Ban brinstar and rainbow cruise

[Ripple]

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.

way to not read any of my other posts. congrats, you can nit pick. I said in every other one of my posts that as long as its not degenerate. or turn into "do this or lose" then it shouldn't be banned.

"too good" was meant in the way that if it didn't over centralize. marth can be "too good" on yoshis to some people. is it "pick marth or lose"? no

 

[JPOBS]

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?

this post is amazing.

 

[Pi]

I think a more realistic way to approach this 'problem'
would be to come up with a better counterpick stage selection method

 

[Fortress | Sveet]

or just remove the non neutral stages so tournament games are pretty much standardized.

 

[JPOBS]

assuming that every tournament has the same stagelist, then tournament games ARE standardized, because the same stages are legal/banworthy in them all.

only tournaments which have different stage lists would fall into the category of being "unstandardized". But all the important tournies use the Pound 4 stagelist so whatever.

 

[Niko45]

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.

The standard set forth by neutral stages is the fact that those stages are the ones designated for game 1 of tournament play and pretty much universally across the globe are the stages you random from in friendlies. Do you think it's just a coincidence that these stages have been designated as "neutral?" They are widely considered the most fair stages. Your argument might as well be proposing that we open up all the stages, as long as there is a sliver of a competitive aspect to them. And I would strongly disagree that the neutral stages are really just "simple". The neutral stages are consider the most neutral, where the stage itself is passive and plays a minimal role in the outcome of the match. You seem to want to play devil's advocate, and flip things upside down saying "Who's to say what's neutral? Maybe I think Brinstar is the most fair stage!" - to which, I would bring up that the entire community basically disagrees with that (but yet it's dangerous to legislate based on that for some reason).

Stages which are irrelevant for 90% of the cast and provide large (larger than a neutral stage CP advantage) advantages to the other 10% should not be allowed. I feel like that's pretty basic.

Can anybody arguing that Brinstar and RC should stay explain to me why Mute City is banned?

Also getting off the whole "jiggs/peach are too good on Brinstar" thing, how about the sheer fact that Lava is random as ****? What if every time I edgeguard my opponent and edgehog him, the lava saves him, but when he edgeguards me, it just happens to not be there to help me out? I'm sure you could find some type of consistency over many many matches on Brinstar, but for our tournament format (1 match in a 2/3 set? jesus) the luck factor is huge.

 

[Wobbles]

Well, to remain consistent with your argument, we should be banning Pokemon Stadium then; it's no longer considered "neutral enough" to be in the starting list from which players strike.

"Pretty much universally across the globe are the stages you random from in friendlies."

They are that way because those are the levels that were, once upon a time, the random levels in tournament, and people sit down to practice *for tournament settings* when they play. So they would set to random the stages that they were going to randomly encounter in tournament. If these other levels were on the random list, people would set them to random as well.

*

Also, you're right. If a level is competitive enough to include at all, then why are we saying "it's fair enough overall but not fair enough to base the first match on." That's ridiculous.

How about this; we remove the notion of "counterpick" levels and include all legal levels in the starting list from which you strike? IF you are at a tournament where the host deems Brinstar, RC, and DK64 to be legal, competitive stages, then you would strike from:

YS
FoD
Battlefield
FD
DL
PS
Brinstar
RC
DK64
and Icicle Mountain.

Spoiler

That was a joke, get FD out of there.

9 levels, even # of strikes for both players. And you still get a ban I suppose.

*

Yes, it's bad to legislate based on what the "entire community" thinks because, for starters, it's not the entire community. It IS the majority of players though, which jives suspiciously well with the fact that the most popular characters--conventional wisdom says, anyhow--suck at the levels in question. If you've got that kind of shadow over your credibility, then I think it's fair to say you'll need more proof than "because we say so."

Maybe you're familiar with the phrase "tyranny of the majority?"

 

[otg]

Wobbles you funny.

