Brawl+ Stage Legality Discussion: Brawl+ 7.0 Gold Discussion (Go Discuss Everything!)

[VietGeek]

That's a bull**** answer. I'd even say it's not an answer at all. XD

Then again, nothing really gets through to you guys, does it? While I utterly despise and oppose of replacing FD with such an inferior stage, it's not like I can't just not replace it myself. So it all works out. ¦D

You're right that it's not an answer.

I'm very amused at your conclusions. Eh, no matter, it's better this way.

 

[Kei_Takaro]

I kinda get that tingly feeling back in my Melee days where it was only about FD,Battlefield,GG,Japes and stuff. Friggin' lol'd at banning FD

 

[goodoldganon]

I like how everyone keeps laughing at replacing Final D and I haven't seen one good reason why it should be kept around when an IDENTICALLY designed stage without the terrible recovery eating sides and the ability to fly under it. SSE is still a flat platform in space. Stop meat riding FD. SSE Stadium is a superior Final Destination

 

[Ryose]

I like how everyone keeps laughing at replacing Final D and I haven't seen one good reason why it should be kept around when an IDENTICALLY designed stage without the terrible recovery eating sides and the ability to fly under it. SSE is still a flat platform in space. Stop having meat riding FD. SSE Stadium is a superior Final Destination

But most(?) like FD better. We've grown attached to being gimped by the ledges...and colorful background. Amirite?

 

[goodoldganon]

It's late so I shouldn't say replace Final D. Final D should and always will be a pickable stage, I just think SSE Stadium is 100x better from the competitive standpoint.

 

[Shadic]

I like how everyone keeps laughing at replacing Final D and I haven't seen one good reason why it should be kept around when an IDENTICALLY designed stage without the terrible recovery eating sides and the ability to fly under it. SSE is still a flat platform in space. Stop having meat riding FD. SSE Stadium is a superior Final Destination

Couldn't we replace the main platform and the collision data, instead?

Shiny background and epic music for the win.

 

[Kei_Takaro]

Yeah, put FDs BG on every legal stage and I'm happy w/o the real thing

EDIT: Since you wanna ban FD, why not just make it CP? afterall, it's a PS2 with a slight dis/advantage

 

[FrozenHobo]

just going to bring this up, probably a fluke, but i've tried it over 2 times now and ti seems to always work...

freezing lylat leaves it in its neutral position, at least when i'm doing it. i know the wbr says that it tends to begin in random positions, but when i do it its always the same neutral position. maybe this should be looked at again.


edit: nvm, i just f'd up my stage freeze code and forgot the line at the end that sets it back to regular time so all of my stages are frozen. i'll try it with a fixed code now.

edit2: no, its still working fine even with the fixed code. don't know what they were doing, but its been giving the neutral position every time i've selected it.


also, i have a fix for big blue where there are no cars, the falcon flyer stays the entire time and it still follows the track (some random stage jumping):


The Roadway [Phantom Wings]
4A000000 90180F3A
38000000 FF000031
48000000 805B8ADC
DE000000 80008180
14000BD4 00000000
14000BD8 00000000
4A100000 00000378
18000004 52000000
201D003C 00000000
E0000000 80008000

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e-iJ5-6PIsA

 

[FSLink]

Yeah, put FDs BG on every legal stage and I'm happy w/o the real thing

EDIT: Since you wanna ban FD, why not just make it CP? afterall, it's a PS2 with a slight dis/advantage

I'd have to agree with making it CP.


Also, forgive me for not wanting to read all 28 pages so late at night, but what's the reason for Norfair being banned?

 

[MK26]

Warning: Read At Your Own Risk

(Cape, I'd really appreciate it if you read it all and at least responded to the main point - even if it doesnt sound like it, i have mad respect for what youve done with B+ and how youve managed to make me question some pretty long-standing opinions on stages)

Main point

So basically you want ROB and Metaknight to be top tier due to stages, which completely throws off all the effort into balancing the characters? Or should I just go make MK and ROB worthless unless they CP a stage in their favor (or one of 6/7)

Sounds like a good deal of fun to me. I like losing to a person because of a horrendously stupid advantage thats avoidable instead of to their skill.

Thats why the Melee backroom changed the ruleset how they did, and I agree with everything they did on that.

I was originally gonna start this post with a rant on how I looked back at it and realized that Cape’s stage list was (as I would have said) "really ****ing stupid". But then I found this post, and I realized that this was what I wasn’t understanding. I saw your logic for each of the stages, and I saw that it was consistent throughout. Extremely conservative, yes, but consistent. But what I didn’t see was the basis for that mindset. And giving Brawl+ the same treatment as Melee may look ingenious from the perspective of an MBRer, but the truth is, that logic is straight up flawed.

Now, Im no Melee pro, but from what I understand, Brawl’s predecessor has about 8-10 truly viable characters. That’s 1/3 of the cast. And the characters that comprise that third are mostly fairly unique especially in their playstyles – in fact, several characters have single stages that work best for them, so, especially with the new streamlined stage list, it’s more than possible to not be at a total disadvantage, as long as you know to ban the right stage. Extrapolating this to Brawl, the same kind of list makes sense, since Brawl has a similarly small viable portion of the cast to work with.

