot of stages then you probably should either not pick that character or just accept the fact they suck

um

no bans = all stages open = as long as one stage is bad for your character you're ****ed = you will lose as a spacie against marth on FD at equal skill. Does that mean spacies suck ?

 

[RIDLEY is too SMALL]

what if you're Fox and Marth picks FD, Yoshi's and GHZ ? good luck

I don't understand your point.

What would normally happen in standard rulesets would be the fox player bans 2 stages based on the knowledge they have of the match-up. Either way, fox is going to a stage that marth has the advantage in, but what I was talking about would be more straitforward and not require as much specific match-up knowledge, not to mention needing to know individual player and what other characters they play.

 

[GHNeko]

um

no bans = all stages open = as long as one stage is bad for your character you're ****ed = you will lose as a spacie against marth on FD at equal skill. Does that mean spacies suck ?

isnt that cherry picking?

he meant if your character sucks on a lot of stages, then its your character that's bad so you should pick another character or deal with it.

 

[Ripple]

it means spacies suck on FD against marth.

nothing more than that.

if you don't want to go to FD as a spacie, then choose another character or don't ***** that you might have a couple bad MUs on 1 stage

 

[steakhouse]

yeah no i withdraw my statement, that's actualy something to try out. I disagree with no bans tho, unless the stagelist is tiny which i don't want either

 

[RIDLEY is too SMALL]

What would people think about something like this for 3.5:

Starters
Battlefield
Smashville
Pokémon Stadium 2
Dreamland
Green Hill Zone
Distant Planet
Yoshi's Story

Counterpicks
Final Destination
Yoshi's Island
Skyworld
Norfair
Warioware
Fountain of Dreams
Lylat
Metal Cavern
Skyloft
maybe Rumble Falls? (since it's smaller now)


*Character selection always occurs before stage selection instead of after.
*The first match follows the standard 1-2-2-1 stage striking process.
*Except for the first match, the loser of the previous match picks 3 stages that he would like to play on, and the winner strikes 2 of them, thereby deciding which of the 3 stages to play on.
*Everyone has a great time because they realize that the stagelist is both balanced and also doesn't omit any popular stages, while having a streamlined and less time-consuming counterpick process.

(The starters are probably very debatable, I just thought those were good ones. The 5 stage starter list might work better, idk)

Anyway, I think these kinds of changes could make Project M more balanced, while also not excluding some of the really good stages in the game.

 

[MagnesD3]

What would people think about something like this:

Starters
Battlefield
Smashville
Pokémon Stadium 2
Dreamland
Green Hill Zone
Distant Planet
Yoshi's Story

Counterpicks
Final Destination
Yoshi's Island
Skyworld
Norfair
Warioware
Fountain of Dreams
Lylat
Metal Cavern
Skyloft
maybe Rumble Falls? (since it's smaller now)


*Character selection always occurs before stage selection instead of after.
*The first match follows the standard 1-2-2-1 stage striking process.
*Except for the first match, the loser of the previous match picks 3 stages that he would like to play on, and the winner strikes 2 of them, thereby deciding which of the 3 stages to play on.
*Everyone has a great time because they realize that the stagelist is both balanced and also doesn't omit any popular stages, while having a streamlined and less time-consuming counterpick process.

(The starters are probably very debatable, I just thought those were good ones. The 5 stage starter list might work better, idk)

All of those levels are competitively viable. (Except skyloft probably..). Add draculas castle to replace sky loft and we are good.

 

[DrinkingFood]

@ Strong Badam does stage striking not take forever in your area? In Louisiana we have been trying to get the stage list as small as reasonably possible because of how long we've seen stage striking/banning take. A lot of the stages are good, if you want a small list that doesn't need 3 bans and doesn't take 2 minutes in between each game to ban stages in finals, you can't be having 11+ stages. Inevitably you just have to get rid of some stages that are "perfectly fine". Ideally I'd like a ban system with no bans in 3/5. Seeing matchups pushed to their limits on the best possible stage for one character is fascinating, but if you allow enough stages to warrant multiple bans in 2/3s, you can't really expect thereto be no bans in 3/5 to enable that to happen. Regardless of the degree to which they were justified, there were already people complaining about the duration of matches in-game and the possibility of tournies running long because of PM. I could see it wise cutting back potential redundancy altogether on the stage list and going for a small, 8-10 stage list running 1 bans, none in 3/5, to help streamline the selection process. Of course it should be heavily looked at for balance, but I see a low number overall solving potential problems. I know a lot of the time issues are solved by the development of the meta around character/stage interaction allowing players to more intelligently and decisively choose their bans and strikes without hesitation, but there are a lot of stages and characters in this game now that are viable, trying to go through them all will take a very long time, while this provides a solution now.