 

[Mew2King]

all those stages are about is playing cheap and running away like a ***** with some characters having way too big of advantages over others way more than on other stages. It's simply stupid and uncompetitive. I'm not posting any more in this thread anyone with a half a brain knows these 2 stages should be banned.

 

[Hax]

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.

this does not outweigh the 0% SD that happened 30 seconds later..

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.

look at how the desync happened; nana fell off of a janky-shaped platform that popo was not on, desyncing her. normally this would be fine; on brinstar nana loses her stock. this also supports my statement that jigglypuff's bair spacing is beyond broken on brinstar; instead of being able to punish with bair and then close in on jiggs as he normally would be, Chu's best option was to bair and then return to the right side of the stage without closing in, because attempting to do so would lead to the death of his nana (as it did). considering the best position in the game versus any character is beneath them, this is a major problem.

not only is jiggs broken on the top platform, but on the main stage as well.

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.

while this de-sync was entirely Chu's fault, watching Nana get hit by such shallow lava brings me to a point i've forgotten; brinstar's lava can hit through the stage. bigger characters cannot run to or use aerials on certain parts of the stage when the lava lies directly underneath, or they will get hit by it. considering getting hit by lava translates into getting hit by the best combo starter in the game, fastfallers will probably lose their stock to good players upon touching the lava. versus jiggs, the player has to be good enough to hit down-b.

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.

first of all, this is not true. Chu was halfway across the stage and out of smash/tilt/ice block range. second of all, "take control?" if you think that doing 15% (which was not possible, but i'll help you out here) makes up for the MASSIVE advantage jigglypuff gains by breaking the stage then you are completely blowing up your position simply to support your argument.

regardless, Mango would have daired the breakable section sooner or later. unless you mean to tell me that executing an aerial when your opponent is on the other side of the stage is difficult..

I skipped the next few paragraphs because they don't really add to the debate. i'll just say that all the good things you listed about brinstar are outweighed by the counterarguments i have made above.

I just watched your match vs Rayku; LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOL this might be worse than Chu v Mango

6:10 the lava interrupts the match, granting you a combo you did nothing to deserve
6:12 your nana takes 12% for you bairing; this would go unpunished on any other stage
6:28 the lava saves your nana when she should have died
6:58 the lava messed up your edgeguard; even though you still killed him you wouldn't have had he teched/not get-up rolled to the right
7:08 the camera turns away so i don't know exactly what happened, presumably you were needled into the lava. all i know is that you took 80% (and should have died) for falling in LOL
8:00 another recovery that should not have worked; if he DI'd the 2nd lava hit properly he wouldn't have gotten hit by your bair
8:20 the lava costs you the match LOL
8:36 brinstar costs you the match again LOOOOOOOOOOL

if all of the above doesn't convince you, i don't know what will lmfao

 

[Fortress | Sveet]

inb4circumstantialevedencerefutation

 

[BuntyBant]

I don't see the problem with counter picks because i thought they were suposed to help the person that lost the last round by letting them pick a stage that helps them. It's not really a counter pick if the only stages you can pick are ones that don't give you an advantage.

As for it doesn't make for fair competitive play is see it the opposite way. Competetive play allows people to find who has the most control over the entire game in any situation. You are not really playing the entire game if you only play 1/26 characters and 6/29 stages. This is not to say you have to play other characters or put every stage on random or counter picks but it gives you no reason to ban a stage because the character you are playing doesn't benifit from it equally as another. I think counter picks are good because there is no reason why you can't switch character or tuff it out like wobbles and stop making excusses and play the game.

If a stratigy is as broken as camping you have to ask yourself why you didn't switch characters before the match when your opponent has told you what stage they are taking you to. If you can truely only play one character then im at a loss why you think you should win a tournament when you have only grasped 1/26th of the game and think its unfair that someone who has put more time into learning the other characters and stages should win. you then decide the only way you can win is to change the rules to your likeing.

