BBR Recommended Rule List v2.0 & General Ruleset Discussion

[infomon]

"planking" isn't particularly well-defined. Some tournament organizers (TOs) implement ledge-grab rules, but the SBR has made no such recommendation. I think those TOs are being scrubby; planking has not been proven broken. It's great in some matchups tho, but then, so is Final Destination

so official word is, no official word yet, though lots of debate and division.

 

[basvhout]

ban Japes XD and place rainbow to counter/banned. Then I'm happy. (A)

 

[DUCKAtl]

yeah, wait no summit?

 

[Eternal Yoshi]

Summit is banned for a few reasons.
1. The gimpfish being a OHKO hazard. Not all characters are fast enough to jump out of the way. Also your foe can footstool you back in the water to get you killed.
2. No ledges. Too unfair to tethers and bad recoveries. This is an anti Olimar stage.

Feel free to add more.

 

[Eagleye893]

will there ever be a limit or restriction on the IC alternating grab? I'm just wondering, because those are 0-death every time on every character if the IC player knows what they are doing. I know the CG for the ICs takes skill, but once a player gets it down there seems to be an advantage for them against nearly anyone.

 

[AvaricePanda]

@Eagleye

No.

The tactic is not overcentralizing, and there are viable solutions to get around being grabbed. There's are still some instances of human error in the top levels of play vs. ICs, but assuming each Ice Climbers main was perfect with their alternating grab, they would still have disadvantageous match-ups and be able to be put in disadvantageous zones/situations. Pro ICs aren't pro simply because they can chaingrab; they're great players who are able to read others well, use other parts of ICs metagame such as desynching well, and actually get the grab against competent players.

tl;dr: The technique isn't overcentralizing, and the character isn't, "Learn how to chaingrab and you win." There's no reason to ban or limit their alternate chaingrabs.

 

['V']

Someone should update this with an EDC decision or something.

 

[Dark Shifter]

whats the sbr's stance on ddd/kirbys inhale suicide on both players last stock if both players die at same time? ddd/kirby wins the match right?

 

[Zhouten]

whats the sbr's stance on ddd/kirbys inhale suicide on both players last stock if both players die at same time? ddd/kirby wins the match right?

Yes, and what about Ganondorf since it's already been proved that the victor/sudden death of his Ganonocide flame choke is decided at a complete random chance? I think it was mentioned that the opponent could do something to make it so they win in a suicide Flame choke with Ganondorf, and that's why it wasn't added to the rules. Yet even now, when it's been proved that was not the case... I still don't see it as a rule. Either way, bottom tiers deserve this kind of help, to give them at least barely, a fairer chance.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jqspGnTl_tQ&feature=channel_page

 

[TP]

Indeed, two things determine the outcome of a ganoncide: controller port and luck. The mechanic itself is not luck-based, but it is impossible to control it, so it is considered luck. Obviously, neither controller port nor luck should play a factor in the outcome of a match. Therefore, there needs to be a ruling on ganoncides. Period.

 

[choknater]

ummm, there's one important question i have concerning something the ruleset doesn't cover

i don't know if it's common sense but like, if someone ever complains to me i want to know what to say to them

coming from a sheik main... if someone counter picks a character, do sheik/zelda count as the same character? for example:

first match: sheik vs peach on smashville. sheik wins
peach player counter picks battlefield.
sheik player decides to stay the same character
peach player switches to ice climbers

NOW: is the sheik player allowed to move the cursor over and change to zelda AFTER the opponent changes to ic's?

because during the match, i'm going to try to change to zelda anyway...

and should this apply to pokemon trainer as well? but not samus...

sorry about the bump but i need an answer

 

[OFY]

If an opponent continues to run away and avoid all attacks, even though I'm not playing as icies, is that considered stalling.

The opponent runs away, dodges, and after about 30seconds-1 minute he attacks and repeats the same thing but to a lesser extent.

?

