Ban brinstar and rainbow cruise

[Pi]

Well obviously all stages give certain characters advantages, I never said they didn't. But ideally they WOULDN'T provide advantages, right? So since we don't have an absolutely fair stage, how about we have players play on the three stages that yield the least amount of advantage to either player to increase the influence of skill on the results? The only way to do that is to ban the obviously unfair stages, and then let them strike from the 5 most neutral stages.


@Wobbles

You can't possibly compare the effect wind or Randall has on a match to the effect lava has when it engulfs the entire stage aside from a single platform. I agree that in a perfect world someone would enter a tournament and play as gay as possible to prove the tactic is broken, but good luck finding someone good enough to trash their reputation as a Smasher. Rising pound as Jiggs and wall-bombing as Peach as a means of stalling have unanimously been banned, but I don't recall ever seeing anyone actually abusing these tactics in tournament.

comparing wind to brinstar is not okay
but comparing peach bomber stalling to brinstar is okay

 

[Bones0]

comparing wind to brinstar is not okay
but comparing peach bomber stalling to brinstar is okay

I wasn't comparing them. Peach wall-bombing is definitely way easier to win with than winning on Brinstar in a favorable match. I was just trying to remind Wobbles that while abuse of a tactic is the best way to justify a ban, sometimes you just have to realize it's stupidly unfair and ban it regardless of whether or not someone has won a tournament with the tactic.

 

[Pi]

I wasn't comparing them. Peach wall-bombing is definitely way easier to win with than winning on Brinstar in a favorable match. I was just trying to remind Wobbles that while abuse of a tactic is the best way to justify a ban, sometimes you just have to realize it's stupidly unfair and ban it regardless of whether or not someone has won a tournament with the tactic.

so peach wall bombing is clearly stupidly unfair and worthy of a ban, much like brinstar is

seems like a comparison to me.

and you're still lacking any solid foundation for your side of the debate

for years and years and years we've allowed brinstar as a CP

and now all of the sudden because you (anyone) say it is, it's unfit for competitive play?

since when? since rom3? since hax made this thread?
why? beacuse jiggs can plank there? she can do this anywhere
because lava burns? does it only burn X character?

 

[Bones0]

so peach wall bombing is clearly stupidly unfair and worthy of a ban, much like brinstar is

seems like a comparison to me.

and you're still lacking any solid foundation for your side of the debate

for years and years and years we've allowed brinstar as a CP

and now all of the sudden because you (anyone) say it is, it's unfit for competitive play?

since when? since rom3? since hax made this thread?
why? beacuse jiggs can plank there? she can do this anywhere
because lava burns? does it only burn X character?

Holy **** you don't read, do you? I only brought up wall-bombing to remind Wobbles that NOT EVERY TACTIC WORTH BANNING HAS BEEN ABUSED IN TOURNAMENT. That's it! I am not comparing how obvious of a ban either is, only that if he is demanding people abuse unbalanced stages in tournament before they are banned, he should also be asking that someone rising pound stall before it is banned (which is stupid because, like I already said, good luck finding someone good enough to compete at the top level and not care about trashing their reputation as a Smasher).

It's hilarious you say I lack foundation for my argument when I've clearly explained how we should be playing on the three most fair stages because they best demonstrate player skill, and then your argument is basically "it's always been done like this, why change?" You are just arguing from tradition.

This just in: the counterpick system is bogus. It NEVER should have been used, ESPECIALLY when there were loads of stages not banned from play. As the community has banned more and more stages, counterpicking has actually been becoming LESS of a broken system. In fact, if it weren't for Brinstar and RC, I would be content with using counterpicking because the rest of the stages are that close in fairness. You also act like there are only a few people requesting these stages to be banned. You know a better way of determing whether a stage is balanced, check the ban percentages on the stages. When you are playing Fox vs. Jiggs, Brinstar is the most obvious ban 100% of the time. Ask ANY decent Fox what is the worst legal stage to play on and they will say Brinstar. It is not even debated because it is so obvious. Now if you are just talking about from the neutrals + poke, it becomes the complete opposite scenario. Some Foxes would ban Dream Land because of the large blast zones, some would ban FoD because of the low platforms messing up shffls, some would ban Battlefield because of the lack of wall-riding for recoveries, and there's more reasons for the other stages. Some neutrals tend to benefit certain characters, but there are also usually some drawbacks on those very same stages that make it largely personal preference on where you strike to/ban.

 

[Hax]

But for the counterpicks... well, they're COUNTERpicks. Designed to give you an advantage based on the other person's playstyle and character, or what characters you use. If we had a stage that was 100% neutral while simultaneously offering depth to a variety of character matchups, we wouldn't really NEED any others, but as long as they weren't broken or degenerate, why get rid of them?

glad to see you and I both care for character diversity and complicated strategies; these two combined translate to a healthy metagame. Brinstar/RC strips us of this diversity by overcentralizing not only 2 specific characters per stage, but specific strategies from its players.

Me, I like proof. I want somebody to prove to me that there are techniques that are unstoppable or degenerate on these levels. Unfortunately, everybody wants the crowd to like them, so nobody's going to geographically relocate their money to their mouth.

for the above reasons I have proven that Brinstar/RC are degenerate; Chu vs Mango 3 displays a strategy that is outright unstoppable. ironic that you would make this statement considering Ice Climbers vs Peach/Jiggs on Brinstar is the Bowser vs Sheik on FD matchup among the good characters.