 

[Fortress | Sveet]

Why don't we just have RC and PF be neutrals and FD, YS, FoD, Brinstar, PS, DL, and BF all be CP stages. Sounds like a good competitive environment.

 

[EPsilon933]

This thread seems a bit popular...

 

[Zone]

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

Wow, Well written. And I totally agree with this entirely. Also funny how this is coming from a IC player, aren't they suppose to hate Brinstar and RC?

I play RC alot, and I do well there alot just because of my knowledge of alot of things which I take advantage of my opponents lack-of-knowledge. Some people say "wtf that's BS" when they up+B with someone on that swinging platform, when the stage is at the top left. They fall through cuz they were holding down. And they comment and say "wtf this stage is so gay." Or... you just don't know wtf you're doing.

 

[JesiahTEG]

Hax$- something else i want to say now that i can word it right...

the reason why smash has such a ridiculous gap of skill between certain players...like, how even though average level players can 4 stock scrubs, those same people can get 4 stocked by pros, who can get 4 stocked by armada, who can lose to mango's mario...And there might be someone out there, and probably is that in the future can just tear mango up...

The reason why that's possible in melee, where you can just get so ridiculously good is the amount of depth melee has...the amount of moves, combined with percents and di, edgeguarding, where you hit them with your hitboxes, etc all add to the depth...

what does depth mean? more depth=more things to master.

stage selection is most DEFINITELY included in this. the more stages we can allow, the more we give people to explore and master...thus increasing the level of skill between that player and everyone else. that's what we're about right?

i'm sure if the characters had even more moves than they do now, some players would be better than others just because of that one move...but then others would figure out ways around it, and some people would just do crazy **** with those moves and maximize efficiency with it

the same concept applies to stages, only stages aren't explored nearly as deeply or commonly as moves cuz it's very possible to avoid those stages...compared to how often you play on neutrals like wobbles said it's probably like 1%.

but, obviously we cant allow ridiculous stages. we can't allow complete dominance by one character or one strategy. that's not healthy for the metagame or competition.

but, that being said, the goal should be to allow as many stages as possible while experiencing as little overcentralization (is that even a word lol) as possible.

when i think about it that way, we can't ban cruise or brinstar. no one character has absolutely 100% dominated these stages. we've never seen that.

i did see wobbles beat darkrain on brinstar though, as well as beat broly ( a marth player) and doh (peach player) all in a row, in tournament.

i think if anything, we should be encouraging players to explore these stages even more. what if everyone was as good on those stages as wobbles is...and what if they played the most broken characters on those stages.

first off there would be more skill required to win for everyone. wins wouldn't be nearly as free for the players who counterpicked there, and the result would be closer to "whoever is the smarter player wins."

on neutrals with character dittos, whoever the better/smarter player is wins because you're playing the same character a neutral stage...but then you start to add matchups and stages and suddenly it's "whoever can play by the rules given to them better wins."

and that's when people begin to say tournament wins does not equal skill. One player is better at winning under the conditions while even though the other player is smarter, knows what his opponent is going to do more of the time etc. thats when people start to take credit away from tournament wins.

but, in short my point is, if everyone put the amount of time into these stages as they could be..and i dont mean messing around with it either. i mean doing what you have to do normally to get good..testing and losing and getting frustrated, but then finding something that can help, learning to apply it etc...lets put it this way, if those 2 stages were the only 2 neutrals allowed, people would learn to master them and more skill would be required to win.

or, the complete opposite could happen. maybe one character or two would completely dominate, and we'd realize that we can't allow the stages because that one character is unbeatable on it played right.

but, as it stands, that hasn't happened. it probably never will. as certain as we THINK or FEEL that WOULD happen ( and hax i respect you a lot as a player and you're smart as ****), we have a duty to the game to prove it before we make the changes. otherwise, we're just being selfish.