 

[KoRoBeNiKi]

If an opponent continues to run away and avoid all attacks, even though I'm not playing as icies, is that considered stalling.

The opponent runs away, dodges, and after about 30seconds-1 minute he attacks and repeats the same thing but to a lesser extent.

?

If anything like this is happening, I would recommend to get the tournament director so he can choose whether it is stalling or not.

 

[infomon]

It's not stalling because it shouldn't work. You should always have a reasonable ability to hit the opponent. What was the stage and what was the matchup? How was he successfully avoiding your attacks so consistently -- was he able to predict them?

 

[FunkMaster]

WELL. It looks like sheik/zelda and pkmn trainer are IMPOSSIBLE TO COUNTERPICK meeheehee!!!

and I would assume that running away and avoiding stuff is okay as long as no ledgestalling is happening

or something. and I would think it's possible with some characters. like say, METAKNIGHT. really match up

dependant though, of course.

 

[infomon]

"Ledgestalling" is also perfectly valid. There don't seem to be many matchups where it's even particularly effective (except against someone who's inexperienced at dealing with it, which obviously doesn't count).

 

[XIF]

Luigi's Mansion is not perma-banned?

ahahahahahahaha!

 

[Kichikuru]

Lol If im not wrong I Could of swore that last rule is the only reason these videos are so long LOL

 

[Overswarm]

Luigi's Mansion is not perma-banned?

ahahahahahahaha!

We haven't found anything wrong with it. People STILL think (character X) is the greeeeeeatest at it, and its always a different character. That means no one has figured it out yet.

"Snake's mansion!"
"Lucario mansion!"
"G&W mansion!"
"METAKNIGHT HAS A TORNADO AND I DISAPPROVE"

 

[infomon]

^^ Don't forget DK and Olimar.

 

[Overswarm]

See what I mean? XD

 

[jamlosingthegame]

I have a question, don't know if it's been asked/answered before. You see, my school is going to have a tournament soon, and for some reason they allowed items. I apparently need some kind of explanation as to why they are banned, because maybe looking up rule sets isn't enough of a reason to turn them off, and otherwise they stay. Anyone got a good explanation besides me?

 

[llamapaste]

Say that items are too random and favors lucky players that can get their hands on them during a battle. Sorry if it's too late.

 

[AtticusFinch]

This may be random and might have been already answered but I'll just ask for laziness sake
What is (Your) opinion on music being played out loud at tournaments? I mean at most social groupings music is normally played, but with Brawl/Melee, the opinions vary. Some people prefer to listen to Ipods in game and others don't, and I prefer music to be played when there's groups of people together so there's never social awkwardness. I'm assuming a no from most, but I feel as long as you can hear the tv set over the music at the tv station, it shouldn't be the biggest issue.

 

[TheManaLord]

brawl should be one stock MK v MK smashville only

 

[JRI3102]

Where can I find a link to the banned technques? What characters have them, and how to avoid (or tell) if someone is doing them. Thanks

 

[Iota]

what was the problem with temple i don't understand why it was banned

 

[Rappster]

what was the problem with temple i don't understand why it was banned

degenerate gameplay, only fast characters are viable.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vIteUAyHluQ

it's not brawl, but similar things happen in brawl.

 

[Vyse]

Sup guys,

Due to a rising number of threads in Brawl Tactical Discussion relating specifically to the ruleset, I've decided it would be best if this thread existed here in Tactical rather than Tournament Discussion.

All threads existing now, and made in the future relating to rule clarifications/proposals will now be closed and directed to here.

Discuss away!



EDIT:

2 Big Points of Discussion:

Ledge grab limits. They suck. They really suck.

First of all, here's the most stupid thing you can do with them:

No planking; 40 ledge grab limit.

First of all, you are severely nuking characters' ledge games that are not only not broken, but actually really beatable (yes, even pit/G&W/marth/pika/bowser/etc.) at higher levels of play. This is almost by definition scrubby-banning something that isn't broken.

Now here's the better way.