However, I feel that it gets completely thrown out the window when Brawl+ comes into the equation. Suddenly you have a viable character list no less than 4 times larger than Melee’s. Suddenly, we have the power to change stages for the better. Suddenly, no combination of stage and character cannot be countered. Even if you have a character that can completely and utterly abuse a stage to hell and back, at least one out of the other 39 characters will both have an advantage on that character and do well on that stage. And if that isn’t true 100% of the time, somebody has screwed up somewhere. You shouldn’t need to use your ban to stifle a strategy, unless you stubbornly stick to your main through and through. Why get pissed at ROB on Frigate, or Diddy on Smashville, etc, etc, when (by definition) half the cast will have an even or better matchup with them, and several will do more than adequately on that stage. Your ban should be on a stage you personally loathe, or one that several of the characters you play do poorly on.

Because you have viability across the board and because you can find a character tailored to your opponent’s choice for both stage and character, the counterpick system that is already used in this game is more than adequate at preventing a no-win situation. Brawl+ makes the failsafes at your disposal – remove your opponent’s favourite stage and counter your opponent’s best character – truly safe from failure. And so it doesn’t need to be like Melee, where a stage ban is a strategy ban. Banning a stage is only part of countering your opponent’s strategy; it cuts your opponent’s options while simultaneously opening some of your own. It’s completed when you tailor your character choice to the character he used in game 1 (because he’s counterpicking, which means that you won the previous game) and the stage he’s chosen. Ban Delfino, so that annoying bat can’t shark you there. Then when he cp’s you to Halberd, choose Snake. Or Wolf. Or G&W. Or Ness. Or Olimar. Or Ganon. Or whoever. You get my point. The logic that works with Melee doesn’t apply here. Because you have options for characters, you can have a more liberal stage list. Because you have a more liberal stage list, characters get more counterpicks, and the thinking game gets more complex. How can you say that that’s bad?

======

Sub-points

So now, im going to get into specifics, starting with the individual stages...

======

WWR

As for WiFi waiting room. Its just plain HUGE. Its barely a good enough stage for teams and the sandbag, while it can be strategic also leads to more camping than it supposedly stops. Other than that its just a bad FD rip off with humongous boundaries.

Show me a video of WWR being camped so badly. Not to mention we can change the boundaries and probably the stage size. And if it’s good enough for teams, then make it cp in teams.

AND THAT STUPID, STUPID sandbag. it just gets in the way causing hit lag and blocking projectiles.

Boundaries are fixable, and it sounds to me like you simply haven’t spent the time to learn how to use sandbag to your advantage...

"My strategy for that stage is to go Sonic, jab you, and take ledge. for 8 minutes. It's a legit strategy magnified only by the stupidity of the level. very few projectiles will hit me on the other side and good luck approaching, i'll just dash attack you." [/COLOR][/FONT]

Are we talking about FD here? Because it seems to me like the exact same strat could work there. Maybe...iunno, half the stages in the game, too?

WWR and SSE jungle have similar strategies and WWR is just plain a bad stage, making it the obvious dismissal.

What? Similar strategies? How? This game has 40-some-odd characters. Can you honestly say that every single one plays the exact same on both of them?

WiFi Waiting Room promotes camping because if say Fox hits you for damage and then runs to the other side of the screen and keeps shooting, you have to approach. With Sandbag, you can just hide behind him and take no more damage. Meaning you arent approaching. Sandbag does not give you a chance to approach because its motionless, however it gives you a shelter from projectiles. Therefore it removes approaching from the equation.

1) This only applies to Fox, because his projectiles are the only ones that don’t cause flinching.
2) You go through sandbag. You run to fox. You take 3 damage. You do whatever afterward. Sandbag is not a wall
3) If Fox is unbeatable by laser camping here, I shudder to think what he’s like on other flat stages
4) You still want to approach, because you’re losing. Duh.

======

Frigate

For Orpheon the KOing off the top can be pretty random as I have seen it KO from multiple spots on both sides of the flip. You should not win a match because the stage just happened to KO your opponent for you. Thats a stupid competitive stage for that reason.

Orpheon can KO you off the top or trap you under the stage. Two videos posted showing different locations and my own experience has seen it KO on the right hand side. Sure there is a big light going off when the stage is going to flip, but the flipping is entirely inconsistent. Seen it flip four times in a row before, that comes into fighting the stage more than the opponent. If you go to a tournament and expect the stage to beat your opponent for you, then how far do you even get in tournies?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G7SWAEIhbBA
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5wxrH3cMbUQ

Brawl is a glitchy game.

And if the stage beat your opponent for you, then your opponent needs to learn to play this game.

======

PS1

Pokemon Stadium 1 is not needed as a CP (but could easily be argued as one) due to the ledges, the windmill, the rock, and the fire stage. All of those stages have areas where no matter what character you are it makes it a completely stupid idea to ever approach. This puts the match on hold for 30 seconds each time. What happens when you get the rock stage 4 times in a row? Thats a waste of two minutes. And dont give me any of this strategic bull**** since it doesnt matter who is hiding behind the rock or the tree, approaching is a stupid idea. Because of TOs only having so much time to run a tourney + the fact that this stage has stupid ledges and areas that create long breaks in the fighting without any kind of a strategy involved then why the hell would we have it on?

Get the rock stage 4 times in a row? Please. An 8-minute match will have 5 transformations total. You’ll get each one once or twice. Each one lasts up to 35-40 seconds. That’s no more than 2 minutes on rock or fire. Not to mention, unless one character is actively camping, it’s entirely possible that the whole ‘im too scared to approach’ thing might not even occur. And since characters can actually break overly defensive play (and counter MK), Plank vs. Puffster Ep. 2 wont happen in B+. btw, johning about the ledges is scrubby.