It's amazing how obvious **** turns out to be incredibly wrong when you give it time. Marth's f-smash was broken, you know. Now it's still good, but mindlessly spamming it gets you *****. Remember when he could just f-smash to edgeguard? Then people learned to ledge-tech. Then M2K started using counter to edgeguard spacies, which couldn't be teched and was pretty much unstoppable. Why didn't we ban that, even though he was winning all the tournaments, and it seemed so formulaic, so unstoppable?


you are pinpointing some of the few techniques that have drastically changed over time and using them as the basis for the statement that "**** turns out to be incredibly wrong when you give it time." I can back up the statement that "**** stays the same over time" with far more evidence. when there is a stage that eventually becomes one upper platform with no room for ground movement, characters with aerial movement will be at an advantage. when a stage hazard does more damage as someone continually falls into it, faster-falling characters will take more damage from it. when there is a stage that constantly spawns new platforms (with some of them making for huge gaps between the players), laser camping will always be a broken strategy. no matter how much time passes, these characteristics will not magically change.

your statement is a strawman as it gives examples of characters' moves/strategies that have varied in usefulness over time and uses them as evidence to support the statement that "**** turns out to be incredibly wrong when you give it time." characters' strategies/metagames are millions of times more complicated than stages, hence the two cannot be compared. jigglypuff's metagame evolving does not support the statement that brinstar or rainbow cruise's metagame will evolve.

 

[-ACE-]

Gee, I dunno why europe banned banned brinstar and RC... Their melee scene is so shallow because of it too.

Spoiler

I'm terrible at trolling

Edit: seriously, how much has Europe suffered by not having these stages be legal in tournament? Not much imo. We get to see a living, working example of what Hax is proposing (or close to it) and they have a very successful and competitive scene. Obviously banning stages has its pros and cons, but some of the "cons" being brought up are being blown out of proportion somewhat.

 

[PB&J]

plank- please ban these stages at pound 5..if u ban it..everyone will follow most likely

 

[Smasher89]

Sweden didn't for a very long time ban alot of stages, and where unarguably the country with the best players(counting crewsvise) in europe where Amsah where the only one to compete at that level for a few years.

Now though we had have different rules at like every tournament and Holland might be one of the more dangerous countries here. Which is bad result for the swedish scene.

Banning lots of stages has made the counterpick system much more shallow in that it's harder to pick a stage where neither the opponent or his friends don't have a clue on whats going on, using the system to trick them.

But it do reduce the play down to 2-3 stages entirely dependant on matchups, not players different skills, that before was up to the player to learn and not the host to ban for some stupid reason (Onett and jungle japes got banned here not for any evidence, but for a player didn't want to drive a bus to the tournament if they weren't off).

About the counterpicks in IC vs Falcon, IMO it's fair if IC could do the same thing back to CF, which is a reason to pick ppc against CF, oh wait it got banned due to? I guess the same reason as the BF argument earlier, camping.

Wobbles, if you don't got the sollution I might thought up one right now that possible even gets grabs

 

[Nygma]

I've been saying for centuries that counter pick stages are stupid. Neutrals are the only stages we should play on

Pokemon Stadium
Fountain Of Dreams
Final Destination
Battlefield
Yoshis Story
Dreamland

With NO BAN. Just do the striking procedure for game 1 of each set and ****ing deal with your characters bad level. No other game series does stupid bull**** like "you cant pick this ultra or super! I want an advantage!"

All that **** is stupid and people need to learn their bad stages to get more accurate tournament results.



Enough of this counter picking stupid stages where people have a clear cut advantage over someone else. If you win with a character you STAY AS THAT CHARACTER. None of this stage choosing bull****. You either choose to pick a new character and go to random level or pick a new level and stay as the same character. I have always thought that the Smash tournament process is the most childish thing in fighting game communities.


I'm so sick of the smash scene whining and complaining about EVERYTHING.

 

[Wobbles]

Hax:

Strawman? A strawman is where you set up the opposing person's argument so that it looks ridiculous, then fight THAT rather than challenge what they're actually saying.

What Niko said is that "it's obvious these stages are abusable, let's skip the work because we know the answer." I'm saying we can't be certain without testing it, because our initial impressions about EVERYTHING in this game have been pretty much wrong. We think we know better now, but our psychology doesn't change.

Chu vs Mango's a pretty funny match to me for a lot of reasons, but yeah, let's talk about the Brinstar thing. Chu didn't have an answer to a strategy the very first time it was used against him, so clearly it was a broken one that couldn't be beaten. Most of us have been cheesed by something we weren't prepared for, and our initial reaction to such strategies will inevitably be "this is unfair and stupid."

Chu and UberIce also got slaughtered by HBox at a Florida tournament because HBox just spammed rest on the ICs shield and watched Nana die because she's really dumb. Funnily enough, when we played friendlies at APEX, that didn't work on me because I had practice dealing with that courtesy of other Puff players, and while I still lost those friendlies, HBox didn't land nearly the same # of rests on me. I think several games he didn't get any. People were telling me beforehand about how badly Puff wrecks ICs because of it, yet believe it or not there's a way to make it not happen.

What makes a character matchup so much more complicated than the way the stage interacts with the characters, or forces the characters to interact with each other?

If you let Puff have free reign over Brinstar during the full lava transformation, yes, you will probably get wrecked while on the top platform. If you get knocked into lava as a fast faller, then you will probably eat a lot of percent.

But hey, on Yoshi's Story you can kill Peach with ridiculous Falco shine combos at absurdly early percents. Puff dies at something dumb like 50 percent on YS to Fox's up-smash. Why don't we regulate this? Because the characters have inherent properties that influence how good/bad they are depending on the level. Is Brinstar's lava *too* extreme?

Well, I've seen a lot of bad spacies play there and get wrecked. I've seen a lot of good spacies inexperienced and the specifics of the level get wrecked. I haven't seen any spacies that say, "I practice on Brinstar all the time."

Bah, have to go to work. In fact I'm late because of this dumb thread >_>

 

[Niko45]

I apologize for putting like no effort into my argument but its mostly cause others have stated the necessary points on my side. What I was trying to say about how you can lay out an intelligent argument all you want is that at the end of the day your argument is just as subjective as my simplistic one. You know Marth dominated this game for years before finally, FINALLY coming back down to earth. Are we willing to give Brinstar 3 or 4 more years just to find out if it's really imbalanced? I think all this calling for proof and what not seems kind of silly when the game has been out for nearly 10 years and people have been dealing with these stages in tourney for nearly that same amount of time. The fact that some regions have already parted ways with these stages, along with a convincing majority agreeing that those stages are stupid (again, simplest term) should be all the proof you need, because really, how can you prove something that's subjective and open to interpretation?

 

[Metal Reeper]

Every tourney match should be settled with Falco dittos on Big Blue.

