Ban brinstar and rainbow cruise

[Masmasher@]

a simple disclaimer is that the backroom/ tournament directors could do what they want.
i know that my voice for this is a small squeak in a hallway at best.
im saying that if this happened it would be because you guys are tired of dealing with it not because there is a actual competitive reason for it.

for the priniciple and competitive reasoning its wrong but i highly doubt anyone would miss RC in tournament play. so doing because it increases fun is the actual reason.

 

[Ripple]

for the priniciple and competitive reasoning its wrong but i highly doubt anyone would miss RC in tournament play. so doing because it increases fun is the actual reason.

terrible reason

http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/appeal-to-emotion.html

 

[Pengie]

Actually the MBR has no authority over tournaments. All they can do is put out a list of recommended rules; however if anyone wants to deviate from these rules they can go right ahead. Put simply if you don't like these stages run tournaments where they are banned and enforce those rules.

 

[Masmasher@]

Actually the MBR has no authority over tournaments. All they can do is put out a list of recommended rules; however if anyone wants to deviate from these rules they can go right ahead. Put simply if you don't like these stages run tournaments where they are banned and enforce those rules.

agreed
10 char

 

[Fortress | Sveet]

http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/poisoning-the-well.html

no, it doesn't

except when the information directly relates to the topic under discussion. It'd be like listening to an impoverished man from southern africa with no available media about the American presidential foreign policy. Unless he somehow proves he has some credibility (such as maybe direct conversation with the president during a trip or something), the fact that he actually knows nothing on the topic is highly relevant.

You dont seem to realize that fallacies have exceptions. Most of your arguing has been based around misusing logical fallacies or stating that a fallacy is being used when the statement is perfectly valid in those situations.

 

[john!]

there should be a fallacy called "argumentum ad fallacium" which is the fallacy of talking about fallacies in an argument when you don't know what the fallacies actually mean

 

[Fortress | Sveet]

lol i approve john

edit- when did this turn into a MW debate? lol I guess MBR has no power in the MW.

Spoiler

BUT I DO! MWUAHAHAHA

 

[Wobbles]

I remember beating lots of people on levels I'm not supposed to win on. Like 2-stocking Peaches on Brinstar, beating campy Foxes on RC. Hell I've beaten Puff on Mute. By a substantial degree, because I'm ready for the gimmick and I adapt my playstyle accordingly. And I'm supposed to be playing a character that's auto-lose on all three of those levels.

(I guess that's anecdotal evidence and doesn't count though. Unless we're trying to argue against theorycrafting? ****, what CAN we use?)

What's the big deal, just practice on the stages already. Am I the only one who plays exclusively on levels I've been having trouble with so that I can figure out why, rather than wait until I get ***** in tournament?

Did you know that it was IMPOSSIBLE for Jiggs to win against Fox? All he had to do was u-throw u-air. And FastLikeTree's Fox ***** the TX Melee scene for months with almost nothing but (literally, ask any TX player from that time) flatland drill-shine infinites. He could flatland Peach, Marth, Sheik, even flipping Mario on FD from zero to death, consistently, in tournament, and did so for quite some time. Unescapable!

Spoiler

Smash DI son.

I guarantee you every Jiggs player has 100x more experience playing on Brinstar than the average player. Because that Puff is ready to counterpick people there and does so frequently, whereas spacy players stay away from it like it carries the plague. No wonder they don't know the lava patterns or whether their short hop b-air will hit through the side platforms when their tethers are broken.

Guess what though? If Kirby grabs me on Brisntar's breakable middle section, you know what he's going to do? D-throw and see if I panic and kill myself when the level breaks. I guaran****tee you. And I'll be ready to double jump and air dodge to the appropriate chunk of the level depending on which one I'm closest to. Yes, I know Kirby is garbage and this probably won't happen to you. But wouldn't it suck to lose your last stock in pools to that and get 5th instead of 4th seed and not make it out?

You could always just complain about it on Smashboards though, I guess.

 

[jugfingers]

idk why these are legal in the first place

hear hear!




wobbles your argument also applies to every banned stage.

and there is a reason why stages are banned


a good reason.


because lots of them are super gay


just like the ice climbers and wobbling

 

[Wobbles]

Oh. Okay. My bad.