also, to touch on what you said because you made a REALLY good point...what warrants a ban for a stage more...the community or the truth?

we don't know the truth, we haven't explored it deeply enough. we dont know for sure if those stages really would allow one character to absolutely be unbeatable cuz it's never happened...but, a huge portion of the community (idk if its majority or not) wants them banned. lets just say it is majority, lets say its 75%.

but, just for sake of discussion, lets also say that they're wrong. let's say that those characters are not unbeatable on those stages, but even still 75% of the community wants them banned.

what's the right thing to do? do we ban it for the community, because really we're the ones that matter...or do we suck it up and take the heat for not banning the stages, because we want to force the community to improve as much as possible...thats something to think about.

is the goal to make the community as happy as possible or is the goal to create as much opportunity for skill as possible?

if the goal is the community, then we ban it. if the goal is skill, then we can't ban it until someone proves the brokenness.

me personally? i have pride in the melee community and i like to think that our journey to the top of the metagame is the most difficult (or one of the most difficult) out of any fighting game, and to ban them without completely proving it is almost embarassing that we'd just take the easy way out like that.

that's just me though and once again i'm not at the level where i can post with 100% confidence in my words, so take it for what it is: an opinion

 

[Rykard]

i like when people makes posts like Jesiahs and he pretty much just summed up everything in that.

I would also like to point out that Rainbow Cruise is actually a pretty decent stage to counterpick against Jiggs because of the fact that the majority of kills Jiggs gets are from easy edgeguards/gimps and rests, all of which are significantly hindered by the way the stage works. So even if Jiggs does get some advantages on brinstar, you can then counterpick jiggs back to cruise if you know how to play on it which kind of demonstrates how counterpicking is effective in itself i guess. Just talking theory-wise at least

 

[Brookman]

Brinstar is a bad stage by the standards set on our neutral list, due only to the lava.

 

[TheZhuKeeper]

Brinstar is a bad stage by the standards set on our neutral list, due only to the lava.

You're hot then you're cold
You're yes then you're no
You're in then you're out
You're up then you're down
You're wrong when it's right
It's black and it's white
We fight, we break up
We kiss, we make up

(You) You don't really want to stay, no
(You) But you don't really want to go ='(
You're hot then you're cold
You're yes then you're no
You're in and you're out
You're up and you're down

 

[Druggedfox]

Loooool zhu has the best postsssss

@Jesiah

If stages cause imbalance among characters (aka, give certain characters autowins over others) then is the depth the stage adds to the game worth the characters we lose to it?

 

[PB&J]

hax- ask plank to ban it at pound 5 , prob the best way to start new rules

 

[metalreflectslime]

hax- ask plank to ban it at pound 5 , prob the best way to start new rules

This.

10 char

 

[KirbyKaze]

time for a song combo




I'll start

I love the mountains

 

[EPsilon933]

I love the clear blue skies?

 

[Wobbles]

Here's your problem Hax. You are saying that the lava, because it can damage players at ALL and influence the match in ANY WAY, is *bad*. I'm saying that because you can plan around it and because you can see it coming, it is a resource that both players have access to. Not to the same extent because characters take advantage of it in different ways, but you can say the same about other stage characteristics.

Lava saving people and getting them killed... well, we can make nearly identical arguments regarding Randall on YS, if you want. Should have died, shouldn't have, gets you killed because you didn't see it coming and do some random thing that screws you over. In fact, lots of people have complained about Randall to the point of saying YS shouldn't be neutral. Even when I pointed out he's on a strict timer and it doesn't take much practice to learn to check the clock at important times, many people say you "shouldn't have to look at the clock," or "you can't be expected to do that." That doesn't even take into account hitbox stalling on Shy Guys that can ruin recoveries--or randomly help them-- or deadweighting on them from throws that changes combos. At least you can see the lava rising in the background of Brinstar. Not paying attention to that is the same as not paying attention to the level shifting on PS and not knowing that the platforms, when sunk into the level, don't entirely disappear immediately, creating weird little partitions in the stage.