I also think banning these 2 stages will really change the MU. Falcons will lose to spacies much more often, etc.

 

[Dark Sonic]

I could've sworn that being bad on certain stages was an inherent character flaw, considering other characters....don't have that problem.

 

[Brookman]

. . .

I started practicing on brinstar all the time a few weeks ago . . .


not that I'm any good in tournament :CC

 

[ArstNeio]

I'm not going to bother reading through 28 pages worth of discussion, especially since based on the pages I have been reading, this thread seems to be full of stupid complaints like "omg so gay why are these stages allowed", but I will address some of the philosophical ways of thinking when it comes to stages, because that's what this thread should really be about. Apologies if what I bring up is already mentioned; this will be a relatively long post, however, so I'm sure some things will be new (hopefully).

What does it mean to be a fair stage? Is a fair stage a stage that makes most matchups more balanced? Or is a fair stage the stage that is the median of all stages in that matchup? I propose that it ought to be the second - the fairest stage is the stage that, of all stages, is the median between the stage most favorable to one character and the stage most favorable to the other. The current standard for "fair stages" seems to be stages that 1. make the tier list more balanced and 2. make things more "fun", both troublesome criteria. I'll address both.

Criteria 1 becomes clear when we look at the way things are banned. Why is it that the Ice Climbers and Marth (just two examples) have some of their BEST stages as starter stages? On the other hand, Fox's and Jigglypuff's best stages are mostly banned. Basically, what the community is doing is trying to legislate a tighter, less extreme tier list, and do so using the stage list. I personally don't think that this is a good thing to do, because first of all character balance isn't really possible to achieve anyway, and achieving marginal character balance at the cost of a ton of stages simply isn't a good tradeoff, in my opinion.

Criteria 2, though, is the biggest problem with the Smash community. Really, what's happening is people are not getting practice on these stages, and then complain about it, and then want to ban instead of working on their game. Stages like Brinstar and RC aren't more unfair than stages like FD (in fact I'd say they are more so), players just don't like them because they aren't as similar to the other stages in our starter lineup. It's easy for players to adjust to playing on FD because it's a simpler stage than the other stages; it's harder for players to adjust to stages like Brinstar and RC without practice, and unfortunately most of our community is too lazy to do so.

Brinstar and RC are both stages that contain hazards, yes, but there's nothing inherently wrong with hazards. The hazards in question, and the special things you can do with every stage are in themselves advanced techs, just like wavedashing and l-canceling. We simply need to learn better how to take advantage of these stages. To everyone who complains that these stages are "omg hella gay", consider that you're being just as scrubby as that next door neighbor who complains that wavedashing is a glitch and shouldn't be used. If you're truly a competitive player, you'd stop worrying about legislating these stages and start working on getting better on them.

A far more interesting point is that the existence of CP stages doesn't make sense because this assumes that the stages are less fair. I am in ardent agreement. Brinstar, RC, KJ64, and PS should be part of our starters, and we should have a 9 stage strike. There's nothing wrong with having a broader strike list (besides time constraints, so we can't overdo it) because it's no longer a random system. Back a few years ago it'd be problematic to put too many stages on random because then the first round matchup could be cheesy, depending on the characters that players picked. NOT ANYMORE GUYS! We're striking now. We might as well add the current CP list to our starter stage list and strike from all of them, because that would mean that the end result will be the median fairest stage among all the legal stages that the matchup will take place on. For those saying that the CP system is flawed, I agree- there shouldn't be any CP stages. However, this doesn't mean that the stages that are currently CP should just be banned; rather, they should be starter, and part of our strike list, because they aren't as unfair as people make it out to be.

So basically, the philosophical question is, are we actually interested in the most fair stage for every matchup? A broader stage list allows us to achieve this better because it makes both players ban stages that are bad for them; banning is just some committee telling both players what stages are bad for them and not letting them pick for themselves. A 29 stage strike is the most fair, because you get the most median stage in the matchup, but that isn't possible based on time constraints (sure, Fox Samus might end up on what would be considered a "Fox stage" today, but it would be the most balanced of all the stages, and thus the fairest one). This analogy is simply to show that larger stage lists means we'll be getting fairer stages.

What some people are basically saying is, screw getting the fairest stage, screw stage diversity, I think stages ought to be used to make the tier list tighter. And I agree, with a tighter stage list (and therefore a less extreme tier list), we might have a few more characters show up here and there, and a bit more diversity. But first of all, I don't like the precedent that restricting stages to achieve greater character balance sets (this also assumes that character diversity > stage diversity, which is debatable). And second of all, the character diversity benefits you get will be rather marginal, while you'll be cutting a ton of stages to achieve it (we already are banning way more stages than for my tastes).

Stages are the final frontier of the Smash metagame. They are the frontier that we have neglected since the beginning, and they are the last thing waiting for us to develop. Unfortunately, our community is so conservative and unwilling to do so.



Well, that's it for my ideological take. Let's now consider the specifics of RC and Brinstar.

I will contend that if you are put in a position to be hit by Brinstar's lava, you're being outplayed. This is a pretty intuitive way of thinking. Why is it that when you're getting chaingrabbed on FD, it's "omg so impressive" but someone utilizing Brinstar's stage characteristics in the same way is "omg gay"? Does Brinstar's lava suddenly and randomly hit people? Absolutely not. It's very clear when the lava is coming up, and, if you know the stage, you also know that there are only certain places that the lava will stop at- level with the ground, and covering all but the top platform are two that come to mind. You also know that when the lava is level with the ground, there are a couple specific spots where the animation doesn't look like the lava is over the ground, but it still is. If your opponent doesn't know these things, then they should be punished for it, in the same way that if your opponent doesn't know how to l-cancel, then they should be punished for it.

Brinstar's lava isn't unavoidable. It isn't even very difficult to avoid. It simply changes the stage control element of the game to something that players aren't used to. Stop *****ing and start getting better at it. Players' complaints to something like this, which isn't random, isn't difficult to react to, and doesn't kill you are the exact same as the scrub next door's complaints about how wavedashing and other advanced techs are "glitches". Stop being scrubs guys.

