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

[bobson]

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.

This is fixed when players gain basic pattern recognition and realize that if the ledge is moving in a certain direction when you first use your recovery move, it will likely be further in that direction when your recovery move ends.

There is really absolutely no reason anyone competent enough to get past pools in a tournament should ever have any more trouble with these ledges than they would have with, say, FD's pits. It's a matter of experience with the stage and nothing else. Players being too inexperienced to know how to grab ledges is not a legitimate reason for a ban.

Halberd and Delphino are extremely similar. I think Halberd is a fine stage, but I dont think it should be on a good counterpicking list along with Delphino. Why should I have to use two stage bans (needless complicated as well) to ban one strategy such as sharking, or make sure that my Fox or Falco illusion doesnt get completely ****** by the stage?

Because they're both in the game and offer unique experiences without unbalancing anything beyond the other viable stages in the game? They both transform, and one of the transformations in both of them has a non-solid floor and another has a low ceiling. That's where the similarities end. By this reasoning, Smashville should be banned because I should be able to ban FD and not worry about having to deal with a long stage. It's true that the stage ban system is weakened in a sense by both of them being present, but it's not anywhere near a grievance great enough to justify removing the depth that's added by having a totally unique stage.

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.

Orpheon can KO you, yes, if you fail to realize that there is a giant alarm going off that covers the screen which is telling you to move into a spot where you can't be KOed or gimped. The KO/gimp spots are only in certain areas of the stage and can always be avoided when you have enough experience on the stage to know where they are unless you're in the process of getting gimped already. I've been gimped more because the balloon on Smashville spawned in front of me while I was charging Luigi's side-B than I have on Orpheon. It's not even an issue of experience; you can never play on the stage and still know exactly where you shouldn't be when the stage flips. It's just knowledge. Lack of knowledge is not a reason to ban a fine stage.

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?

Four times. The flip lasts about three or four seconds, so in an eight minute match, you'll spend 3% of the time moving slightly to avoid getting gimped, if it actually decides to flip that many times, which it often doesn't. Jesus, you're right, that's awful! How can I even concentrate on my opponent in such a mess?!

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.

Firstly, I don't even think it's possible to get the same transformation more than once in a row on PS1. Secondly, yes, that happens sometimes. Big friggin' deal. The pros of having an extra stage with a unique dynamic outweigh the cons of sometimes having a gap in the match.

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.

What? The only thing that comes close to promoting camping on this stage is the second form, which disappears. The first transformation is smaller than almost every starter, and the third one is about as big as FD. Walk-off camping is also not a beneficial strategy in any way and is usually a directly bad choice because about three-fourths of the roster have projectiles that render it entirely irrelevant.

The changing stage also has the opportunity to save from KOs during transformation (which isnt strategic, or good timing)

I've used the transformations several times to get hits or KOs on people who thought I was setting myself up for an easy gimp and forgot about the transformation.

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.

After reading this I question if you've ever actually played on this stage VS anyone competent. Camping on Castle Siege simply doesn't work--or at least not to any greater extent than, say, camping on Rainbow Cruise. Certainly not to a bannable extent, by any reasoning.

The point of the matter is, the stage should lead to assisting a strategy or harming another not beating your opponent for you.

None of these stages "beat your opponent for you."

Overlapping of the same strategy on different stages makes the entire banning system useless.

It makes the banning system useless in one specific instance where you're trying to avoid that specific strategy. Again, the pros of having an extra totally unique stage dynamic that benefits the game outweigh this rather whiny con.

You seem to have a flawed idea of what exactly is bannable, which has led to a highly inconsistent stage philosophy that considers stages like Lylat Cruise and PS1 bannable while stages like Brinstar and Rainbow Cruise are fine. A ban instituted in a competitive game is inherently a bad thing; something that should only result when a certain aspect of the game is deemed so overpowering as to ruin the possibility of competitive play, not something that should be utilized to "optimize" competitive play. The opposite is true, as well: elements that don't destroy competitive play are inherently good things, and removing them arbitrarily weakens the game's depth. Middle ground between the two, as far as ban philosophy goes, is nonexistent: an aspect is either good for competitive play, or it is bannable. One could argue that Falco's lasers and side-B hurt competitive play by giving him a powerful camping ability in some matchups, but the inherent good which those moves provide by being unique gameplay elements outweighs the potential bad of them being used to make competitive play less-than-optimal.