No unbeatable planking; 40 ledge grab limit for Metaknight only.

Now, what you're doing is giving the TO/player an easily-enforced method to check if the MK had been planking, and to DQ them if they were. Except... This doesn't just hit planking. It hits unbeatable planking, and then it hits beatable planking (think ledgedrop->jump->fall->jump uair, or ledgedrop->upB, or stuff like that), and flat-out ledgecamping (hang on ledge until you fall off, jump around a bunch, come back). It's like banning the B button because MK can IDC-it's nerfing a strategy that is not broken because we "have to".

Except that, you know, planking isn't quite the easiest thing to mask. You can't plank for a while using MK's perfect planking and claim you were "trying to get a better field position". As soon as the judge comes over, your ability to plank brokenly is gone. And what do you get? Ledgecamping back.

"But BPC, why does this matter?"

Fox/Falco/Sheik/TL/other character with a good horizontal projectile on FD. You have the lead and no interest in losing it. What is the best field position for you? The ledge, and shortly under it. Ledge grab limits tilt the falco matchup about 40-60 points in Falco's favor (what's he gonna do against you hanging around on the ledge?).

LGLs are easily seen as a surgical nerf to metaknight, one like many others we've seen attempted. They prevent him from using quite potent, yet beatable strategies and fulfill no function that a TO looking over your shoulder couldn't fulfill.

Ideal rule:

No stalling. Unbeatable planking (drop->uair->jump->uair->regrab and drop->downB->regrab count, among other methods that are similar). TO discretion.

So this was brought up by Gheb in the MLG Discussion forum, I feel it's a good idea that deserves more discussion:

I think the best solution is to simply remove the distinction between "starter" stages and "CP" stages. Since stage striking already serves as a compromise solution to find the fairest stage in any given match-up (and since starter stages are often used to counterpick) you might as well strike the first stage out of the whole stage list.

The way things work right now if you had 11 legal stages for your tourney, we would have a certain number of starter stages, let's say 5, and 6 others for CP. The players would each strike two of the 5, leaving 1 left to start on. They would CP games 2 and 3.

In the proposed new system, the first match would involve each player striking 5 stages from the list, with 1 left to play on. The players would then CP games 2 and 3.

The word fair is thrown around a lot with respect to stages and how characters interact with them. The idea of a fair stage is absurd; each stage merely benefits different characters, and this certainly applies to both the stages deemed counter picks and the ones deemed starters by our current rule sets.

The merit of this change, I feel, is that it removes the notion of any "fairness" associated with stages. By allowing all stages in the striking process, you will by definition come out with the most even or "fair" stage possible for that matchup out of the stage list, because it is the middle ground in between what both players want. The goal of a well made stage list should be to avoid giving any characters arbitrary advantages, but by limiting the first game to so called "neutrals", we are also limiting character inherent strengths that make them more flexible stagewise

Through this system we would remove the current striking/CP system that allows these notions of "fairness" associated with certain stages to arbitrarily buff certain characters, and instead allow the characters through striking to decide what is in fact the most even stage.

Thoughts?

 

[Jack Kieser]

Ok, so condensing the ruleset discussion. Coolio. I say we should discuss the Starter/Counterpick paradigm first, because LGL are just plain ********. LGL's apply primarily to MK, while a change in the Starter/CP paradigm would have much more serious ramifications for a larger selection of the cast.

Oh, inb4someonesaystobanMK

 

[Vyse]

I actually agree with BPC's proposal to simply limit unbeatable planking. This is actually a rule that's been in place in Melee for a long time in some form and one I support already.

I'm for larger starter lists at the very least, but for the purpose of running tournaments built on many people who don't study these stage lists, I prefer a smaller list + an extended counter pick list to make striking easy.