 

[Nygma]

I think the idea of using counter pick stages is stupid in general for ANY character.

I see the point of people saying learn the stages but on the other side of the spectrum it also screams, "Well, my character sucks on all these stages so im going to pick a stupid stage so i get a clear cut advantage"

The problem with smash as a competitive game is that you have to factor in two things when assessing what do do after a loss:

"stage"
"character"

which is unlike any other game because other games just counter pick with character.

Blaz Blue
Street Fighter
Mortal Kombat
Clay Fighter
Tekken
King Of Fighters
Fatal Fury

and pretty much an fighter EVER made doesn't have to deal with "stages" influencing game play. While this adds depth to smash in general it makes balancing competitive play a pain in the ****ing ***.

This is a big reason as to why i've stopped caring about Smash. Too many people complaining and trying to argue for a different tier list, stages for to's to change, rule set, venue fees, and pretty much everything.

All you guys do is cry and complain.

"MK needs to be banned."

"Snake is too good!"

"Remove Brinstar and Rainbow Cruise!"

"The pound 4 ruleset is horrible plank! You removed Mute City for your benefit!"

"Jman and M2K should have been allowed to compete at Pound 4!"

"MLG should not dismiss Brawl from the circuit! ADHD and M2K AGREED!"

"PBNJ owes people money and should be banned from events!"


When are you guys going to grow up and shut up?

 

[Brookman]

which is unlike any other game because other games just counter pick with character.

Please direct me to another platform fighting game, then continue this logic.

 

[john!]

nygma seems to be doing a lot of complaining in this thread. so ironic.

 

[Ripple]

Please direct me to another platform fighting game, then continue this logic.

I'm confused as to what your saying. are you saying smash isn't a platform fighter?

to your answer: soul caliber

 

[Wobbles]

Niko: Do you know what was discovered in 2002, but never used and never dealt with until 2006? The IC grab infinite. Nobody bothered using it, saying it was either too hard to do (lol), or it was too gay, or they just didn't play ICs and therefore didn't know about it. It wasn't until my friend and I concretely exploited it that it became an issue.

Nobody has seriously pushed this level to see if there's a metagame hiding inside of it. Nobody has demonstrated that it's a problem. We have people who play on it once every couple of months when they go to a tournament and Peach counterpicks it against them and--surprise!--they aren't remotely ready.

Are you saying that the game is finished developing? That we've learned all we need to learn, we're good now, the game can remain as it is? It's been out for TEN YEARS after all. Well that's funny to me. Because you're arguing to ban a stage that's been legal forever and hasn't shown to dramatically influence tournament results. You're trying to upset a decade-long status quo with no serious proof, and telling me that I'M being silly when I ask you for it.

Your argument has turned into "it's obvious that I'm right, why aren't you just banning what I want to be banned?" I've presented criteria for my argument and given you a fairly objective standard for deciding what's broken and what isn't. You're saying it doesn't matter how logical these standards are, because you're just going to disagree with them anyhow.

How do I prove my "subjective viewpoint?" I'll put it in plain English for you. "Jigglypuff demonstrates on numerous occasions, regardless of her opponent's skill level, that she has a strategy that can't be beaten on that level." Tournament placings are pretty objective, wouldn't you agree? You could also demonstrate to me that "factors outside the scope of the player's control or foresight dramatically and immediately influence the match." So if you can show me multiple cases where some player is completely screwed by the level and it's clearly not his fault whatsoever, I would be inclined to agree that randomly getting boned isn't competitive-friendly. Of course, if it's a case where somebody insisted on going for a combo when they could clearly see the level shaking and the lava rising, that wouldn't count, would it?

Guess what? I know nobody's going to like me for saying this (well nobody likes me anyhow, but for different reasons), but the "convincing majority" of players in this game are BAD. The convincing majority of players do not make it out of pools at major tournaments. The convincing majority loses to random crap and suicides for no reason and makes lots of dumb mistakes. The convincing majority has agreed that the stages are "stupid," and when you ask them to define it, they say it's stupid because it's "gay."

The convincing majority sucks at argumentation and logically making their case. The convincing majority says that things they don't know how to fight are "broken." The convincing majority can't shift a metagame on their own, and they have to wait for players much better to do it for them. The convincing majority uses things like "M2K said Y so it must be true" as their argument, even when they don't know why M2K said it.

Your proof is based on getting other people to agree with you. Mine is based on factual results. I'm not sure what makes mine so subjective.

 

[Roneblaster]

ban wobbling

edit

its stupid

and gay

 

[Mew2King]

so we should only listen to what good players say?

not to sound douchy, but yes. We know more about competitiveness and high level play. Those stages are gay in both Brawl and in Melee. I don't even need to say why it's obvious it's just gay and I'm leaving it at that.

also plank/mlg are gay for unfair bans

 

[-ACE-]

M2k is the man.

 

[Pi]

last two posts make me ill

 

[KirbyKaze]

Rainbow Cruise is gay as balls but I don't really mind it unless it's Fox

Falco is pretty manageable there for Sheik

I actually dislike fighting Falcon there more than Falco. Knees are really annoying on a level that forces a lot of air game. He's also really good in the top part if he stays ahead of you because he can Uair when you try to come down the slopes and it's pretty high priority and stuff

He moves around the platform part better than Falco.

Stomping someone onto the plats in the middle of the boat also setup some easy knees/additional stomps because of how small the plats are but Falco is definitely better on the actual boat because of his Shine --> Shine/Uair/Firebird.

Falco is probably better overall on the level though.

I'm not really all that good though and I don't play there often so take what I say with a grain of salt

 

[TheZhuKeeper]

Rainbow Cruise is gay as balls but I don't really mind it unless it's Fox

Falco is pretty manageable there for Sheik

I actually dislike fighting Falcon there more than Falco. Knees are really annoying on a level that forces a lot of air game. He's also really good in the top part if he stays ahead of you because he can Uair when you try to come down the slopes and it's pretty high priority and stuff

He moves around the platform part better than Falco.