Ideally, no part of the game would have to be banned, but unfortunately we play a game that was built primarily for casual play, so certain aspects like circle camping and wall abuse have to be limited if you want any semblance of competition to remain in the game. But at no point should banning these things that absolutely must be banned be taken as an affirmation that anything that "hurts" competition should be banned; for one, deciding which processes "hurt" competition more than others is a largely subjective and arbitrary process, which leads to, well, lists like this. I suppose one could make the argument that Brawl+ as a project was created to "optimize" Brawl for competitive play, so the ban philosophy should follow that, but I think my points still stand even in that case. The crucial depth added by stages like Halberd, PS1 and Castle Siege is too much of a good thing to be removed because of minor problems like stage banning being less effective and matches taking a little longer. Competition, as well as the game itself, is hurt more by their exclusion than their inclusion.

 

[Kei_Takaro]

Somehow wierd, IMO I'd insta-ban Delfino as long as it had walk-offs (maybe Halberd too, but it seems 90% more avoidable)

I didn't think through that much on what I said above so don't be nuts 'bout that k ^^. lol

EDIT:
Reading bobsons posts quoting every single word of Cape's statements remind me of Phoenix pressing alot on the testimony XD

EDITEDIT:
Hell, I don't feel like reading a wall of text, srsly

 

[FrozenHobo]

just gonna put this here: http://www.smashboards.com/showthread.php?t=187932

take from it what you will....

 

[The Cape]

Well in the Delphino vs Halberd arguement.

Delphino has a bigger main platform and only passive hazards. Which is why I thought it to be the better choice over Halberd in that instance. Had the agreement from alot of the other players I discussed the list with. (Vanz, Glick, etc)

 

[bobson]

This is assuming there has to be a choice at all, which there shouldn't be.

 

[The Cape]

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.

 

[lord karn]

You seem to have a flawed idea of what exactly is bannable, which has led to a highly inconsistent stage philosophy that considers stages like Lylat Cruise and PS1 bannable while stages like Brinstar and Rainbow Cruise are fine. A ban instituted in a competitive game is inherently a bad thing; something that should only result when a certain aspect of the game is deemed so overpowering as to ruin the possibility of competitive play, not something that should be utilized to "optimize" competitive play. The opposite is true, as well: elements that don't destroy competitive play are inherently good things, and removing them arbitrarily weakens the game's depth. Middle ground between the two, as far as ban philosophy goes, is nonexistent: an aspect is either good for competitive play, or it is bannable. One could argue that Falco's lasers and side-B hurt competitive play by giving him a powerful camping ability in some matchups, but the inherent good which those moves provide by being unique gameplay elements outweighs the potential bad of them being used to make competitive play less-than-optimal.

Ideally, no part of the game would have to be banned, but unfortunately we play a game that was built primarily for casual play, so certain aspects like circle camping and wall abuse have to be limited if you want any semblance of competition to remain in the game. But at no point should banning these things that absolutely must be banned be taken as an affirmation that anything that "hurts" competition should be banned; for one, deciding which processes "hurt" competition more than others is a largely subjective and arbitrary process, which leads to, well, lists like this. I suppose one could make the argument that Brawl+ as a project was created to "optimize" Brawl for competitive play, so the ban philosophy should follow that, but I think my points still stand even in that case. The crucial depth added by stages like Halberd, PS1 and Castle Siege is too much of a good thing to be removed because of minor problems like stage banning being less effective and matches taking a little longer. Competition, as well as the game itself, is hurt more by their exclusion than their inclusion.

Why is a ban instituted in a competitive game inherently a bad thing? Cape's list seems fair and adds a dynamic to counterpicking levels that wasn't there before. Many people would call this a good thing.

Also, by choosing not to ban things you're already deciding that banning things hurts competition, so you're still making the same inherent choice that you are accusing Cape of making. The fact of the matter is, when you play a game competitively, there will be a ruleset. Whatever the ruleset is, whoever created it had to at some point decide what is good and what is bad for competitive play.