It's a good thing we banned those gay things.

Spoiler

What if they got married?

 

[jugfingers]

Oh. Okay. My bad.

apology accepted.

 

[Hax]

you make it seem as though aerial game is not an important skill, which in reality, it is just as important as ground game

the importance of aerial game vs ground game is irrelevant: the criteria for a ban is whether a stage significantly skews matchups or not. FD does not, and so your "man up and practice on the ****ing stage" behavior actually applies here.

LOL, you wish hax. don't insult my intelligence by saying I would say that every stage in the game would be legal. there can be more than 1 banning criteria.


...what the f*ck are you trying to say? that my ban criteria for one stage should be different from another's? that doesn't make any sense

you tried to sound smart by citing the 2/3's statistic often used in politics (i.e. congress vetoing a president's decision) and you failed; this burden is ridiculous when assigned to smash. to quote you: "according to most legal ban criteria. its " if 2/3 of the cast are rendered useless when otherwise viable" if this were the criteria currently in place then every stage in the game except for Temple would be legal.

so (again) how much is too much? what if a character was 20% better? 25%? where do you draw the line? anything you say that isn't based on evidence is subjective and biased. hell, I could argue that the 10-15% that Ics get is too much

in regards to "everything i say being subjective": likewise. there is no such thing as an objective criteria for stage-banning.

if you believe that a 10-15% increase warrants a ban, however, then every stage in the game would be banned as i can name a matchup on every stage that is skewed by 10-15% in relation to other stages. i prefer to draw the line at 30-40%; the point at which all spacies have to do to win is laser, all peach has to do is dsmash, and all jiggs has to do is rest.

do you honestly think your criteria is more realistic?

so? Ics are limited. any stage that isn't flat, they lose on. that's their flaw. jiggs' flaw is that any stage that is flat she has a harder time with.

IDK what the point of your last paragraph was

you are either ret*rded or a troll at this point

the point of my last paragraph was to illustrate how devastating brinstar can be to a character; bringing a 40-60 matchup to 5-95

your reasoning for IC's/jiggs' flaws make me think you've never played melee

nah. from the beginning fox can force a jump, hitting you with a laser from the layout of when they start the match. no amount of frame perfect dodging is going to stop that. from there any person whose head isn't up his *** (even me) can proceed to run away and become untouchable. at best the match could become a stalemate with neither opponent approaching each other.

that takes skill, though. if the game does not instantly read "GO!... GAME!" then there is skill required to win, albeit a miniscule amount. hence, stages are banned because they marginalize skill

 

[Vyzor]

Both stages suck. Sure.

 

[Strong Badam]

HOW IS NOT APLICABLE WHEN PEOPLE ARE SAYING "TOO MUCH"

two reasons
1. slippery slope argument has no logical basis, despite its ridiculous popularity.
2. what are we going to slide to? banning every single stage and having no stage to play on, thus not playing Melee anymore? "slippery slope" typically means leading to something negative, but would a better, more generally accepted stage list be negative in the eyes of the majority?

don't you play Brawl anyway

EDIT: I'm mostly here to point out logical fallacies and issues with the arguments of both sides. I'm personally in favor of Wobbles' argument (note: Not side. His argument is the only one in this entire thread that doesn't look like a 7th grader came up with it).

 

[Grim Tuesday]

I lol'd at Ripple's post. Anyway, banning a stage just because a few characters do good there doesn't sound like a valid reason. Banning it because it can split apart or the acid rises also doesn't sound like a valid reason. Learn the match-up or use the same character to deal with stages that you don't like. Learn the characters, learn the stages, or have ditto matches.

What's the big deal, just practice on the stages already. Am I the only one who plays exclusively on levels I've been having trouble with so that I can figure out why, rather than wait until I get ***** in tournament?

Did you know that it was IMPOSSIBLE for Jiggs to win against Fox? All he had to do was u-throw u-air. And FastLikeTree's Fox ***** the TX Melee scene for months with almost nothing but (literally, ask any TX player from that time) flatland drill-shine infinites. He could flatland Peach, Marth, Sheik, even flipping Mario on FD from zero to death, consistently, in tournament, and did so for quite some time. Unescapable!

Spoiler

Smash DI son.