Stomping someone onto the plats in the middle of the boat also setup some easy knees/additional stomps because of how small the plats are but Falco is definitely better on the actual boat because of his Shine --> Shine/Uair/Firebird.

Falco is probably better overall on the level though.

I'm not really all that good though and I don't play there often so take what I say with a grain of salt

Brinstar is a very warm stage.

=D

 

[Niko45]

Niko: Do you know what was discovered in 2002, but never used and never dealt with until 2006? The IC grab infinite. Nobody bothered using it, saying it was either too hard to do (lol), or it was too gay, or they just didn't play ICs and therefore didn't know about it. It wasn't until my friend and I concretely exploited it that it became an issue.

But what is being "discovered" here? If anything we discovered years ago that Brinstar creates unfair advantages for Jiggs and Peach and we're just now saying, "Hey, this stage is not like the other stages."

Nobody has seriously pushed this level to see if there's a metagame hiding inside of it. Nobody has demonstrated that it's a problem. We have people who play on it once every couple of months when they go to a tournament and Peach counterpicks it against them and--surprise!--they aren't remotely ready.

That's a pretty major assumption, one that I'd disagree with. This stage comes up once every 2 months? Nobody has bothered to learn this stage? Sounds a lot like "nobody knows how to fight puff!" Like I said, when the game has been out for 10 years, and its been a legal stage that entire time, I think it's just naive to assume nobody knows how to play the stage. In fact, your entire argument seems to operate under this assumption that anyone who wants brinstar banned has never given the stage a chance.

Are you saying that the game is finished developing? That we've learned all we need to learn, we're good now, the game can remain as it is? It's been out for TEN YEARS after all. Well that's funny to me. Because you're arguing to ban a stage that's been legal forever and hasn't shown to dramatically influence tournament results. You're trying to upset a decade-long status quo with no serious proof, and telling me that I'M being silly when I ask you for it.

Fair point. Overturning a 10 year status quo should really have the community behind it. If the community isn't behind it, the local TO won't get rid of it. Fair?

How do I prove my "subjective viewpoint?" I'll put it in plain English for you. "Jigglypuff demonstrates on numerous occasions, regardless of her opponent's skill level, that she has a strategy that can't be beaten on that level." Tournament placings are pretty objective, wouldn't you agree? You could also demonstrate to me that "factors outside the scope of the player's control or foresight dramatically and immediately influence the match." So if you can show me multiple cases where some player is completely screwed by the level and it's clearly not his fault whatsoever, I would be inclined to agree that randomly getting boned isn't competitive-friendly. Of course, if it's a case where somebody insisted on going for a combo when they could clearly see the level shaking and the lava rising, that wouldn't count, would it?

Well here's what's subjective about your viewpoint: You think that a stage needs to allow an absolutely broken strategy to be banworthy. I disagree. I don't think Brinstar is completely devoid of competitiveness. Sure, you can get good on the stage. But that's not good enough in my opinion. Is it up to the standard set forth by the neutral stages? Is it as fair as those stages? Does the game deviate too much from the "traditional" game (as defined by what IS a neutral stage in the first place)? I would say yes, but again, these things can't be measured quantitatively or "proven", and I disagree in the first place with your criteria for "proof."

Guess what? I know nobody's going to like me for saying this (well nobody likes me anyhow, but for different reasons), but the "convincing majority" of players in this game are BAD. The convincing majority of players do not make it out of pools at major tournaments. The convincing majority loses to random crap and suicides for no reason and makes lots of dumb mistakes. The convincing majority has agreed that the stages are "stupid," and when you ask them to define it, they say it's stupid because it's "gay."

The convincing majority sucks at argumentation and logically making their case. The convincing majority says that things they don't know how to fight are "broken." The convincing majority can't shift a metagame on their own, and they have to wait for players much better to do it for them. The convincing majority uses things like "M2K said Y so it must be true" as their argument, even when they don't know why M2K said it.

Plenty of bracket level players have weighed in in favor of banning these stages. Not just M2K or a pack of random scrubs. You're just making this stuff up about the "convincing majority."

Your proof is based on getting other people to agree with you. Mine is based on factual results. I'm not sure what makes mine so subjective.

Well, it certainly is subjective. I'm not sure what "facts" you are providing. Mostly just comparisons to other evolutions in the smash metagame from its infancy to what is now its mid-life. I mean comparing misguided thinking from the game's infancy to now, 10 years in, is just irrelevant. I think its pretty safe to assume we have a matured metagame now (if not now, when?). Can it evolve further? Sure. But I think as a community we're more than experienced enough to make a decision about an outlier stage. I mean what you seem to be saying is "NOBODY knows anything about this mysterious stage. We should give it another 10 years because we just don't really know how bad it is."

And as far as getting people to agree vs proof - sure? Having people overwhelmingly dislike the stage is certainly more meaningful than proving anything to you personally, based on your subjective criteria of what makes a stage bannable. We make rules as a community in the first place (I'd assume) in order to encourage the most competitive format of the game we can extract from its raw form. If the community believes this stage does not represent competitive melee to satisfaction, then it should go. It doesn't need the "proof" of an unstoppable strategy to be removed.

 

[KirbyKaze]

Brinstar is a very warm stage.

=D

Brinstar is the devil

Thank god my character can invincible stall through the lava so if I lose a fight for the plats I'm perfectly fine

 

[Kason Birdman]

not to sound douchy, but yes. We know more about competitiveness and high level play. Those stages are gay in both Brawl and in Melee. I don't even need to say why it's obvious it's just gay and I'm leaving it at that.

also plank/mlg are gay for unfair bans

You don't need to be good to know how to be good.
Besides.. less experienced players can totally have just as much knowledge and insightful thoughts on what is gay/unfair.

 

[JBM falcon08]

KirbyKaze is it realistic to say sheik could plank when the lava comes up if necessary? with the invincible up b stall that is.

 

[Hax]

Strawman? A strawman is where you set up the opposing person's argument so that it looks ridiculous, then fight THAT rather than challenge what they're actually saying.

my fault; I meant to point out that you created the image that you had refuted my point when infact stages' metagames cannot be compared to characters' metagames. similar to a strawman but not quite. debate terminology aside, I would like to hear a response to this.