People who don't know how to deal with it, or don't know that they SHOULD deal with it, call it ******** and say "X should have worked" or "you shouldn't have hit me there."

I know how you'll respond to this: "you can't seriously be comparing NEUTRAL STAGES to the LAVA on BRINSTAR." Well, they share similar characteristics, don't they? They may not be as prominent but tell me Randall hasn't influenced the outcome of matches on YS, or you haven't been ****ed over by a platform on PS or FoD by being caught at the wrong spot in its transformation. Or if you want an example from another counterpick that you haven't talked about banning, DK64's barrel, which IS completely random and is, more often than not, off screen until the last moment, making it nearly impossible to plan around unless you're Peach or Puff. And while it can save you, you can also try and hit the other guy when he pops out. Kinda like lava! Doesn't hurt you though, except when it spits you at the bottom of the screen.

As for my Rayku match...

6:10: you can see the lava rising in the background as early as 6:05. Rayku screwed up, much in the same way I do near the end.

6:28: So?

8:00: He made a mistake and got killed for it. What's the problem here?

8:20: I was too absorbed in my CG to see the lava coming. If I'd abandoned it I could have played off the lava to combo instead, maybe into something on the top middle platform where I could have finished a handoff uninterrupted.

8:36: Don't know what you're talking about, I should have gone for a grab for a charged smash finish rather than a d-smash. I panicked because victory was so close and didn't think about the membrane delaying my hitbox or the slopes changing my speed.

I deserved that loss, and it's all stuff that I should have been watching for.

But here's where you chip in and say I "shouldn't" have to watch for that stuff because I don't have to on other levels. And that's where I say "yes I do." I have to take into account random properties of the other stages ALL THE TIME. If you want to play the should and shouldn't game, how about we do this?

I SHOULDN'T have to space my forward+b more precisely with Fox and Falco to avoid going under Battlefield, when that doesn't happen on other neutrals. Why should I have to pay attention to that?

You SHOULDN'T get the benefit of FD's sloped side while recovering, because it artificially alters recovery distance on up+b moves and can make you recover when you should have died.

I SHOULDN'T need to know that there's a high tendency for stage hits to send you straight down when you hit certain parts of the wall on Yoshi's Story. It's a flat wall, why should it do that? It's quite clearly ********.

I also shouldn't know that Randall spends exactly 5 seconds inside the stage, 5 seconds outside of it, and that if you try doing certain ledge actions while he's next to you he can screw you up. That is also stupid.

I shouldn't have to know that the right side of PS's rock transformation doesn't let you roll very far onto the level, just as I shouldn't have to know that there's a slope near the tree during the fire phase that can screw up short hops. And why should I know that the grassy platform gives you an autofastfall when you run off it? That's dumb.

Look at all the random unintuitive **** you have to learn in order to play on our neutral stages. I'm pretty sure the only reason people don't think about that stuff is because... well, they don't think about it! They know it already! You know the ins and outs of those levels because you play on them constantly. You're used to paying attention to dumb **** on those stages and when you forget, either you admit that you screwed up or the people around you laugh at you.

But I guess we shouldn't have to learn ANOTHER level, right? That's just too much work for us hardcore tournament players.

 

[AXE 09]

(This is a partial quote, originally from a thread in the MBR)

Alright, I have always questioned... Why in the world is Brinstar a legal tournament stage?

Personally, I feel that both Rainbow Cruise and Brinstar should not be a part of the counterpick list. In fact, I feel that there should be no counterpick stages. I think PS can be a neutral stage, and I'm a little iffy with KJ64 but I can accept it.