I guarantee you every Jiggs player has 100x more experience playing on Brinstar than the average player. Because that Puff is ready to counterpick people there and does so frequently, whereas spacy players stay away from it like it carries the plague. No wonder they don't know the lava patterns or whether their short hop b-air will hit through the side platforms when their tethers are broken.

Guess what though? If Kirby grabs me on Brisntar's breakable middle section, you know what he's going to do? D-throw and see if I panic and kill myself when the level breaks. I guaran****tee you. And I'll be ready to double jump and air dodge to the appropriate chunk of the level depending on which one I'm closest to. Yes, I know Kirby is garbage and this probably won't happen to you. But wouldn't it suck to lose your last stock in pools to that and get 5th instead of 4th seed and not make it out?

You could always just complain about it on Smashboards though, I guess.

Why don't you learn the match-up against Fox on Temple so we can un-ban it, guys?

 

[MattDotZeb]

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

I'd be so sad without RC =(
You *******s already stole Corneria from me D<

 

[mers]

I haven't read much of this thread, so what I say might have been dealt with before.

The two most solid arguments that I read came from Hax and Wobbles. It seems to me like they generally agree on the reason for banning stages: that they remove too much skill from the game. The disagreement lies in whether or not certain stages actually do this. I'm sure they would both agree that Temple is useless competitively, but they disagree on whether Brinstar and RC remove enough skill from the game.

Wobbles says that these stages are considered disadvantageous for certain matchups largely because players don't practice on them enough, while Hax thinks that the bias is inherent.

It seems to me that most people agree that competitive Melee should be about the skill of one player vs. the skill of another. The debate comes down to whether or not certain stages unbalance this skill vs. skill philosophy enough that they should be banned.

This is a subjective discussion, and anyone trying to bring facts or science into it needs to realize that.

 

[Wobbles]

Grimfandango: Because no amount of learning will decentralize the matchup on Temple away from "if Fox gets the lead AT ALL, EVER, EVEN FROM ONE RANDOM LASER SHOT, then you lose guaranteed." Compared to "I don't like how Puff can hit my shield repeatedly when I'm on the top platform of Brinstar and there is lava around me, it's unfair she has this good thing on this level."

Oh, but you knew that and you're just being a silly boy.

mers: I totally believe certain stages have inherent bias in them. The question is HOW biased, HOW decentralizing, and whether or not they are autowin assuming the benefited player isn't horribly, horribly incompetent. Just because a stage is good enough to turn a character into the "best character in the game, on this level", doesn't render it unfair enough to ban the stage.

Why? Because for starters, we accept that there is a best character in the game overall. Meaning that even with our neutrals, we have "best characters" there. Except for the random player who bans FoD instead, I want to say all stage bans against me in tournament are Final Destination. Why? Because the characteristics of that level transform ICs into a terrifying character. Is it "unfair" that the stage does that?

We don't ban characters for being the best in the game, provided they aren't the best by a margin that makes them unbeatable. Because if being the best is banworthy, then eventually you would run out of characters.

Unfortunately, like with every other game and every other tactic, people have decided that there's a "real" game you play with certain characters and certain levels, and everything else that's different from that isn't the "real" game. Smash on RC is not REAL Smash, but Smash on Battlefield is, unless you're in Japan, in which case it's only real Smash on FD and Dreamland.

 

[Grim Tuesday]

Grimfandango: Because no amount of learning will decentralize the matchup on Temple away from "if Fox gets the lead AT ALL, EVER, EVEN FROM ONE RANDOM LASER SHOT, then you lose guaranteed." Compared to "I don't like how Puff can hit my shield repeatedly when I'm on the top platform of Brinstar and there is lava around me, it's unfair she has this good thing on this level."

Oh, but you knew that and you're just being a silly boy.

And from our point of view (the people advocating for these stages to be banned), no amount of learning well decentralize the matchup on Temple away from "if Puff or Peach ever aerial camp AT ALL, EVER, EVEN IF THEY HARDLY PUT ANY EFFORT INTO IT AT ALL, then they get an obscene advantage guaranteed.

 

[Masmasher@]

i cant believe you are still seriously reaching for this argument.
cmon... forgo that sillyness.
theres good points on both sides but trying to compare brinstar or RC to temple is not one of them.