Chu vs Mango's a pretty funny match to me for a lot of reasons, but yeah, let's talk about the Brinstar thing. Chu didn't have an answer to a strategy the very first time it was used against him, so clearly it was a broken one that couldn't be beaten. Most of us have been cheesed by something we weren't prepared for, and our initial reaction to such strategies will inevitably be "this is unfair and stupid."

Wobbles, I wish my nana was as good as yours. how did you remove her innate AI that tells her to SD at zero when the stage breaks apart? I must know of this advanced technique!

or you could opt to helplessly "camp" one side of the stage while jiggs/peach endlessly poke at your shield from ridiculously safe angles.

both of these are definitely characteristics of a fair stage!

If you let Puff have free reign over Brinstar during the full lava transformation, yes, you will probably get wrecked while on the top platform.

if i let the character with the best aerial movement/safe, spaced moves in the game have free reign during a stage that offers me 3 feet to move on, i will probably get wrecked?

does this sound like a neutral stage to you?

If you get knocked into lava as a fast faller, then you will probably eat a lot of percent.

eat a lot of percent? versus a jigglypuff that knows how to press down-b, I will eat a stock and then not even have the opportunity to punish her because the lava cancels her lag.

as for nana, she is dead (versus any character) upon touching the lava. it appalls me that people are claiming that brinstar adds competitive depth when the strategy necessary to kill the opponent becomes "spam your strongest move while they are constantly sent into the air, unconscious"

But hey, on Yoshi's Story you can kill Peach with ridiculous Falco shine combos at absurdly early percents. Puff dies at something dumb like 50 percent on YS to Fox's up-smash. Why don't we regulate this? Because the characters have inherent properties that influence how good/bad they are depending on the level. Is Brinstar's lava *too* extreme?

you are attempting to counter my argument that 24/26 characters in the game get shafted by brinstar by stating that falco gains a decent strategy that comes into play approximately 10% of games on yoshi's. not only does this technique rarely come into play, it is far from broken because it requires ridiculous setup (unlike brinstar, yoshi's does not FORCE me to go to the top platform..) and it is regulated by being impossible on every stage but yoshi's. if you believe that falco's shine kills on yoshi's are ruining our metagame to the extent brinstar is, then I am speechless

 

[Wobbles]

Niko: Yes. I am in fact saying that people don't practice on the level. Do you? Does anybody you know? People set their random stage list to the tourney randoms, and just go. I'm one of the few I know who actually practices the level, and I win there a pretty hefty percentage of the time even against characters like Peach who are supposed to dominate it. I practice there and don't have problems with these "broken" strategies everybody else is lamenting.

It doesn't sound like "nobody knows how to fight Puff" because, for starters, THAT was a lashing out against HBox's victory streak since nobody wanted to admit he was any good. In this case, Brinstar is one of the least played stages even when it's legal, and players auto-ban it when possible rather than learn how to fight there. Like I said, how often do you practice there? I bet you don't. Ever. In the 10 years of this game's release, when's the last time you sat down and said, "I'm going to learn how to play on Brinstar"? When's the last time you put it on the random rotation?

As a community we AREN'T experienced because we've ignored it. It's played in under 1% of tournament matches, an even smaller percent of friendlies, and only by characters who are supposed to be good on it, when it isn't banned. Just because you've left it legal doesn't mean you really know anything meaningful about it. Can Fox ledge-hop onto the left platform when the membrane attaching it to the level isn't broken? When it is? How about the right? How many hits does it take to break the middle of the level? (Yes, yes, yes, nine).

Do I really have to repeat myself again? The proof I'm *demanding,* not the proof I'm *providing,* is "factual tournament results over a period of time involving the stage/strategy/character in question." Why is it fair for me to demand this? Well, you said it yourself, the status quo is leaving the level banned. Just having a bunch of people say they don't like it shouldn't be enough. That IS subjective I guess. I think we should learn to deal with things we don't like because they're part of the game that we're trying to play. Some people think we should just go "I don't like this because it's difficult and different, let's get rid of it," and sweep it under the carpet. It's a lot like eating your vegetables.

Spoiler

Unless it's a stitch face.

To Hax, at this point: No, I don't think it's ruining the metagame. The same way I don't think Brinstar is ruining anything, because nobody has provided the necessary data to demonstrate that it has. You did read the 2nd to last sentence of the paragraph, right? STAGES WITH DIFFERENT PROPERTIES INHERENTLY AFFECT HOW GOOD/BAD CHARACTERS ARE, BECAUSE CHARACTERS HAVE DIFFERENT PROPERTIES. Smaller stages massively benefit characters with powerful moves, larger stages benefit characters with better recoveries.

I could offer plenty of commentary on that Chu-Mango match too, about what Chu did wrong that could have changed the flow of the match. Do you want to look at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VNtyju7cYVw#t=0m35s where Nana is dead but the lava saves her and she makes it back to the level. Or 1:08 where Chu doesn't realize Nana was desynced and goes running over the gap while she doesn't have a double jump, something that wouldn't have gotten her killed if he'd been paying more attention to her. My advanced technique is "wait until Nana is re-synced before I go charging over the abyss." THAT'S my magical advanced technique. When I forget to take into account Nana's AI and behavior she (or I) ends up suiciding on neutrals, it's not a problem unique to Brinstar. And then at 1:52, he de-syncs off his respawn and Nana's AI causes her to land in the center of the stag e where the lava is, getting her needlessly wrecked AGAIN. Besides that the match pretty much looked like your typical ICs v Jiggs fight. Oh, and the start of the match, Chu just stands there and watches Mango D-air the breakable section rather than hitting him with ice-blocks to get free damage, or just WD'ing in with a tilt or smash or something to keep control.

I admit lots of bias, because plenty of people take me to Brinstar expecting a free win and I stomp on them. People take me to RC and camp me, and I beat them. I'm winning against "broken" strategies and "unwinnable" matchups by virtue of my experience on those levels. So I have a hard time seeing what the problem is. So when other people complain about losing to Puff on Brinstar, I get perplexed, because that **** hasn't happened to me. At least, not in any case where I can't see what I did wrong. I lost to a Sheik player on Brinstar recently, but he also beat me by the same margin in the first game on my best level, FoD, and he wasn't even trying to use abusive strategies, he just outplayed me.