======

Pictochat

I'm also a huge fan of pictochat, but see that the stage has so many impassable barriers that slow down the action quite a bit and FORCES camping. the hazzards are also a bit over powered and there's nothing worse than losing to someone you shouldn't have because you were in the wrong place when a random drawing spawned.. lol

I agree with the distaste for the random drawing spawning, but weve already slowed the stage down. You have ample warning when something's about to occur. There are really only a small percentage of drawings that actively harm you, and the key is that, like PS1, they are temporary. You only need to put up with them for a short amount of time, and then you get another, hopefully better one.

======

Halberd

Halberd serves the exact same purposes as Delphino but has stronger and more active hazards and a smaller platform. Hurts spacies recoveries as Delphino does and allows for sharking to be done heavily. Delphino is the better choice and both stages should not be on at the same time for that reason. If you were to ban one, and I just took you to the other then I still get to use my strategy against you anyway and its completely stupid for characters like Kirby and MK against characters like Fox and Falco.

So...four matchups in this game...perhaps more, but seriously, you’re banning a stage based on the fact that two characters have a hard time and an uncommon but completely beatable strategy is easier to accomplish. “Serves the exact same purpose”? What kind of crap is that? Show me where it says that character boards consider these two stages the same? Oh, right, it doesn’t. If I ban Halberd against a Snake, I don’t want to ban Delfino at the same time. Delfino and Halberd are completely different stages, no matter what way you slice it. Some other characters have a field day at Halberd but despise Delfino. Some like or dislike both. Not all. Some.

======

Lylat

Lylat's tilting edges can never be seen as a legitimate hazard as the tilting can make you miss a recovery all of a sudden. It actually changes the stage grab boxes while it tilts. The stage also starts in a random position at the start each time so its not even like you can even memorize where the stage will be at any given time (like you can use the timer for Wario's fart). Plus when the stage is tilted you have the tilted ledges, and since those are never consistant dont even start telling me that you can use that **** for strategy. The stage's extreme inconsistancy is the reason that it should not be on CP in any serious tournament.

It’s not ‘all of a sudden’. You missed. The grab boxes go DOWN when the stage starts tilting, no matter whether the side is going up or down. Yes, I checked, unlike you since it seems FroHo says that it starts flat all the time. Not to mention this stage is nothing like SSE jungle. I have no clue where you got that from, but just because they look similar doesn’t mean they act the same. Think of your main. I don’t care who it is. Now tell me if it isn’t obvious that your character will prefer one stage over the other.

======

Castle Siege

Castle Siege is a fine stage, but it has the same problem as WWR. Its decently large and is great for running away and time outs (especially the second stage). Second stage also leads to walk off camping as they are semi permanent. The changing stage also has the opportunity to save from KOs during transformation (which isnt strategic, or good timing) its just ****ing annoying (same reason people hate ghost on Yoshi's Island Brawl). Its like praying that God comes down and saves your *** from being spiked. if you want a big time out stage then go play SSE Jungle since the run away and camp strategy is viable there but it isnt so retardedly easy that I could spam Sonic's "You're too slow" taunt and still win.

It’s like you had a bad day with this stage and you’re just complaining about it…you even say it’s fine, then air a personal beef about how the stage saves your ***. Like we haven’t seen that before. Not to mention, semi-permanent != permanent...if you don’t want to approach, don’t approach. If your opponent manages to run down the clock and you have to approach, then you did something wrong on the other 2/3rds of the stage.

Castle Siege seems to mostly be a run away kind of stage and Junglefield fills that role better (with more options too)

Final Destination seems to mostly be a projectile-lover’s kind of stage and Smashville fills that role better (with more options too)

THEYRE NOTHING ALIKE

PS1 seems to be mostly a campy kind of stage and Brinstar fills that role better (with less more gay too)

That’s not logic. That’s personal preference.

Rainbow Cruise seems to be mostly an aerial battle kind of stage and Battlefield fills that role better (with a stationary camera too)

Battlefield seems to be mostly an aerial battle kind of stage and Rainbow Cruise fills that role better (with a dynamic camera too)

New Pork City seems to be mostly a joke kind of stage and Temple fills that role better (with nostalgia too)

WWR seems to be mostly a white kind of stage and Pictochat fills that role better (with stripes too)

======

Stage Philosohy (?)

You go to a tourney to play matches and fight, not to try to figure out what two stages of 30 you hate the most. The small amount of stages keeps players playing and fighting with slight advantages and disadvantages to basic general strategies. Too many stages creates too many copy clones, and too many bans just makes the system more convoluted than it has to be.

This implies that starter stages are completely neutral, or close to it. That is simply not true. No two stages in this game play out the same. Individual characters might like or dislike the same subset of stages, but that’s because they can capitalize on the aspects that are similar. It doesn’t mean that everything about those two stages is similar.

The point of the matter is, the stage should lead to assisting a strategy or harming another not beating your opponent for you. Overlapping of the same strategy on different stages makes the entire banning system useless. So you add more bans (which aside from being unbalanced) leads to a more convoluted system than it needs to be. The stage list is conservative but is also the best stage list for competitive play.