 

[bobson]

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.

The advantages aren't "horrendously stupid" and I challenge you to find a top player losing to a mere above-average one because of them. "Top tier due to stages" doesn't exist, there's just top tier. If a big chunk of the stages benefit a certain character type, then that character type is good on a lot of stages; as long as competition still functions and the advantages aren't overpowering, this isn't a problem. It's much better to tweak the characters themselves slightly than remove a huge portion of the game.

Why is a ban instituted in a competitive game inherently a bad thing? Cape's list seems fair and adds a dynamic to counterpicking levels that wasn't there before. Many people would call this a good thing.

Because it removes something. More is good. More stages, characters and so forth mean more gameplay elements, which means more depth. In reverse, less is bad. Less things mean less depth. We want more depth, that's why we started this in the first place. Why are we removing it for minor reasons?
Cape's list adds that dynamic, but it comes at the cost of removing more than half of the game and a lot of depth, which is not something I can see as a reasonable loss by any stretch of the imagination.

Also, by choosing not to ban things you're already deciding that banning things hurts competition, so you're still making the same inherent choice that you are accusing Cape of making.

There's a big difference between deciding that banning anything that isn't absolutely broken is bad and deciding which things should be banned to "optimize" competitive play.

 

[Veril]

I don't agree with all of Cape's stage list, but the logic he uses to defend it is sound and internally consistent. Orpheon, CS and PSI were three of my favorite stages, so obviously I'm biased. PSI is a stage that is so interesting as a CP, and its flaws are relatively minor; it really would be a shame to ban it.

That said the general tone of the discussion here is extremely hostile, and I think I'd rather just talk with Cape than deal with this honestly.

 

[MK26]

**** me, another reply got lost

thank goodness bobson's picking up the slack tho

good **** bro

and id just like to mention that

1) lylat's ledges are very easy to get used to, and once you get used to them, you stop missing them. Period.
2) its impossible to get the same transformation twice in a row on PS1
3) Cape has solid logic, which i will get to refuting as soon as my internet stops ****ing on me
4) Stage touching down to save you + temp walkoffs = Delfino as well as CS
5) Cape, have we gotten rid of teh part of teh counterpick system that says you're allowed to counterpick characters too?

 

[Veril]

Fact: Lylat's tilting is random.

Cape's list is really good as a conservative stage list, but I'd like it better if there were a Banned/CP section for stages that are on the brink like PSI (which Cape admits can easily be argued for CP). That said, I would have no issue playing in a tournament with this stage list. There's a lot of variety in the CPs even if there aren't a lot of them.

A smaller list is innately superior in regards to the stage ban system, and to make that work some stages might get taken out even if they don't 100% need the ban.

 

[MK26]

Veril, want facts? Here are some facts:

With AA posting his findings on Frigate, i thought i might as well post the results of my research on Lylat.

1) There are four different backgrounds:
Corneria (the planet)
The asteroid field
A space battle
One where there's a bunch of asteroids and a few small ships

2) You cannot go through the same background twice in a row. That is, you cannot warp from the end of a scene back to the beginning of the scene.

3) Pleiades' (that's the ship you're fighting on) path is COMPLETELY NON-RANDOM. It is directly linked to each of the four backgrounds. On each background, there is precisely one path Pleiades can take.

4) As far as I can tell, each of the stages (besides Corneria) have two different start points and two different end points. All of these points are along the same line. If S and E denote start and end, respectively, the paths for these three backgrounds are basically:

S1..........S2..............................E1..........E2

Start and end points are independent of each other - just because you start at S1 doesn't necessarily mean you will end at E1.

5) The Corneria background is always the same: The ship comes out of the warp, leans to one side and stabilizes (several consecutive incerasingly small leans), plunges into the planet's atmosphere, leans to one side and stabilizes again, stays straight for about 20 seconds, comes out of the atmosphere, leans to one side and stabilizes for the third time, then quickly warps. The time between warps is approximately 38 seconds.