You clearly don't know much about playing ICs on that level, btw. Its big size lets Nana live longer than average, lava can save her from gimps, or if it pops her up to eat a finisher that can give me a distraction to build more percent than I would have on other levels. Multiple platforms and edge locations--plus the way the breakable section influences Nana's throw DI--let you handoff in many parts of the stage. When you're solo, the slanted level can give you lots of free horizontal wavedashes for even faster movement, or you can use smaller ones to be more precise with your spacing than you can on flat surfaces. Slopes also influence the angle of your smashes which can mess with people's perception of where to jump and go when fighting them. It's a little larger than normal, and if there's lava I can use forward+b beneath the level and then DI lava to recover in situations I normally couldn't. I actually LIKE Brinstar with ICs.

If anything, DK64 is more problematic because of its size. I very easily timed out a Peach in tournament (with Puff, funnily enough) by building percent and avoiding her for the rest of the game on that stage. I think it's pretty doable with other characters too. I know ICs can't catch certain characters there no matter how hard you try, which is why I typically ban THAT instead of Brinstar, given the choice.

Also, your first point: a character metagame is created by the weighing of options and the understanding of relative attributes. What works at what percent. What's escapable, what's not. What part the stage(!) you can go to and be safe on. A stage's metagame is created by knowing things like whether you can poke through this platform with this move. Whether your up+b will magically get eaten by the edge and cause you to die. Whether you die sooner off the top here, but live longer off the side. It's a metagame based on understanding how the character properties exist relative to the stage. The two are related, regardless of whether it's a stage with platforms, with lava, with magic carpets, or with a bunch of empty space. Ignoring the stage's properties is a recipe for disaster. Ever see a Marth try to tipper somebody through the Dreamland platforms? If you want to be good against Marth, you have to know how he works... not only in general, but on specific STAGES. The top platform on Yoshi's sucks against Marth because he can sh-u-air tipper you (and shield stab a lot too), but it's great on DL because he has to full jump and loses lots of follow up even if he connects.

Stage metagame and character matchup metagames are not isolated from one another. You're also dividing the game into "neutrals" as ONE element, as if they are homogenous (they aren't), and then Brinstar as its own, as if I'm asking Chess players to learn how to play darts.

Also, you DO wish your Nana was as good as mine. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QFrkptJT0HE#t=7m31s

 

[TheZhuKeeper]

In this case, Brinstar is one of the least played stages even when it's legal, and players auto-ban it when possible rather than learn how to fight there. Like I said, how often do you practice there? I bet you don't. Ever. In the 10 years of this game's release, when's the last time you sat down and said, "I'm going to learn how to play on Brinstar"? When's the last time you put it on the random rotation?

I actually played against MacD a couple sessions of nothing but Brinstar. Not just matches, but we tested various things, like what a sh bair can reach, how to maneuver around, l canceling on the middle, ledge stalls, platform camping etc...

Before that, I used to ban one of FD / FoD / Brinstar against Peach depending on how I felt, now I just ban Brinstar LOL.

I may be one of the few who bothered to do this though. I do wish there were more "viable" stages, because having Brinstar as an autoban now sets the Fox / Peach matchup (and a lot of other matchups too) as really one dimensional and with basically the same stages every set.

But yeah, Brinstar is way too hard of a fight for me to gamble (it really feels like a gamble, that's the problem I have with the stage) on, I feel like even if I'm playing well, I have a better chance on FD / FoD than I do on Brinstar. Not that Brinstar is necessarily broken (whether or not it should be banned, I'm not sure of either. I too don't think that something has to be entirely "broken" to be banned though). I think the list is ok as it is now because there are very few of these kind of stages so it ends up being a set on neutrals anyways. If such counterpicks were removed, sets (especially long ones) might only happen on two or three stages... and I don't know if that's necessarily a good thing.





But yeah, I think Armada said that KJ64 has more potential to be broken and I think I can agree with that. I think if people really wanted to, they could time out slow characters (who have short full hops) like Peach / Puff / Ganon / Link / etc just by circling the stage and getting small hits. Those characters literally can't hit them if done right (or as far as I can imagine). I mean I've thought of doing this to people who take me to KJ64 to spite them, but I end up just straight up beating them anyways (usually after two stocks of not taking any damage =D). But yeah, potentially, I think KJ64 could be worse. We're lucky we only have one Pink Shinobi LOL.

 

[Bing]

I defs think you're underestimating the amount of people who train on Brinstar... whether they like it or not, its a counter pick, if you play tournaments, odds are you play with Brinstar and RC on. I dont really like Brinstar, but I dont want to get countered there and get ****ed over by the stage..(no johns)

Btw Zhu, I am currently watching Happy Feet 4, good **** <3

 

[Fortress | Sveet]

Mind you, IF we had a stage that was somehow 100% fair, then I'd be in favor of making it tournament standard as the first stage of the match. That would be pretty neat and neutral, so I'd probably be pretty down for that.

I don't understand this ideal... You assume the stage isn't fair because the match-up isn't fair? It is not the stage's fault that IC's ground based game can be beaten by falcon's or fox's aerial/platform game. I don't understand how you think thats even close to being the same thing as "the stage forbids you from staying on the ground".

Hey, don't forget what I said to you when you told me that. "Oh no. Well, good for you. I've got a plan to beat you though!" (I didn't actually have one >_>) Remember, I wholeheartedly support all effective and legal strategies.

But I also don't think it's our job to make the game perfect. I think if a stage is unfair... then it's unfair. If it's not broken or devoid of competitive depth whatsoever, then by removing it we're not preserving the game at all. We're twisting it to make our own personal little private version of it that we like based on criteria that will change with the weather.