I feel that the less you have to "fight the stage", the better. Competitive matches should be strictly player vs player, and not player vs player vs stage. Some characters have better tools to fight/avoid the stage hazards, and it just seems unfair to me for those characters who have to worry about the stage more (Samus, Link, IC's). No character should be put at such a large disadvantage because of a stage selection. How in the world could it possibly be a GOOD idea to have Brinstar as a legal tournament stage?

Unfortunately, almost every map has stage hazards, but the stage hazards that the current 5 neutral stages have are not severe enough to limit any character's options. I feel that the least that you have to worry about the stage beating you, the better [for our competitive community]. You should not have to be forced into a certain position because of a stage hazard, but rather because your opponent forced you to. The stages picked for tournaments should decrease these stage hazards to a minimum, imo.

 

[Brookman]

I'm pretty sure that FD is a stage hazard.

 

[TheGoat]

Personally, I feel that both Rainbow Cruise and Brinstar should not be a part of the counterpick list. In fact, I feel that there should be no counterpick stages. I think PS can be a neutral stage, and I'm a little iffy with KJ64 but I can accept it.

I agree here.
I haven't given this subject too much thought, but maybe just getting rid of the counterpick system and letting people ban like 2 or 3 stages would work out.

 

[Brookman]

I fail to see the correlation between being unable to roll very far on the right side of stadium's rock mode and taking ~30 percent by being thrown/hit/fallen into lava on brinstar.


Sure, as long as the stage is legal and people are forced to play on it then yes, the random slopes and erroneous hitboxes will have to be taken into consideration.


I mean, **** it, let's just add Hyrule to our CP list and see what ****ing happens in tournaments.*

 

[Metal Reeper]

Stages reflect the outcomes of matches a lot(Duh you know that) I'm alright with counterpicks just because....if I mained let's say....Falcon I would not want to get stuck playin on FoD, or YS, or any stage really, stupid fox/falco

 

[Nø Ca$h]

theyre counterpick stages. theyre supposed to be unfair.

 

[Fortress | Sveet]

the thing i dont like about stage bans is that it always assumes the pretense that "if your character is bad on that stage, just ban it". I ran a tournament a few months ago that allowed Corneria, Mute City, and Pokefloats as CPs and gave each player 2 bans (limit 1 neutral). I figured, if theres twice the CP stages and twice the bans, its fine right? Essentially there was 1 additional stage in each CP category, so if a player was exposed in 1 tree in particular, they could ban both.

What I found was the case, though, was that instead of essentially changing nothing except a few more "interesting" games there was actually just more of a chance to force or trick your opponent into leaving a great stage open. Most characters have PF, RC and Corneria that they need to ban against fox in order to prevent "auto loss". The fox player now gets to freely pick between the neutral stages, and gets all his bans. There was obviously more than fox players that were advantaged, but in general the way to combat this was to have a pocket fox/falco.



Wobbles, one thing I think you fail to note is player strengths. You are obviously a player who is very good at understanding how terrain effects the battle. For you, even though your character is theoretically disadvantaged, as a player you are actually very comfortable. If you played someone equally adequate with terrain your opinion on the stages would probably change.

There are as many player strengths as aspects to the game. The difference between what i call competitively fair and most fair definitions (usually loosely based around character match-ups) is that it relates to how well players themselves and strategies in general are allowed to play due to non-player parts of the game.

A stage with a circle generally degrades the gameplay because if one player decides to not attack while he is ahead, the other player can't do much about it. Hyrule is simply an extreme case of this, where the other player actually can't do anything about it. The same concept is true on stages where the opponent can avoid conflict in such a way that they are never at a disadvantage while easily chipping damage. This isn't specific to any match-up specifically, but rather how the stage favors strategies.

A game is only as deep as its most competitive[ly fair] set of rules/conditions and neutral stages are definitely the least biased stages, which is why I fully support a more neutral based stage list.