(Hmm, the thread move didn't leave a redirect :/)

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

I currently believe that any method other than "strike from the whole stagelist" (+/- one stage if necessary to reach an even number, for example if there are 16 legal stages, you'd remove the most "unfair" one from the starter list, in most cases likely GG or Brinstar) is biased and unfair towards certain members of the cast (regardless of number of stages or which stages, it will almost certainly be). The full stage starter list rewards characters who are able to adapt to multiple stages-a reward they earned by, well, being good characters.

To those of you worried about the Metaknight bogeyman (or any other character for that matter), allow me to demonstrate it very simply this way.

Going from the (shockingly liberal) MLG stagelist and this system, you have 15 total stages to strike from. This leads to each player having 7 strikes.
You get to strike 7 stages.
You will not be going to your opponent's best stage (I saw an online tournament today where round one was played on FD and ONLY FD). You will not be going to your opponent's second-best stage (like with ICs, Diddy, Falco and the 3-stage starter list). You won't be going to your opponents third-best stage (like with the above and the 5-stage starter list). You will be going to their 8th-best stage. And if your character loses the matchup horribly in over half of the legal stages in the game, perhaps you should look for a less ****ty character.

3-stage and 5-stage starter lists are an absolute abomination and ridiculously unfair. Recommending them is outright terrible.

Furthermore, I'd like to hear the reasoning that the BBR (or certain members therein) had to vote to ban these stages:

-Yoshi's Island (melee)
-Green Greens
-Luigi's Mansion
-Distant Planet
-Corneria
-Port Town Aero Dive

Go ahead.

 

[Jack Kieser]

The problem with that is the same problem we've run into every time we try to limit planking, in any form: enforcement. Ultimately, the only way it could be enforced is to have a TO or judge watching the match. At least with general LGLs, there's a counter in-game. If we're only limiting PPlanking, however, now we have to SEE it being done to know which version of planking is being performed, so TOs need to be called over... it's just a mess.

Now, I remember someone before mentioned using replays and possibly building a program that parses the controller input data from replays to effectively "search" for the PPlanking input. That might work. But, that also requires hacking (for infinite replays).

I'm just not very optimistic that a doable solution for PPlanking is going to be found, that's all.

EDIT: Total agreement with BPC's above post.

 

[Vyse]

@BPC: Reasoning was given somewhere, but I can't remember where. I just tried looking and couldn't find anything. I'll link it if I can.

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

It's irritating really, because the MK-falco matchup goes from 55-45 to closer to 70-30 when MK is allowed to camp the ledge in any manner that doesn't require him landing on the stage and in the path of lazers.

EDIT: @Vyse: the issue about banning stages that aren't obviously anticompetitive (ones where you can immediately see the problem from past experience like circle camping or permanent walkoffs/walls on certain stages, or ones where the randomness is absolutely ********, such as warioware) is that it is scrubby. You are removing an element of a game without proving that it is worthwhile to remove.

EDIT2: Oh, add Norfair to that list. Too many places ban it.

EDIT3: It would be great if someone would make a series of videos showing why certain stages are banned. Like, go to the stage, abuse the broken tactic. I would be willing to help, but have no video recording equipment at the moment.

 

[Mr.-0]

Vyse is my hero. And relating to the topic, I think our ruleset is fine, and I'm gonna edit and post a stagelist that I think is fine too... but, all in all, I don't really see a problem with the current ruleset or stagelist.

Kay, here we go. Note that I'm one of those who supports big neutral lists. Oh and, If I think I need to explain for that stage than I'll have it in parenthesis after the stage:

Neutral:

Smashville
Battlefield
Final Destination
Yoshi's Island
Lylat Cruise
Delfino Plaza
Halberd (If you can't see the hazards coming, it's your fault. If a better player spaces you into them, you got owned)
Castle Siege (If you can't play around the walk offs and FD lip, than that's your fault)
Pokemon Stadium (I still don't know why people complain about this stage)
Frigate Orpheon (I don't think this stage has any problem being a neutral at all)

Counterpicks:
Jungle Japes (Because BPC told me too)
Yoshi's Island Melee (Because BPC told me too!)
Pictochat (Because BPC told me too)
Norfair (Same reason as Halberd)
The Pirate Ship (I consider ruddercamping stalling)
Port Town Aero Drive (I don't consider the cars a problem)
Green Greens (The bombs aren't THAT big of a deal)
Brinstar
Rainbow Cruise (Because BPC told me too. He isn't very nice when he proves a point and tells people their stupid. Buuuuut, he's still my friend. I feel like Caboose right now. In fact, read this whole message in his voice. It'll make a lot more since then.)