If you pick a stage that your opponent dislikes, he should’ve banned it. If this is his second-least favourite stage, then he has two options: grin and bear it, or counterpick his character. Because he can do that, right?

Variety for what?

the Melee video was to demonstrate that a stage can definetly lead to an almost unwinnable strategy. I think Vidjo had banned Rainbow Cruise that set for similar reasons, so Spammerer just went to the stage of the exact similar type and did the same thing. More stage variety will just lead to more opportunities to use a completely unbalanced strategy on your opponent. The more stages you have, the less effective any and all stage bans become. Then it comes down to fighting the stage and not your opponent. If I wanted to fight the stage and not an opponent I would MM myself on Rumble Falls.

Also, its a MELEE video, who gives a ****? Its still smash. It has the same basic strategies in Melee as it does in plus. The specifics are different for sure, but the basics are still the same. More stage variety leads to more fighting stages and less fighting opponents. The stages I listed are the 10 most basic stages you can get with differing strategies, this way you can ban strategies instead of stages. The stage itself should only affect your strategy and not just plain completely **** your character for you for free. That is the issue.

The Melee analogy fails here, because there is variety in viability, and so you can cp characters (not to mention characters will be roughly equal anyways…). If we can create an unbeatable strat on a perfectly legal stage, I’d wonder how a community mod striving for balance allowed that to happen.

You seem to think that people should give their opponent a chance when the cp stages. You know, like playing honourably. Last I checked, that was a four-letter word around these parts. If I like two different stages, does that mean that one of them is automatically banned? I want a home field advantage. You say learning how to take advantage of stages that aren’t ‘neutral’ isn’t really skill? I beg to differ. You should read Praxis’ defense of Green Greens sometime if you haven’t already. He provides video evidence showing that he’s spent more time than he needs to on Green Greens, and he makes it clear that the 3 people who actually tried their hand at the stage not only all destroy everybody else there, they also go even with each other. He basically proved that Green Greens rewards the more skilled player. Green Greens. And you question Lylat’s legitimacy. (which reminds me, I havent seen any explanation for Norfair's exclusion yet...FFFFFFFF- ninja'd by FSLink)

Small stages for breaking up camping, big stages for camping, wide boundaries if you have a good recovery and they dont, close boundaries if you are a killing machine, etc, etc.

Those are groups of stages. Not exactly the same stage with a different background/layout/whatever.

Let me give a decent example of what Cape is talking about with Halberd and Delfino.

Say you play against a DDD main (in Brawl mind you) and you main someone he can CG. DDD's best CP is Delfino but, Castle Siege is also a good stage for DDD because of the 2nd transformation. Both stages have platforms to avoid getting CG'd but, they both serve the same strategy: CG to the blastzone transformations. So you won the first match, you ban Delfino because he's DDD. He thinks about his choices and left and chooses the next best thing, Castle Siege.

Castle Siege's 2nd transformation lasts longer than the Delfino ones but, the platforms are higher so you can stay away from the ground below where DDD can CG you. Still, the strategy for the stage for DDD is the same.

There's lots of other characters and stages that have this in Brawl and as someone who wins a match in a tournament, I myself never really know what to ban because either way, they will pick a stage where their strategy benefits them regardless of what I ban. Brawl's banning and CP system is basically, to me, deciding between the two evils. The one that's eviler you ban but, even if you ban that, the lesser of the two will be chosen and the same strategy is applied.

In other words, it's a horrible system and I've always felt that way when you have a large CP list.

The fault here isn’t with the stages, its with the game. If there’s a strategy that works unfailingly on several stages, theres a problem. And since we have Brawl+ here and not Brawl, we can get rid of that strat. Sharking does not work unfailingly. Hoping your opponent fails at sweetsoptting the edge doesn’t work unfailingly. Just because you look at a match the same way (ie “im going to camp him with my lasers because they are safe and effective”; or “he sucks at breaking juggles so imma do that”) doesn’t mean that it’s bad to be able to do that on more than one stage...

All the neutrals are basically the same with minor differences:

FD has ledges
BF has three platforms
SV has one moving platform
YI has a wiggled bottom and a tipping platform
PS2 has two platforms

What the neutrals do is allow the players to feel up their opponents and the good players will see their weaknesses and their strengths and counterpick to make either of those more evident. That is why the CPs all have a basic overall type. It comes down to fighting your opponent more than the stage and the stage assists you with your strat.

(Nerd moment) Like in the Yu Gi Oh anime where the area that they battle may give a boost to their character.

WW has a 2x2 array of platforms
Lylat has a 1x3 array of platforms

Again, you’re generalizing...they are basically the same, but they are completely different. They are five unique stages with a few similarities shared between some or all of them. Full stop.

Adding a second ban is also not a good idea due to the fact that in that scenario you could ban Castle Siege and Delphino against DDD. But now he has two different bans and can also ban two different strategies. It makes the counterpicking system unbalanced and gives certain characters more advantages than others.

Example with the list that has been used in tournies:
ROB is great on:
Mansion
WiFi Waiting Room
Skyworld
Frigate Orpheon
etc

So why should this character be great at four stages and I have to decide how I want him to bend me over a table and **** me in the ***. Comes down to not fighting the character, but fighting the stage. Not a good way to play a tourney set IMO.

Edit: And when I say great, I mean have unfair advantages against most other characters.