 

[Grim Tuesday]

i cant believe you are still seriously reaching for this argument.
cmon... forgo that sillyness.
theres good points on both sides but trying to compare brinstar or RC to temple is not one of them.

I'm not saying "lol RC is as bad as Temple".

I'm trying to point out that they fall under the same ban criteria, with one just being much worse than the other.

 

[Masmasher@]

but...the comparison is completely irrelevant because one is banned and the other is not.

 

[Grim Tuesday]

but...the comparison is completely irrelevant because one is banned and the other is not.

Oh, c'mon. Really? That is quite possibly the stupidest thing I've read on this thread (and that is saying something).

Re-read that post and you'll hopefully detect the amount of stupidity within it (you can't compare a legal stage (which I am trying to get banned) with a banned stage... why?)

 

[-ACE-]

Oh, c'mon. Really? That is quite possibly the stupidest thing I've read on this thread (and that is saying something).

Re-read that post and you'll hopefully detect the amount of stupidity within it (you can't compare a legal stage (which I am trying to get banned) with a banned stage... why?)

Lol. I'm gonna have to agree with this.

 

[Masmasher@]

you guys are the one that speak in abosulutes and have you own measuring stick for banning that no one can see. using amount of marginalization
its not a good comparison

 

[Grim Tuesday]

you guys are the one that speak in abosulutes and have you own measuring stick for banning that no one can see. using amount of marginalization
its not a good comparison

Yep. Our own measuring stick no one else can see. That is definitely a good description of us.

Spoiler

Except that everyone on this thread apart from you and Wobbles agrees with us.

 

[Masmasher@]

now your using popularity as a crutch
considering the fact that most people that "agree" with you said
"yeah i dont like those stages take them away"
you postition has followers but the only person that is using this argument is you.
argument is bad/bad arguement

 

[Grim Tuesday]

now your using popularity as a crutch
considering the fact that most people that "agree" with you said
"yeah i dont like those stages take them away"
you postition has followers but the only person that is using this argument is you.
argument is bad/bad arguement

...

you guys have you own measuring stick for banning that no one can see

Excuse me? I'M using popularity as a crutch?

Zhu is using a valid argument.

And what argument am I using that is bad?

 

[Masmasher@]

the fact that your trying to compare temple to RC and brinstar is stupid...there i said it.
its a irrelvant comparison because you guys are trying to use marginalization as the criteria and one is worse then the other. one is banned and the other isnt.
one has a untouchable/auto win setup and the other doesnt.
its a farfetched comparison at best and even then it borders ********.
a better comparison would be corneria and RC
my last post couldve been worded better but heres what i meant

 

[Grim Tuesday]

the fact that your trying to compare temple to RC and brinstar is stupid...there i said it.
its a irrelvant comparison because you guys are trying to use marginalization as the criteria and one is worse then the other. one is banned and the other isnt.
one has a untouchable/auto win setup and the other doesnt.
its a farfetched comparison at best and even then it borders ********.
a better comparison would be corneria and RC
my last post couldve been worded better but heres what i meant

Skill Marginalization IS the criteria. There is no "we are using it as the criteria" or anything like that. There is literally no other reason for banning something in Smash.

One is worse than the other, yes, I've admitted that numerous times. But we still believe that RC is past the line of "degenerate", where as you don't. That doesn't mean my argument is "stupid", it means we have differing opinions.

It's far-fetched to compare the stages to each other like: "Temple is banned so RC should be banned because it is just as banned", yes. But that isn't what I was doing. I'm simply using Temple as a way to counter points like "just learn the stage", "some characters just get an advantage there", etc... Because the same can be said for Temple, yet they'd be dismissed as "Oh, but it's TOO strong there, unlike on RC". I'm saying that they are still too strong on RC. Get it?

Alright, assume I did a comparison to Corneria instead. What would your counter-argument be?

 

[-ACE-]

Extreme 1: Battlefield only. Essentially all characters are viable.

Extreme 2: Rainbow Cruise only. Fox and Falco only. People who main other characters and don't want to switch quit melee and an already dying game pulls the plug on itself.

Extreme 3: Brinstar only. We see jiggs in GF's until the end of time.

Obviously all off these scenarios are bogus as ****, but which is the best? Wouldn't you want to be closer to the best of the extremes when it comes to determining your stage list (with competition in mind off course)? Something to think about.