Hmm... there's more neutrals than counterpicks. i don't really know how this would work, but I"m thinking strike four neutrals after banning a stage or possibly two from the entire list, and then come to a decision with the other person.
So like, Ally and M2K play, and M2K bans Halberd, Ally bans RC, and then M2K strikes SV, FD, Frigate Orpheon, and Castle Siege. Ally strikes, well, pretty much picks the stage. And if M2K banned PTAD, for some reason, and striked Halberd instead of SV, than Ally would strike BF, PS, Lylat's Cruise, and Delfino Plaza. Now they pick between Yoshi's Island and Smashville. Than the counterpicking would work the same, but you can't counterpick the stage you just played on or the remaining neutral. You can, however, pick one of the striked neutrals. Wow, I suddenly feel inclined to post my opinions now that this thread is up. Vyse FTW

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

Vyse is my hero. And relating to the topic, I think our ruleset is fine, and I'm gonna edit and post a stagelist that I think is fine too... but, all in all, I don't really see a problem with the current ruleset or stagelist.

Kay, here we go. Note that I'm one of those who supports big neutral lists. Oh and, If I think I need to explain for that stage than I'll have it in parenthesis after the stage:

Neutral:

Smashville
Battlefield
Final Destination
Yoshi's Island
Lylat Cruise
Delfino Plaza
Halberd (If you can't see the hazards coming, it's your fault. If a better player spaces you into them, you got owned)
Castle Siege (If you can't play around the walk offs and FD lip, than that's your fault)
Pokemon Stadium (I still don't know why people complain about this stage)
Frigate Orpheon (I don't think this stage has any problem being a neutral at all)

Already don't like this. Why aren't you striking from the whole list?

Counterpicks:

Hanenbow (It's just so colorful there!)

Needs less circle camping.

Norfair (Same reason as Halberd)
The Pirate Ship (I consider ruddercamping stalling)
Port Town Aero Drive (I don't consider the cars a problem)
Green Greens (The bombs aren't THAT big of a deal)
Brinstar or Rainbow Cruise (I used to think poorly of this, but now I think it's a good idea. If I was a TO, i'd let RC be in)

They're both legit. Allow both of them. Also, where are PS2, JJ, YI:M, and Pictochat (among others)?

Hmm... there's more neutrals than counterpicks. i don't really know how this would work, but I"m thinking strike four neutrals after banning a stage or possibly two from the entire list, and then come to a decision with the other person.
So like, Ally and M2K play, and M2K bans Halberd, Ally bans RC, and then M2K strikes SV, FD, Frigate Orpheon, and Castle Siege. Ally strikes, well, pretty much picks the stage. And if M2K banned PTAD, for some reason, and striked Halberd instead of SV, than Ally would strike BF, PS, Lylat's Cruise, and Delfino Plaza. Now they pick between Yoshi's Island and Smashville. Than the counterpicking would work the same, but you can't counterpick the stage you just played on or the remaining neutral. You can, however, pick one of the striked neutrals. Wow, I suddenly feel inclined to post my opinions now that this thread is up. Vyse FTW

Lolwut? This is a rather strange break from tradition... Each player bans a stage... before the first round?

 

[Mr.-0]

Already don't like this. Why aren't you striking from the whole list?