Character X is way above average on stages 1, 2, 3, and 4. I beat my opponent in the first match, and ban the stage I hate the most, so he has 1 of 3 to choose from. When he picks which one he likes, I can tailor my character choice to the stage and character (because its all but obvious that he’ll be staying with character X), and counter one, the other, or both. Or I can stick with my main, who obviously is doing well seeing as how Im up 1-0 in the series.

ROB plays better on cps than neutrals. Because neutrals aren’t actually neutral. Theyre as polarizing as any other stages in this game. Theyre just more straightforward. The counterpick system cant possibly be balanced across B+’s roster. For instance, your list somewhat stacks up against ROB...

======

Nah, Maestro's is better.

**** straight.

======

tl,dr: Maestro just spend 4000 words disagreeing with Cape.

 

[~tgm_Zeej]

Also, forgive me for not wanting to read all 28 pages so late at night, but what's the reason for Norfair being banned?

Well, if the random, boiling waves of killination weren't enough...

Easy to stall/camp/run away.

Too tough to edgeguard with no less than 3 edges on either side.

Odd layout and close blastlines make it incredibly one sided in some match ups.



Bottom line, you have to fight the stage just as much as your opponent, if not more so in some cases.

 

[FrozenHobo]

i read all of that.... dear god, i read all of that and i already know what the comebacks will be for all of them... dear god, is this what esp is like?

 

[Shadic]

If we really want to fix Final Destination, why don't we just do something like this?

It took me 5 minutes. And I've never done stage swap stuff before. Should be easy to make it look decent and work well, eh?

 

[Kei_Takaro]

Erm, Big Blue+ has good intentions, but if you stage spike even once, the opponent should be killed instantly by the road, not unless you slow the road down I think

 

[MK26]

i read all of that.... dear god, i read all of that and i already know what the comebacks will be for all of them... dear god, is this what esp is like?

:<

i suppose 2 in the morning isnt the best time to post what you want to to be a serious post...at least its not incoherent, right?

(and the stage specific points were more out of frustation for a pair of lost posts om those topics)

and esp is know what capes responses are while hes thinking them

 

[FrozenHobo]

Erm, Big Blue+ has good intentions, but if you stage spike even once, the opponent should be killed instantly by the road, not unless you slow the road down I think

i'm still playing around with the code, but i can tell you that slowing the stage down is going to promote circle camping even more than what JJ has. i do agree that (stage) spikes will be annoying, but with increased tech speed, with enough practice you should be able to tech the road and roll forward. i dunno, just a thought.

i may also look at adding two platforms, but i'd need to see how the stage plays then.

 

[Alphatron]

It was logicially and factually proven that Subspace Stadium is a better stage than Final Destination. in the competitive scene. Wanting FD to stay because you like it doesn't exactly help the arguement. Even if it is FD. My favorite stages are Halberd and Lylat Cruise and I'm not complaining THAT much about their exclusion.

@ FrozenHobo: The intentions for Big Blue+ are good, but I don't really think it will work out. Playing with my friends on the already slowed down Big blue over the weekend showed what happens. Camping still exists. Getting spiked onto the track, even if you tech with certain characters, still leads to death. Especially when the stage decides to jump over that huge gap. On the flipside, this doesn't screw over everyone.

I can easily Jigglypuff, and edgecamp Big Blue. My jumps will constantly be restored and her air speed will keep me from going too far off the side of the screen. Why doesn't this happen currently? Because there are cars on the road. Removing the cars removes the ability for a good deal of characters to safely head over there. If I don't feel like fighting, I'll take the road anytime.

Of course, that last part is merely theory crafting without having tried carless Big Blue yet. So before shooting myself in the foot, I'll wait to see how things turn out.

@MK26: I agreed with parts of your posts, and disagreed with others. Falling through the stage, no matter how specific it is, is not a legitimate hazard. Like Hobo, I can also see how some of your points will be countered though. Still a nice post. I would still go with Halberd over Delfino due to Delfine having water and campy areas, whereas Halberd does not.

Let's say I was to actually put the effort into making New Pork City a legit nuetral/Cp stage. If the slow as molasses chimera still showed up, would he be a legitimate hazard? Just asking. I could have a picture for my intentions up if needed.

 

[FrozenHobo]

well, while i see where you're coming from on BB+, there are a few things. in slowed down BB if you hit the road you have a better chance of surviving. i'm currently looking at speeding up the stage so hitting the road makes recovery more difficult. additionally, in regular big blue the flyer leaves after a while which eliminates the whole "camp the flyer" option. this does however, make your point about ledge camping somewhat true, except that ledge camping B+ isn't exactly a great option with the ledge invincibility fix.

i want you to know that i am taking all of these opinions and seeing how i can make the stage better/less campy.

 

[Alphatron]

Well, when you're finished, I would still like to test the carless big Blue(by myself. My friends would spit on such a thing even existing). I'm not sure what to really suggest, as decreasing theleft boundary for the stage would be terrible(maybe not after road speed changes).

 

[Kaye Cruiser]

But most(?) like FD better. We've grown attached to being gimped by the ledges...and colorful background. Amirite?

^ This. And SSE is in no way superior to Final Destination buddy. I think you're overrating your new suggestion a bit too much, though I'm glad you changed it away from actually replacing the stage.

Besides, SSE Stadium is really just PS2 frozen with a different background and no extra platforms. It doesn't help that it looks equally boring as the WWR either. XD

 

[MK26]

alpha, the point isnt that falling through the stage is a legitimate hazard, its that dying on account of the flip isnt either.