6) I didn't specifically check the times or flight patterns for the other locations, though I am certain that Pleiades takes the same path every time for each background and only the start and end points are different. Depending on whether the start or end is early or late, the background takes around 30 to 50 seconds before switching.

Unfortunately, even with all the hacking tools available to us, I couldn't decode anything that might help us better understand the stage. (For those of you that are fluent in BrawlBox, there's a stageposition file in STGSTARFOX_GDIFF/2/ModelData[100]/3DModels(NW4R)/stageposition; in Brawlscape, it's simply inside Lylat Cruise (GDiff). It might be worth trying to decipher it.)

And Cape did make a cp/banned list, ive got it in the op as well

 

[bobson]

That said the general tone of the discussion here is extremely hostile, and I think I'd rather just talk with Cape than deal with this honestly.

I'm probably responsible for most of that, and I apologize. I assumed I'd just be ignored, so I went with my standard overly-inflammatory attitude when I came in. It's something I'm trying to stop doing.

Fact: Lylat's tilting is random.

Randomness doesn't mean anything if it doesn't affect anything. It's still very easy to recover properly.

Also, Lylat's tilting is based on the background, so you could feasibly memorize each of the backgrounds' tilting and bypass quick judgement entirely. Most people don't do this because it's pointless when recovering properly on the fly is so easy anyway.

It is very good as a conservative stagelist with only a few mistakes like Lylat and PS1. I'm moreso arguing against conservative stagelists in general.

 

[lord karn]

The advantages aren't "horrendously stupid" and I challenge you to find a top player losing to a mere above-average one because of them. "Top tier due to stages" doesn't exist, there's just top tier. If a big chunk of the stages benefit a certain character type, then that character type is good on a lot of stages; as long as competition still functions and the advantages aren't overpowering, this isn't a problem. It's much better to tweak the characters themselves slightly than remove a huge portion of the game.



Because it removes something. More is good. More stages, characters and so forth mean more gameplay elements, which means more depth. In reverse, less is bad. Less things mean less depth. We want more depth, that's why we started this in the first place. Why are we removing it for minor reasons?
Cape's list adds that dynamic, but it comes at the cost of removing more than half of the game and a lot of depth, which is not something I can see as a reasonable loss by any stretch of the imagination.



There's a big difference between deciding that banning anything that isn't absolutely broken is bad and deciding which things should be banned to "optimize" competitive play.

There is still no reasoning as to why the removal of something is necessarily bad. Removing things does not always correlate with removing depth from the game. The dynamic that Cape's list (or one similar) adds IS depth. The banning of those stages makes that depth possible. Honestly, having a bunch more levels doesn't really add much depth. It just means you have to learn how to play on a few more levels, but the kind of depth that Cape's set creates is, in a sense, deeper. Learning to play on a new level isn't really that hard, but being able to analyze your opponent's playstyle/character and figure out which level you should ban/counterpick is. Essentially what I am saying is that the kind of depth that Cape's set adds is 'deeper' than the kind of depth added by having lots of stages.

Either way, a competitive ruleset should foster competitive play. If something hinders competitive play, then it should be banned. Now, it's arguable as to what hinders competitive play. But saying, "Things shouldn't be banned because things shouldn't be banned" is a pretty silly argument. Rather, if the criteria for banning something is competition, you should prove why banning certain things does not promote competitive play.

 

[SaltyKracka]

There is still no reasoning as to why the removal of something is necessarily bad. Removing things does not always correlate with removing depth from the game. The dynamic that Cape's list (or one similar) adds IS depth. The banning of those stages makes that depth possible. Honestly, having a bunch more levels doesn't really add much depth. It just means you have to learn how to play on a few more levels, but the kind of depth that Cape's set creates is, in a sense, deeper. Learning to play on a new level isn't really that hard, but being able to analyze your opponent's playstyle/character and figure out which level you should ban/counterpick is. Essentially what I am saying is that the kind of depth that Cape's set adds is 'deeper' than the kind of depth added by having lots of stages.