Cause you strike from the starters. That's how it is in the regular ruleset too. Right? Direct past from the BBR Recommender Rule List 2.0:

The SBR Recommended rule list uses the stage striking system. In this system, players take turns striking stages from the starter list until only one remains; these stages are not banned and can be counterpicked later in the set. There must be an odd number of starter stages. There are up to 8 stages available for stages striking under the SBR stage list (4 in starter, 4 in starter/counter). We recommend as a TO that you decide on the ideal number of stages to use for striking at your tournaments (3, 5, 7).

In mine, you can ban starters and there's an even amount, which, IMO, could turn out good or bad. I'm not sure. I think I'll have to try it out. But to not be a SaveMe, If it doesn't work I'll say it doesn't work.

Needs less circle camping.

See down below.

They're both legit. Allow both of them. Also, where are PS2, JJ, YI:M, and Pictochat (among others)?

See down below.

Lolwut? This is a rather strange break from tradition... Each player bans a stage... before the first round?

It is kinda strange... and stupid... but, I kinda just wanted to throw it out there. I heard ADHD say on either SaveMe's stupid thread or on one of your threads that he has an "unbeatable" camping situation that he has on that stage, where he's unapproachable. And an addition he talked about some actually random thing that pops up and kills you. I never play on pictochat, but from his argument, I decided to ban it. And PS2, well, MK's unbeatable if he gets you above him, and with his nado and aerial game, it's not that hard. For example, M2K could nado ally and send him up on battlefield. Ally has tons of options. On PS2, M2K just needs to jump and uair like crazy. I just think it gives him too much of an advatage, and makes the game much less enjoyable and much less on tech skill and things like that. Yoshi's Island melee, well, I hate it. Biased reason to say that, but I think it should be banned. People with spikes who are smart get advantages on matchups here, if they spin the blocks and space well, but it's not really an issue. I just don't like the stage. Same with JJ. Though, the fact that gimps and spikes are EXTREMELY prevalent here (I mean, come on, one hit into the water and a smart opponent will keep you down. And others, well...no real reason not to. And on Hanenbow, I consider circle camping stalling, therefore it would be illegal. And the ban before the first round is... I don't know, I think it'd work out... pretty good. It just sounds like it'd work, ya know? Probably not, but, I'm gonna try it with some friends.

Edit: Lol wow I failed. Part of my response is in your quote.

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

It is kinda strange... and stupid... but, I kinda just wanted to throw it out there. I heard ADHD say on either SaveMe's stupid thread or on one of your threads that he has an "unbeatable" camping situation that he has on that stage, where he's unapproachable.

On norfair, or what? First of all, no camping is unbeatable on norfair. There will always be a hazard pushing you out of your safe zone. You can get a ridiculous temporary positional advantage (for example, MK on the lowest platform, under the second-highest platform with a lava wall to his back might as well be completely unapproachable...), but it's going to disappear again (...but only as long as the wall is there).

And an addition he talked about some actually random thing that pops up and kills you.

What are we talking about? Can you format your answer like mine?

I never play on pictochat, but from his argument, I decided to ban it.

I never play on pictochat ... decided to ban it

Scrub. Banning a stage like pictochat due to excessive randomness is completely unwarranted.

And PS2, well, MK's unbeatable if he gets you above him, and with his nado and aerial game, it's not that hard. For example, M2K could nado ally and send him up on battlefield. Ally has tons of options. On PS2, M2K just needs to jump and uair like crazy. I just think it gives him too much of an advatage, and makes the game much less enjoyable and much less on tech skill and things like that.

Hoo boy. First of all, Snake actually can do a lot of really ****ed-up **** on the air segment. Need I remind you:
-He has tons of **** he can dump on your head from above
-He has tons of **** he can throw at your *** from below when he hits the ground
-He falls faster than you
-his air speed is considerably better than yours

And then there's literally anyone with a stall-then-fall aerial (sonic, sheik, etc.) who become very scary for MK on this stage (sonic especially; if he whiffs that uair, he can get back to neutral very, very fast while you're still stuck hanging around in the air)

PROVE IT. Prove that MK is, at the top of the metagame, unbeatable on PS2. Need I remind you that you are talking about one segment of the stage? 1/5th of the stage, closer to 1/9th of the total stage time? And you'd ban it because MK gets an unproven temporary advantage on it.