Besides, SSE Stadium is really just PS2 frozen with a different background and no extra platforms. It doesn't help that it looks equally boring as the WWR either. XD

sooo...final destination with different edges and a different background? lol, we can switch the background...i think subspace stadium is closer to fd than ps

 

[Plum]

It's not about what people like, its about what supports a competitive environment best.
If SSE Stadium is a more competitive stage than FD then it should be used, simple as that.

 

[Kaye Cruiser]

...*facepalm* Either way they're both COMPLETELY neutral. Neither one can be considered more competitive than the other anyway! Replacing FD, of ALL the stages considering it's kind of symbolic being the "last battle" stage, with something that won't provide anything better is complete and utter idiocy.

And don't even try using FD's edges as an excuse either. A simple tilt of the control stick while jumping or using Up-B or a simple wall jump is more than enough to keep yourself from dying. We've have more than enough time to get used to it, and anyone who can't deserves to lose a stock for sucking just that much. Besides, SSE Stadium happens to have the same recovery people as PS2 which involves somehow ending up under the whole freakin' platform. But I doubt anyone cares about that or noticed since not that many people have even used the stage aside from the small few of us. >_>

Whatever. Just do whatever you want like you always do.

 

[Roxas215]

Wait are people arguing about replacing FD with SSE stadium? Why in the world would u do that? What the hell does SSE stadium offers that FD doesn't? There is no reason to do that. People act like this game is new. Everyone knows about the ledges. It's your own **** fault if u get caught under it.

 

[JCaesar]

If FD ledges were as dumb as PS1 ledges or Melee BF ledges, I'd agree, but honestly they're fine how they are. The only legitimate argument I can see for replacing FD with SSE Stadium is that you can't go under SSE Stadium.

 

[Kei_Takaro]

Depends IMO, it's good for characters with crap recoveries in FD's ledges, and it will probably enable all characters to recover fairly on SSE Stadium
Also, no more surprise secks Bair on the ledge of FD for insta KO lmao

 

[Kaye Cruiser]

Depends IMO, it's good for characters with crap recoveries in FD's ledges, and it will probably enable all characters to recover fairly on SSE Stadium
Also, no more surprise secks Bair on the ledge of FD for insta KO lmao

Anyone can recover on those ledges if the person using them is actually good enough or smart enough to know how to do it. And the stage spike thing is hardly even a reason to swap it. There are PLENTY of other stages where you can do the same thing if the timing is right, and those ledges are as easy to grab as WWR's.

Give up the mundane idea already. Leave Final Destination alone.

... *facepalm* Somebody get me a British kid with and a blonde please. XD

 

[~tgm_Zeej]

One wonders why Brawl FD is worth defending at all?

I really couldn't care less one way or another, as either way it'll basically be the same stage, but now I'm curious.

 

[Alphatron]

NINE
ADDITIONAL
STAGES

All made to replace WWR without actually doing so. Simply being added to the game.

Any more of this arguement and I'm gonna start arguing for Temple and Rumble Falls to be added back. After all, its just as pointless and I actually like Temple.

 

[VietGeek]

One wonders why Brawl FD is worth defending at all?

I really couldn't care less one way or another, as either way it'll basically be the same stage, but now I'm curious.

"don't fix what ain't broken"

the ledge really only gimps about every melee character's recovery options at a certain point inward of the stage

don't let wolf recover from a certain angle cuz wolf is bairly annoying
**** zelda all she does is cause rage irc convo's
sheik is a sheik it ain't f-air w/e

fd pays tribute to a fatal counter hit of "can't let u do dat star fox"

except now w/ wolves

obv

Spoiler

typing like this is fun

 

[Thunderhorse+]

huge snippit from a page ago

That was...actually a fairly well thought out post. I applaud you for at least giving the other side extremely solid to work with. Part of me really wants to agree with you. However, I noticed two logical fallacies in there.

Because you have viability across the board and because you can find a character tailored to your opponent’s choice for both stage and character, the counterpick system that is already used in this game is more than adequate at preventing a no-win situation.

In an ideal world, where everyone could able to play all 39 characters at a tournament level, this would be pretty sound. The problem is, tourney players can usually play at most about 3 or 4 characters at that level. Secondaries are usually taken on to alleviate bad MUs, but you'd be surprised at the amount of times weaknesses to certain stage elements are shared by characters.

For example: Falco has a bad MU against Kirby, I think we can all agree on that (if you want details, I can explain). Arguably, Marth does much better against him. That's why I seconded him, yes? Problem is, Falco and Marth share a certain stage weakness on Frigate Orpheon where if the 1st transformation is present, they will have an almost silly time trying to recover against someone like Kirby or Jigglypuff. In fact, I'll take it one step further: every single character I play (Falco, Sonic, Charizard, and hopefully Marth one day) all do bad on Frigate. It turns what would be two advantageous MUs (Charizard and Marth) into MUs that are impossible to win despite me having picked them up to counter Kirby.

Sure, I could just ban Frigate, but it's only an example to illustrate my point, and since there's only 'one' of Frigate, banning Frigate ends the problem right there. These type of issues undoubtedly exist on every stage, even the ones that 'double up'. You could say I should learn a different character that both counters the MU and plays well on the stage, but considering the amount of stages you're proposing and the amount of characters in the game, you'd have to pick up alot of characters, and very few players can pick up many characters without having it affect their tourney performance in one way or another. The smaller stage list helps to alleviate this problem.