 

[steakhouse]

I'd say norfair and drac's NEED to be CPs, simply because they promote on-the-go, spur of the moment combos instead of combos that just work everytime / autocombos, and that project M's goal is :

• The combos are challenging and spontaneous, with anything longer than 2-3 hits requiring a knowledge of both characters' options and some degree of prediction and/or a deep understanding of the mental aspect of the game."

Starters should be the 3 most picked + 2 situational, so Smashville, PS2, Battlefield, and ... Dreamland and GHZ ?

Counterpicks I'd say Warioware, Skyworld, Yoshi's Island, FD, Lylat, Drac's and FoD. Could also squeeze in DP and Norfair. Not a big fan of Yoshi's if we already have Warioware. Metal Cavern is a little too slanted for my liking but I'd replace FoD with Metal Cavern if it wasn't. Skyloft would be okay if the right wall was slanted and the left edge didnt have the little change in altitude that makes it possible to D-tilt though the stage. Rumble Falls is still too big for singles. I'm not really feeling norfair to be honest, it just feels like a larger PS2 with moving platforms ; wish they would've just shrunk 3.0 Norfair and made it into a doubles counterpick.

All in all I'd be just so happy if we had a stagelist that had Drac's and Lylat, those are my favorite serious-match stages but no one wants them on stagelists.

 

[EddyBearr]

What would people think about something like this for 3.5:

Counterpicks
Metal Cavern

I love this. Although, Yoshi's Brawl should be a neutral.

 

[Frozn~]

What would people think about something like this for 3.5:

Starters
Battlefield
Smashville
Pokémon Stadium 2
Dreamland
Green Hill Zone
Distant Planet
Yoshi's Story

Counterpicks
Final Destination
Yoshi's Island
Skyworld
Norfair
Warioware
Fountain of Dreams
Lylat
Metal Cavern
Skyloft
maybe Rumble Falls? (since it's smaller now)


*Character selection always occurs before stage selection instead of after.
*The first match follows the standard 1-2-2-1 stage striking process.
*Except for the first match, the loser of the previous match picks 3 stages that he would like to play on, and the winner strikes 2 of them, thereby deciding which of the 3 stages to play on.
*Everyone has a great time because they realize that the stagelist is both balanced and also doesn't omit any popular stages, while having a streamlined and less time-consuming counterpick process.

(The starters are probably very debatable, I just thought those were good ones. The 5 stage starter list might work better, idk)

Anyway, I think these kinds of changes could make Project M more balanced, while also not excluding some of the really good stages in the game.

If this new counterpicking system ends up helping the loser too much, then the winner could always ban 1 or 2 stages before the loser picks the 3. I'm pretty sure this would take about as long as the original system, but allow for more stages to be included.

 

[Chill1208]

How do you Stage-Strike 5 Stages when there is only 5 stages in the Neutral choices? :/
Unless I'm mistaken somehow, I'm very confused..

You do 1-2-1 stage bans

Okay, I hate it when rulesets don't word this one properly...

"If a player wins with a suicide move like gannons side b the player who initiated the move wins"

should be rephrased to this effect:

"If a player causes Sudden Death to occur through the use of a suicide move like Ganon's SideB, the player who initiated the move wins. If the game moves to the Results Screen instead of Sudden Death, whichever player the game says is the winner wins."

I know everyone knows what the rule MEANS, regardless of how it's worded, but you can avoid loophole exploitation as long as the rule is explicitly worded.

thanks made the correction I just wanted to make this page since apex took down thier PM rules page which many touranaments used and my original post is essentially an exact copy exept for TK Breezy's stage bans which we prefer here in CT

 

[Chill1208]

I'm new to PM here, but I tought Yoshi's Story, FD and FoD were neutral stages? What's the difference between PM and Melee on this matter?

FD is in no way neutral and it's about time they fixed that it's terrible for characters like samus who really depend on platforms

 

[Chill1208]

Your all free to do your own stage list for your tournaments but this is what CT has been using for months now and we're very happy with it I'll post the old stage ban list for your guys reference tho also my mistake with TK Breezy's stagelist the winner only gets 2 bans not 3 so i just fixed that

 

[Chill1208]

Not gonna run three bans unless we get another CP to compensate, seems that Sykloft or lylat is the popular choice around here. I'll run one at the biweeklies and tell ya how it went. Optimism ahoy!

While it's nice that you're trying to get a unified ruleset for CT BTW, it'd be better if we discussed it in groups specific to CT. There's a lot better discussion to be had there.

Well I basically just coppied these rules from the apex rules set and added TK Breezy's stage list which has been standard at the last few tournies I've been too so I didn't really see a need to discuss it

 

[Chill1208]

Here is a video explaining the reasoning behind TK Breezy's stage list

 

[RIDLEY is too SMALL]

I definitely feel that TK Breezy's stagelist would be MUCH better by the very simple addition of Skyworld. Add Skyworld, and I think that the CT 3.5 stagelist would actually be balanced. (Still 2 bans, of course). But without another good stage for floaties (like Skyworld), this stagelist will absolutely have balance issues and this will have a direct impact on tournament results and the 3.5 meta game. TK Breezy's stagelist has balance flaws, and they need to be fixed if this stagelist is going to be widely used. Skyworld would do a lot to make this stagelist more balanced.