 

[Masmasher@]

Skill Marginalization IS the criteria. There is no "we are using it as the criteria" or anything like that. There is literally no other reason for banning something in Smash.

One is worse than the other, yes, I've admitted that numerous times. But we still believe that RC is past the line of "degenerate", where as you don't. That doesn't mean my argument is "stupid", it means we have differing opinions.

It's far-fetched to compare the stages to each other like: "Temple is banned so RC should be banned because it is just as banned", yes. But that isn't what I was doing. I'm simply using Temple as a way to counter points like "just learn the stage", "some characters just get an advantage there", etc... Because the same can be said for Temple, yet they'd be dismissed as "Oh, but it's TOO strong there, unlike on RC". I'm saying that they are still too strong on RC. Get it?

Alright, assume I did a comparison to Corneria instead. What would your counter-argument be?

im saying that using marginaization is silly
the statement contradicts itself. using marginazation as a absolute is wrong. you are the only one that can see the measuring stick. broken is a much more suitable term in this case.
fox/temple is broken. thats why its gone there is no amount of change that refutes that, no character change will net you the desired result
RC and brinstar are bad for certain characters. but through ten years of playing it been proven that theres a point of both sides having enough to win. if it wasnt the case it wouldve been banned along time ago.
the argument of learn the stage is valid because of the fact that its been around for years in competitive play. it suddenly didnt just get magically worse.

as for arguments on comparing corneria and RC/BS you would have to talk to someone else cause im still shocked that it happened. (and still pissed)

a simple analogy for marginalization will suffice.
2 kids get the exact same action figure on the same day. they both go play outside in the sandbox. they both get their toy dirty but one decides to throw the toy away because its too dirty. the standard for that kids tolerance of how his action figure should look is higher then the other kid

now for broken its simple
dirt can get on a action figure, its not broken. simple
if it arm snaps off its broken.
banning is a absolute theres no mid way ether something broken or its not.
of course this is the disconnect with melee because some stuff has been banned because its
considered "too good"
a measuring stick that is the perception of a select group of people that is subjective

 

[Grim Tuesday]

im saying that using marginaization is silly
the statement contradicts itself. using marginazation as a absolute is wrong. you are the only one that can see the measuring stick. broken is a much more suitable term in this case.
fox/temple is broken. thats why its gone there is no amount of change that refutes that, no character change will net you the desired result
RC and brinstar are bad for certain characters. but through ten years of playing it been proven that theres a point of both sides having enough to win. if it wasnt the case it wouldve been banned along time ago.
the argument of learn the stage is valid because of the fact that its been around for years in competitive play. it suddenly didnt just get magically worse.

as for arguments on comparing corneria and RC/BS you would have to talk to someone else cause im still shocked that it happened. (and still pissed)

a simple analogy for marginalization will suffice.
2 kids get the exact same action figure on the same day. they both go play outside in the sandbox. they both get their toy dirty but one decides to throw the toy away because its too dirty. the standard for that kids tolerance of how his action figure should look is higher then the other kid

now for broken its simple
dirt can get on a action figure, its not broken. simple
if it arm snaps off its broken.
banning is a absolute theres no mid way ether something broken or its not.
of course this is the disconnect with melee because some stuff has been banned because its
considered "too good"
a measuring stick that is the perception of a select group of people that is subjective

Find me objective criteria for banning a stage and I will <3 you forever. I mean, one kid might be happy with his "broken" action figure and not consider it broken at all, but actually deeper (he can pretend the action figure lost his arm in a battle when he is playing, etc...).

And who is to say that you only ban something when it is broken? Isn't that criteria subjective as well?

Ten years of playing doesn't mean it is fine. How long was slavery around for? How long was it until women got the right to vote? For a Melee example: How long did it take people to realise they could SDI? How long was it until Wobbling was discovered? How about the Master Hand Glitch?

No, it didn't magically get worse. It's always been bad, the players just got better.

Since this is all subjective, like I said, it comes down to the TO's DECISION. If more people agree with me than disagree (which is what this thread seems to show: Hax, Armada, M2K and hungrybox all agree), then it will become the standard. Simple as that.