This sums that up very nicely until you prove that Metaknight counterpicking PS2 is as ridiculously potent (at the highest possible level of play) for metaknight as you claim.

Yoshi's Island melee, well, I hate it. Biased reason to say that, but I think it should be banned. People with spikes who are smart get advantages on matchups here, if they spin the blocks and space well, but it's not really an issue. I just don't like the stage. Same with JJ.

Again, you'd ban something that you just don't like? That is beyond wrong. Stagelists should not have anything to do with personal preference! Otherwise we'd have a lot more stagelists looking like this:

Starter:
FD

Counterpick:
FD
FD
FD
FD

Though, the fact that gimps and spikes are EXTREMELY prevalent here (I mean, come on, one hit into the water and a smart opponent will keep you down. And others, well...no real reason not to.

You get spiked into the water the right side. Now, your opponent has to follow you across the stage before you jump back out of the water. How the hell... show vids.
You get spiked into the water from the left side. Now your opponent has to follow you into the zone where if he touches the water, he dies to gimp you. Stop spewing hot air and show me high-level matches where the stage has been shown to be "too good", or else you know what I'm going to say.

And on Hanenbow, I consider circle camping stalling, therefore it would be illegal. And the ban before the first round is... I don't know, I think it'd work out... pretty good. It just sounds like it'd work, ya know? Probably not, but, I'm gonna try it with some friends.

Um... What.

Actually figure out what you're talking about and come back. I'd rather let someone else explain to you why both of these sentiments are really stupid.

 

[Mr.-0]

On norfair, or what? First of all, no camping is unbeatable on norfair. There will always be a hazard pushing you out of your safe zone. You can get a ridiculous temporary positional advantage (for example, MK on the lowest platform, under the second-highest platform with a lava wall to his back might as well be completely unapproachable...), but it's going to disappear again (...but only as long as the wall is there).



What are we talking about? Can you format your answer like mine?





Scrub. Banning a stage like pictochat due to excessive randomness is completely unwarranted.



Hoo boy. First of all, Snake actually can do a lot of really ****ed-up **** on the air segment. Need I remind you:
-He has tons of **** he can dump on your head from above
-He has tons of **** he can throw at your *** from below when he hits the ground
-He falls faster than you
-his air speed is considerably better than yours

And then there's literally anyone with a stall-then-fall aerial (sonic, sheik, etc.) who become very scary for MK on this stage (sonic especially; if he whiffs that uair, he can get back to neutral very, very fast while you're still stuck hanging around in the air)

PROVE IT. Prove that MK is, at the top of the metagame, unbeatable on PS2. Need I remind you that you are talking about one segment of the stage? 1/5th of the stage, closer to 1/9th of the total stage time? And you'd ban it because MK gets an unproven temporary advantage on it.

This sums that up very nicely until you prove that Metaknight counterpicking PS2 is as ridiculously potent (at the highest possible level of play) for metaknight as you claim.



Again, you'd ban something that you just don't like? That is beyond wrong. Stagelists should not have anything to do with personal preference! Otherwise we'd have a lot more stagelists looking like this:

Starter:
FD

Counterpick:
FD
FD
FD
FD



You get spiked into the water the right side. Now, your opponent has to follow you across the stage before you jump back out of the water. How the hell... show vids.
You get spiked into the water from the left side. Now your opponent has to follow you into the zone where if he touches the water, he dies to gimp you. Stop spewing hot air and show me high-level matches where the stage has been shown to be "too good", or else you know what I'm going to say.



Um... What.

Actually figure out what you're talking about and come back. I'd rather let someone else explain to you why both of these sentiments are really stupid.

You don't have to be so mean Anyways, my two cents have been burned. Wasn't much of a debate, but I lost if it was. On a positive note, I liked the big message. It was very colorful.

Editing stagelist now!