The second fallacy that I want to point out is much more general, that being that not all stages can provide competitive value, even if they're technically legal. PS1 can be a CP-able stage, but what do its transformations offer strategically? Most of them just bring up walls, which doesn't benefit any character at all, merely stop the action until the transformation returns to normal? And what character can benefit strategically from Lylat's tilting, random or not? It's not that I think they are broken they just...simply don't add anything from a competitive point of view, even if we were to add them. And if they don't add competitive value, why add them in the first place? All it serves is to clutter up the stage list needlessly. The only exception I would make to this rule are the starter stages, and only because its a necessary evil. I would get rid of smashville or PS2 but then we'd be left with only 4 good starters, which won't work for stage striking.

Again, I respect your line of thought in your post, but there are just a few major things you failed to take into account.

EDIT: also at you wanting videos showing off people abusing the sandbag for camping. Let's just say...

CHALLENGE ACCEPTED!

See ya after Hackfest 4.5

 

[Kaye Cruiser]

Sonic does bad on Frigate...? O_o

You must play a pretty bad Sonic then buddy, no offense or anything. I can easily dominate on Frigate using Sonic, Captain Falcon and even Ike of all people. Wolf too, but I'm learning how to adapt to all situations with him at the moment like i did for the others. XD

 

[JCaesar]

The second fallacy that I want to point out is much more general, that being that not all stages can provide competitive value, even if they're technically legal. PS1 can be a CP-able stage, but what do its transformations offer strategically?

I just wanted to throw in my 2 cents here.

PS1 definitely has strategic value. When I played Ryoko at BtL2, I won the first round, he CPed me to Frigate 2nd round and won (oh wait, I thought ROB was super-advantage unbeatable on Frigate, right? And against a ****ty recovery like Zelda's no less. Logic fail. Anyway...), the 3rd round I CPed him to PS1. You know why? It had nothing to do with the transformations. I CPed it because Sheik and Zelda can't sweetspot the ledge there. And it worked out. He had trouble with the ledges and I capitalized on it. It was a smart CP on my part.

You might say the stage "won" the match for me, but he could have picked a different character which doesn't get screwed over by the ledges (I believe he plays both Peach and ZSS who shouldn't have any problems with PS1 ledges), or he could've banned it (and I probably would've CPed a neutral if he had), or if he practiced on the stage more he could perfect sweetspotting the ledges with Zelda. It was hardly an unwinnable match. ROB doesn't do any better on PS1 than he does on a neutral.

I would hate to see strategy like this fall by the wayside due to an ultra-conservative stagelist. Once these stages are banned they are never coming back. I would hate to see great stages like Halberd, Frigate, or PS1 disappear from tournaments forever.

 

[The Cape]

You might say the stage "won" the match for me, but he could have picked a different character which doesn't get screwed over by the ledges (I believe he plays both Peach and ZSS who shouldn't have any problems with PS1 ledges), or he could've banned it (and I probably would've CPed a neutral if he had), or if he practiced on the stage more he could perfect sweetspotting the ledges with Zelda. It was hardly an unwinnable match. ROB doesn't do any better on PS1 than he does on a neutral.

It does not make an unwinnable match, but the way this match played out is that you won because the ledges are SOOOO bad that he either had to switch characters or lose? That just seems like a bad reason to keep it on more than anything. If the ledges are really that bad, than what about players who only play Zelda effectively? The stage should not force the player to switch characters it should just encourage them to do so to keep an advantage in the matchup. This is one of those instances where the stage handicaps a character in such a way that it becomes laughably easy to fight them in that sense. Zelda already has trouble fighting camping, and if she cant even recover effectively on this stage than picking this stage is like condeming her to die every time she falls off.

 

[MK26]

That was...actually a fairly well thought out post. I applaud you for at least giving the other side extremely solid to work with. Part of me really wants to agree with you. However, I noticed two logical fallacies in there.

Why thank you. :bigthumbu

In an ideal world, where everyone could able to play all 39 characters at a tournament level, this would be pretty sound. The problem is, tourney players can usually play at most about 3 or 4 characters at that level. Secondaries are usually taken on to alleviate bad MUs, but you'd be surprised at the amount of times weaknesses to certain stage elements are shared by characters.

For example: Falco has a bad MU against Kirby, I think we can all agree on that (if you want details, I can explain). Arguably, Marth does much better against him. That's why I seconded him, yes? Problem is, Falco and Marth share a certain stage weakness on Frigate Orpheon where if the 1st transformation is present, they will have an almost silly time trying to recover against someone like Kirby or Jigglypuff. In fact, I'll take it one step further: every single character I play (Falco, Sonic, Charizard, and hopefully Marth one day) all do bad on Frigate. It turns what would be two advantageous MUs (Charizard and Marth) into MUs that are impossible to win despite me having picked them up to counter Kirby.

Sure, I could just ban Frigate, but it's only an example to illustrate my point, and since there's only 'one' of Frigate, banning Frigate ends the problem right there. These type of issues undoubtedly exist on every stage, even the ones that 'double up'. You could say I should learn a different character that both counters the MU and plays well on the stage, but considering the amount of stages you're proposing and the amount of characters in the game, you'd have to pick up alot of characters, and very few players can pick up many characters without having it affect their tourney performance in one way or another. The smaller stage list helps to alleviate this problem.