I agree with all of this 100%, however at the same time I see the ~6 neutrals are the most similar stages and brinstar and RC are very different from them

Spoiler

not to mention everybody thinks the neutrals are the most fair stages

. I think in order to make the game as competitively fair as possible, the stages need to be standardized in terms of gameplay on them. I don't think RC, PF, Brinstar, MC, Corneria, GG, ect are unfair, but I think they are definitely non-standard. If you really like those stages, I think a fun side tournament would be to remove the neutrals and play just them and strike from them and stuff.


Most of the balance difference between BF, YS and DL is the size of the map & blastzones. FoD, PS and FD each vary the platform system uniquely and there are alternating blastzone/stage size (PS is big with close blastzones, FoD is small with far blastzones). If you think about it this way, FD is definitely the least similar of the 6 stages.


I think the most fair ruleset would be

5 Striking stages:
FoD
YS
BF
PS
DL

Counterpick stage:
FD

Or even ban FD.

Spoiler

Marth vs Fox test strike:

1: PS
2: YS / FoD
1: DL

Stage- BF

as apposed to (standard P4 rules)

1. DL
2. YS / FD
1. BF

Stage- FoD

Spoiler

Falcon vs Falco

1. FoD
2. DL / BF
1. YS

Final Stage- PS

notes: I think it may be a better choice for falco to ban PS in this situation over BF, however I dont think many people in this metagame would say anybody does good vs spacies on PS. I don't necessarily believe this is true, however I think this strike is representative of the immediate metagame.

Standard:

1. FoD
2. DL / FD
1. YS

Final Stage- BF

I havent finished reading your whole post wobbles, I'll edit this or post again if i want to reply to anything else.

 

[JesiahTEG]

Note to self: Wobbles is just as vicious in debates as he is at Melee

 

[ArstNeio]

Well here's what's subjective about your viewpoint: You think that a stage needs to allow an absolutely broken strategy to be banworthy. I disagree. I don't think Brinstar is completely devoid of competitiveness. Sure, you can get good on the stage. But that's not good enough in my opinion. Is it up to the standard set forth by the neutral stages? Is it as fair as those stages? Does the game deviate too much from the "traditional" game (as defined by what IS a neutral stage in the first place)? I would say yes, but again, these things can't be measured quantitatively or "proven", and I disagree in the first place with your criteria for "proof."

Well this is a problematic point of view, and also likely a focal point of this debate.

Should things not broken be banned? If a stage isn't completely broken, then banning it just because of current subjective beliefs on what is fair or unfair first sets dangerous precedents and second prevents the metagame from evolving. Video games are resilient. Someone will find a powerful strategy, and it will be dominant for some time, and then someone else will find a counter to that strategy. Stopping this cycle in the middle first is problematic because we're cutting metagame development and second because we now have a precedent to do that in other situations. If we can ban stages because they aren't as fair as some other stages, why don't we just only play on one stage? Why don't we ban all the characters except one? The game will go on, and players will find a way to deal. There's no need to legislate Melee into a competitive game because Melee is resilient enough, as is any game, to deal with these challenges.

Plus, Brinstar and RC might be more unfair to certain characters in certain matchups, but the starter stages encounter the same situations. That's what the strike and ban system is in place for. A categorical ban requires the infraction to be game-breaking.

Plus, what exactly is the "standard set forth by neutral stages"? These stages aren't so much "neutral" as they are "simple"--these stages are, in the case of some characters, some of their best stages, which hardly sounds neutral to me (so I'll call them starters from now on). What exactly is the "traditional" game? Who is in the position to decide what ought or ought not be considered Smash? Why is it important to adhere to the "traditional" game? There's really no reason except that people like to play on simpler stages more because they're easier to play on. Just like it's easier to play without advanced techs. And plus, it's really not a good idea to legislate based upon preference; just because most players don't play Jigglypuff, and most players don't enjoy playing against Jigglypuff, doesn't mean we should ban Jigglypuff. Brinstar, RC are the same.

tl;dr
1. Banning stuff when it's not broken is bad because it halts metagame development and sets dangerous precedents
2. The "standards set forth by neutral stages" is just a fancy way of saying "hey guys everyone likes playing on starter stages so let's just play on starter stages.
3. Legislating based on what people like is bad; it sets dangerous precedents, and we wouldn't do it in circumstances like, say, banning characters, so we shouldn't do it for stages either.


I think we all need to step back and ask ourselves: if we were talking about something else (say characters) would we be willing to ban a character for criteria to the same degree as we are to ban stages? If not, then why should characters and stages be held to different standards?

 

[Fortress | Sveet]

The game really needs to be standardized. Some people will say were "turning it into street fighter" or a "traditional fighter" but why do we need to keep the janky obtrusive stages just to not "turn into them"?

The game changes a lot based on what stage you pick. The depth is in the characters and the fact that the neutral stages are very balanced.

I completely disagree with any implications that non-neutral stages have "more depth". Maybe you can be more creative or move in weird ways or do annoying things, but in the end the matchups have all been warped so much that its less fair overall, and therefore less deep.

 

[Pi]

The game really needs to be standardized. Some people will say were "turning it into street fighter" or a "traditional fighter" but why do we need to keep the janky obtrusive stages just to not "turn into them"?

The game changes a lot based on what stage you pick. The depth is in the characters and the fact that the neutral stages are very balanced.

I completely disagree with any implications that non-neutral stages have "more depth". Maybe you can be more creative or move in weird ways or do annoying things, but in the end the matchups have all been warped so much that its less fair overall, and therefore less deep.

but in the end the matchups have all been warped so much that its less fair overall

what do you mean overall
you mean jiggs vs. fox/falco/falcon?

that's not overall

 

[j3ly]

THERE IS NO GOOD REASON TO BAN RAINBOW, BRINSTAR, OR KJ64!

-it's too good for ____
-the majority don't like it



are NOT GOOD REASONS

who died and made you pres?

hyrule - it't too good for fox
- the majority of people dont like it

they are perfectly good reasons. however, why all the bans? diversity is important. i think way way more stages should be allowed but thats just me, think of all the char specific CP techniques we would have developed by now on the stages.

imagine the different combos, on different stages in combo videos. what if shades of falco had yoshis island 64 combos in it! imagine! sometimes it might just be gay, but watever you get a ban.