 

[shapular]

Can we get over the multiple bans thing? Both Melee and Brawl had 14+ stages at one point and neither of them needed more than one ban. That's with way more skewed stages than PM and Meta Knight running around in Brawl. That would cut down the stage selection process a good deal since it's easier to figure out what your worst stage is than your third-worst stage, and the person picking the stage probably already has a good idea about where he wants to go. It'd also help balance the game by making sure characters with fewer good legal stages don't have an unfair disadvantage against characters who are good on a lot of stages.

I've also liked the idea Ridley mentioned since I saw Amazing Ampharos talk about it a while back. It'd be interesting to see a regional or some popular smaller tournament like Xanadu try it out, but I think it'd be hard to get one of those TOs to consider it and I don't think it'll gain traction without that happening.

 

[Strong Badam]

Here is my stagelist:

Starters:

Battlefield
Fountain of Dreams
Pokémon Stadium 2
Skyworld
Smashville

Counterpicks:

Distant Planet
Final Destination
Green Hill Zone
Lylat Cruise
Yoshi's Island: Brawl
WarioWare, Inc.

Either 1 or 2 stage bans.

Dreamland and YS are banned because of their polarizing nature as well as their archetypes being fulfilled by other stages that are also more interesting and provide more unique gameplay than a tri-plat layout. This becomes even more necessary with a 1-ban format, as it becomes impossible even with their removal to remove all "really big" or "really small" stages. Other stage archetypes do not have this issue. I actually feel like 2 bans in bo3 and 1 ban in bo5 would work out very well.

 

[Ripple]

dreamalnd is polarizing but FD isn't?

 

[Strong Badam]

Dreamland is polarizing in MANY more matchups than FD is. FD is almost exclusively polarizing in matchups involving space animals (and sometimes Falcon if the Uthrow CGer can CG him); for the remaining 37 characters it is usually fine and only grants a minor advantage/disadvantage depending on the matchup. You can also ban FD if your character is bad on it; you can't ban Dreamland, Distant Planet, AND Skyworld.

 

[N00B64]

*nobody likes bad change.

I don't like those maps because I think they are bad maps. PM was the first competent game I played and I like all the melee nuetrals the best (as long as we have the new battlefield lol). The only one I don't like is FoD. I fing despise that stage.

Lylat and skyworld have been around just as long as greenhill and wario for PM (since they play out much differently in PM than brawl) yet almost everyone likes those stages, and hates lylat and skyworld.

Sometimes, people don't like things because they aren't good.

Lylat is a good stage for characters like bowser and floaties due to the low platforms, the easy battlefielding and the lip at the edge to crouch under projectile spam.

Skyworld is good for floaties due to kill bounds, easy battlefielding and the platform placement being asymmetric, giving more options for punishments as well as resting points (not the move

People don't like these stages because people don't main floaties nor like it when their bad recovery skills get exploited for being bad.

The only one I don't like is FoD. I fing despise that stage.

Seems you just can't deal with asymmetrical platforms or large kill bounds under and above a stage.

 

[dude it's raining]

About Skyworld, I just wish they hadn't left it so the background along with the clouds underneath sometimes trick my eyes into thinking it's still as thick as it used to be.

 

[DrinkingFood]

I disagree SB, in that FD is only polarized against spacies, it is also heavily polarized AGAINST characters who rely on platforms for movement. That includes spacies since they are vertically quick, but it also includes low traction+floaty characters who need platforms to move horizontally in the opponent character's diagonal blindspot while also making their jumps lower commitment. It's also somewhat polarized TOWARDS characters who dislike platforms getting in the way of their combos/movement/approaches. ROB for example basically has anytime-platform movement with his airdashes, but having actual platforms there get in his way, so when he's on FD it's basically removing the opponent's access to platforms without harming ROB's ability to maneuver in that zone.

I mean I still agree that dreamland is more extreme in regards to how it affects matchups due to it's extreme size and blastzone, but FD certainly ain't no saint in regards to polarizing matchups, either.

EDIT: wow wtf reviving a dead thread okay

 

[Keman]

yeah Drinking that has got me to at times ><

On the topic I do want to say that I do wish there was a more uniform competitive stage list. I realize it will probably never be Melee(with everyone doing basically the same thing across all tourney platforms at all levels now a days).

Maybe I just wish the big 4/5 streams(Neb's/SG/TL/Xan/WindyCity) all used the same set list >.>, but I know all TO's have different preferences.