 

[Mew2King]

I agree with hax

those stages are ****ing stupid

 

[Wobbles]

On Hyrule, there is a literally unstoppable strategy, which for Fox is "fire lasers until one hits, then run in circles until time runs out." You can't EVER be caught if you decide to run, and under our current ruleset, that means you get the victory the moment you land one laser.

Are there such strategies for RC and Brinstar? Is the gameplay on those levels degenerate, or just different from the "normal" gameplay?

Some people don't like to sit and test and prove things, and would rather just play however they want from the get-go. I'm in favor of leaving as much of the game intact and let the "normal" play evolve from there. If somebody can demonstrate something to be broken, then I'm in favor of banning it. If they can't, I like to keep it in.

If you have concrete proof that these stages are degenerate (in the same way that a level like Onett is) and/or have broken strategies (like Termina and Hyrule) then I will gladly change my viewpoint and accept they should be banned.

M2K given the choice you would play all your matches on FD lol. <3

 

[Mew2King]

if u dont use fox/falco on rainbow you're ****ED it's stupid

and brinstar is just gay.

 

[Grim Tuesday]

On Hyrule, there is a literally unstoppable strategy, which for Fox is "fire lasers until one hits, then run in circles until time runs out." You can't EVER be caught if you decide to run, and under our current ruleset, that means you get the victory the moment you land one laser.

Are there such strategies for RC and Brinstar? Is the gameplay on those levels degenerate, or just different from the "normal" gameplay?

Some people don't like to sit and test and prove things, and would rather just play however they want from the get-go. I'm in favor of leaving as much of the game intact and let the "normal" play evolve from there. If somebody can demonstrate something to be broken, then I'm in favor of banning it. If they can't, I like to keep it in.

If you have concrete proof that these stages are degenerate (in the same way that a level like Onett is) and/or have broken strategies (like Termina and Hyrule) then I will gladly change my viewpoint and accept they should be banned.

M2K given the choice you would play all your matches on FD lol. <3

I honestly believe that the gameplay on those levels is degenerate.

One of the Melee players in my state (Ghostbone, 5th on the PR list) ALWAYS uses Puff if he gets the opportunity to play on Brinstar and nearly all of his matches there either go to time, or very close to it. He never loses there either.

How? Spacing back-air and doing rising pound to stay in the air. That is literally it.

My Fox, which destroys his Puff on any other level, gets ***** on Brinstar.

Now, I know the lava patterns, I know pretty much everything about the stage, yet this still happens all the time. I am literally forced to always ban Brinstar against him.

 

[Pi]

lol first thing i've ever agreed w/ wobbles on ever i think
go learn the stage or a new character you lazy johning pricks

 

[Grim Tuesday]

lol first thing i've ever agreed w/ wobbles on ever i think
go learn the stage or a new character you lazy johning pricks

go learn Fox you lazy johning prick so we can un-ban Temple.

 

[jugfingers]

On Hyrule, there is a literally unstoppable strategy, which for Fox is "fire lasers until one hits, then run in circles until time runs out." You can't EVER be caught if you decide to run, and under our current ruleset, that means you get the victory the moment you land one laser.

Are there such strategies for RC and Brinstar? Is the gameplay on those levels degenerate, or just different from the "normal" gameplay?

Some people don't like to sit and test and prove things, and would rather just play however they want from the get-go. I'm in favor of leaving as much of the game intact and let the "normal" play evolve from there. If somebody can demonstrate something to be broken, then I'm in favor of banning it. If they can't, I like to keep it in.

If you have concrete proof that these stages are degenerate (in the same way that a level like Onett is) and/or have broken strategies (like Termina and Hyrule) then I will gladly change my viewpoint and accept they should be banned.

it doesn't have anything to do with having an unstoppable strategy,

in both brinstar and rainbow cruise the stage will literally kill you if you stand in one place long enough.


there is a reason the world tournament of martial arts is fought on a flat uninteresting stage, or why two opponents in dragonball z would travel to an open area to fight, and not into a ****ing meteor storm



there is no reason why this should be a complicated argument, the stages used in tournaments should only serve as a medium of open maneuverability ,
if you think final D is biased towards certain characters its because those characters are inherently better than other characters not because of the stages influence.

and chain grabbing isn't the stages influence, the absence of chain grabbing is a stages influence.