 

[Nø Ca$h]

i think RC should be banned but not brinstar. fox already has PS DL64, and KJ64 on his side. with RC, he basically cant cant be 2-0d.

imo brinstar is foxes only bad stage regardless of the MU. characters with chaingrabs want to take him to FD. characters with exceptional gimp game want to take him to BF.(marth only goes even with him because he has both.) still, foxes have good room to laser camp on FD and the platforms on BF are spaced well enough for him to camp them.

brinstar should be played more lol

 

[-ACE-]

If the lava didn't come up and engulf the entire stage I'd be all for it.

I can't help it, I'd rather see character diversity than stage diversity. Enough people play spacies as it is. I would also argue that melee would last longer if people didn't feel pressured to drop their main that they absolutely love and pick up fox just to deal with stupid stages like RC.

I remember playing chu in tournament a year and a half ago and getting 3 stocked on PS, and I told him we're going to brinstar and he gave me so much **** and whined so much (yeah I should have told him to deal with it but all I really cared about was getting him to stop whining) that I said fine and went BF and lost by 1 stock low%. I felt like I would have had a chance on brinstar, but tbh if I had won I would have felt like the stage did too much of the work, and that's just not as good of a feeling to me as beating someone on a neutral stage. Maybe I'm the only one but virtually unavoidable stage hazards kill the spirit of competition for me.

 

[Bing]

If the lava didn't come up and engulf the entire stage I'd be all for it.

I can't help it, I'd rather see character diversity than stage diversity. Enough people play spacies as it is. I would also argue that melee would last longer if people didn't feel pressured to drop their main that they absolutely love and pick up fox just to deal with stupid stages like RC.

I remember playing chu in tournament a year and a half ago and getting 3 stocked on PS, and I told him we're going to brinstar and he gave me so much **** and whined so much (yeah I should have told him to deal with it but all I really cared about was getting him to stop whining) that I said fine and went BF and lost by 1 stock low%. I felt like I would have had a chance on brinstar, but tbh if I had won I would have felt like the stage did too much of the work, and that's just not as good of a feeling to me as beating someone on a neutral stage. Maybe I'm the only one but virtually unavoidable stage hazards kill the spirit of competition for me.

I love playing Fox and Falco, quick powerful, have intense combos... but yeah, I defs see where you're coming from. I got a pretty **** Mario, but yeah when I get put on Brinstar against a Spacy im just like "**** this should be fun". Generally I still win, but by a lot less of a gap then it should have been.

 

[Brookman]

I would like to conclude my argument now.

In Sum:

theyre counterpick stages. theyre supposed to be unfair.

who is with me?!

 

[Metal Reeper]

I would like to conclude my argument now.

In Sum:




who is with me?!

Yeh, same.

 

[Masmasher@]

Wobbles is ****** this thread
jeez

 

[Smasher89]

Why is Dreamland neutral? Puffs airplanking reduces the game against alot of characters(done this in tournament against samus, and of course won) to get the % lead or loose. Faster characters with lasers get screwed over due to an imidiatly buffered "waveland" to take the ledge instead.

How is KJ64 a Foxstage? it's waaay way better for falcon since Fox kills so late on it. It can if the player getting picked there lead to timeouts (singles only) if you make a dumb character choice, but shouldn't the player need to get that skill(counterpicks, how they work and what doesn't(char matchup for example) seem to work?) anyway, like learning to avoid the hole in pokemon stadium?


Btw how come Ken dominated the game for years even though sticking to Marth, who was supposed to "get screwed over" during a more open stagelist (including Onett and Corneria(where I've seen matches uploaded where he'd play marth and not fox.

 

[-ACE-]

I would like to conclude my argument now.

In Sum:




who is with me?!

YEAH, they're unfair for SOME characters, comparatively speaking. And that makes a lot of people feel the need to pick up fox, falco, or jiggs to keep up... it's just stupid if you ask me, one step closer to fox only rainbow cruise only, which is obviously an extreme but it's just stupid.

What is dumber? all neutral stages or all spacies and jiggs players?