I realize i was being a bit idealistic (idealist?) when I said that - it is hard to expect someone to play more than three characters at tournament level. And I realize that characters can share stage weaknesses. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if you could find a stage weakness for any combination of three characters in Brawl.

But the question is: is that a bad thing? By definition, half of the characters in Brawl will do better on a particular stage than the other half. The difference between Brawl and Brawl+ is that the lack of tier balance in the former means that the same characters (ie high tier and up) are in the 'above average' half almost all of the time. In the latter, we've gotten quite close to balance; most if not all characters will be in 'above average' and 'below average' in approximately equal parts. The approximately equal parts change composition as you add stages to a conservative list until it gets to a liberal list (and vice versa), but still stay approximately equal.

Regardless of whether or not the stage list is large, situations will come up where your main and secondaries are either disadvantaged against the character or weak on the stage. I suppose the smaller list helps to minimize this, but it will occur nonetheless. And if it occurs twice at the same time (meaning your ban is a decision between the lesser of two evils), then you have to make do with what you have. And if you lose, you'll practice on at least one of those stages, over and over. Or you'll pick up a cp just for them. But the point is, you'll never let it happen again. But the situation of 'the same three characters having the same disadvantages against the same one character on two different stages' probably won't come up that often. Your stage ban is there to cover the one problem stage, which is statistically likely to occur no matter what characters are involved in the equation. And anyways, if you're getting cp'd, you just won the previous game. You have the upper hand. Sucks to be you.

The second fallacy that I want to point out is much more general, that being that not all stages can provide competitive value, even if they're technically legal. PS1 can be a CP-able stage, but what do its transformations offer strategically? Most of them just bring up walls, which doesn't benefit any character at all, merely stop the action until the transformation returns to normal? And what character can benefit strategically from Lylat's tilting, random or not? It's not that I think they are broken they just...simply don't add anything from a competitive point of view, even if we were to add them. And if they don't add competitive value, why add them in the first place? All it serves is to clutter up the stage list needlessly. The only exception I would make to this rule are the starter stages, and only because its a necessary evil. I would get rid of smashville or PS2 but then we'd be left with only 4 good starters, which won't work for stage striking.

This is a matter of one's personal opinions on what the stage list and cp system are supposed to accomplish. I personally think that a stage should be legal until proven banned, not the other way around. All the stages on my list are unique; they create different interactions between the same characters. Like you said, if a stage is 'technically legal', then the only way one would ban it would be by looking at the whole, rather than the individual parts.That's somewhat of an ***-backward way of looking at things.

The true measure of a competitive stage is that the more skilled player will win. Skill encompasses both general smash skill and the interpretation of that skill on particular stages. If a player that knows a particular cp stage inside and out will win 10 times out of 10 against the one who limits himself to the neutrals and common cps, then that stage is perfectly fine. The cp'er uses his skill better in that environment, and he gets rewarded for doing so. As such, that stage is an option. Arbitratily (ie without proof of a broken tactic) removing these options shouldn't occur - there is some overlap, sure, but no two stages play exactly the same.

Again, I respect your line of thought in your post, but there are just a few major things you failed to take into account.

EDIT: also at you wanting videos showing off people abusing the sandbag for camping. Let's just say...

CHALLENGE ACCEPTED!

See ya after Hackfest 4.5

You go girl dude!

 

[ValTroX]

Well guys, I just came to this thread so I'll just copy/paste what i wrote on the GSH2 discussion, I also added some more stuff that i thought of, sorry if it was already suggested:

Well, I played some of the stages that we don't normally use and came up with some ideas:

1)Spear Pillar: Remove the bottom platform. If it's possible, leave the Pokemon but remove their power, it makes the stage color change a bit and give it less of a dead atmosphere.

2)Green Greens: Remove the falling blocks and stop them from dropping. If it makes you guys feel better, remove the 2 lateral platforms and move the blast zones in. Also, remove some kb from the apples(or just completely remove them), they seem to hit hard o.o.

3)Pokemon Stadium(Melee): Make the windmill like melee , solid windmill sucks.

About PTAD, the car idea is fine, but at least make edges on main platform(Norfair somehow has edges on platforms o.o)

I do not know if any of this changes are possible, they are merely suggestions but I would like to hear your thoughts on them.

 

[SymphonicSage12]

Green Green is already an amazing counterpick in my mind...

PSM is also a good counterpick already..

 

[Kaye Cruiser]

Screw that Spear Pillar idea. Balanced Brawl tried that too, and it resulted in a horrible stage with death zones so close that you'll die if you even slightly fall off before you get a chance to grab that ledge. >_>

 

[VietGeek]

that's cuz they did it with boundary hacks

they just put up'd the lower boundary until the death zone was past the lower platform which is why it resulted in a still-dumb stage.

the idea here is to remove the lower platform entirely via stripping it of its model and textures (ideally) = never existed.

 

[Kaye Cruiser]

Bah, it's just not Spear Pillar without...well...the "Pillar" part. Majority of the battles on that stage end up traveling to the bottom half anyways. I say leave it as it is. If you can make 3 Pokemon not attack us, then that's awesome though. I always play with all stages slowed down though, and it's much easier to dodge their attacks that way...Well, Palkia's stage flip/reverse excluded, but I use Sub-Stage Select so I never have to play there. XD *never uses the Level Freezer*

Then again, I only have stages slowed down because they end up matching with my music. Especially on FD :<