Either way, a competitive ruleset should foster competitive play. If something hinders competitive play, then it should be banned. Now, it's arguable as to what hinders competitive play. But saying, "Things shouldn't be banned because things shouldn't be banned" is a pretty silly argument. Rather, if the criteria for banning something is competition, you should prove why banning certain things does not promote competitive play.

Ever hear of a certain thing called MK? Yeah. That's where your argument's leading. Ooh, and chaingrabbing. And tilt locks. And MK. Think about that for a second.

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

Sorry for not reading back like 12 pages but is cape's list being endorsed by anyone? It's ****ing stupid.

Following stages hover between legal and CP in vBrawl.
Delphino Plaza (DP)
Lylat
Castle Siege
PS1
Halberd

5 very good stages, all either CP or banned.

Pictochat is obviously a CP. The list is ridiculously conservative; I know Brawl+ is trying to speed things up, but I looked at Cape's reasoning and it basically came down to "at a given random time in this stage the stage itself may or may not make camping slightly more viable" on a lot of stages. What? Lylat? Sure, tilting screws some stuff up. So? It's not a stage where the slightest error will get you killed (Port Town lol), it just means you have to play a slightly safer air game to not get lag (which is also reduced IIRC?). The list seems overly conservative. You mean to say that with all of our hacking abilities, our list of legal stages is smaller than the list in vBrawl?

 

[MK26]

Sorry for not reading back like 12 pages but is cape's list being endorsed by anyone? It's ****ing stupid.

i lol'd heartily

and the melee back room

 

[Shadic]

You're completely missing the point.

The CP system becomes ruined if you have too many CP Stages. It's like if Wifi Waiting Room and Final Destination, AND frozen Pictochat were all CPs. If you were a spammy character (Falco) and were going for a flat stage to laser spam, your opponent can only CP one of the three against you, still leaving you with what you were essentially going for before.

 

[MK26]

Just because two stages are similar doesnt mean theyre the exact same thing

 

[FrozenHobo]

laser spam on FD will be the same on frozen pictochat, even if picto's top and bottom boundaries may be different. he's not trying to limit stages, he's trying to limit repeat strategies. the reason those stages are in CP/Ban is so TOs can choose whether or not to add them at their discretion. if a TO feels that Delphino and Halberd should both be used despite having similar strategies then that tourney will allow it, whereas if a TO feels that having both would be redundant then they can just keep them in CP/Banned.

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

Who said anything about Frozen pictochat? I meant with obstacles. But yeah, okay, I get the point. Still bothersome. >.>

 

[KOkingpin]

I agree with Capes list with the exception of Lylat. PS1 kinda led to camping even in Melee when the stage would change. Who in their right mind would go under the tree on the left side while fox was sitting there waiting for you. (or Peach) OR go down at the foot of the mountain. The Grass stage was the only Balanced Change that the stage really had and the starting point is just like Frozen PS2 with crappy ledges.

Lylat is a good stage. the Tilts help with sliding from aerials (Which brinstar has like 9 points where that happens) and unlike Brinstar it has ledge that can be grabbed with a Phantasm side b you just have to time it right with the tilts. I really just dont see how that stage isnt a CP at all. Its almost good enough to be a Starter stage.

 

[Vinnie]

And another:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=62qyx9BdYFc

Lol that's me!

 

[wWw Dazwa]

Cape's list is phenomenal, truly a shining beacon of hope, balance, and brawl+. Your counterpick list is remarkably designed, and your starter list is a beauty in its own right. Truly you are ahead of your time in stage-listery, it can only be assumed that you and your list will go down in history with Shakespeare, Ghandi, Obama, Meta Knight, and the rest of your worldly-influential peers.

 

[MK26]

dazwa, vids of you playing brawl+ with this stage list, or it didnt happen.

Same with teh rest of you mbr'ers

including cape

 

[XIF]

So I don't really know whats going on, but I do know that this topic was linked in the MBR, and that Umbreon has called upon my unique services. So all i've gathered is that Cape posted this phenomenal stage set for brawl+ and judging from the 200 or so posts after it there's been some dispute. I'm glad Umbreon asked for me, because I have just what this topic needs.

 

[RPGsFTW]

Is it just me, or do all lists that I see have a Counter Pick system as stupid as ours.

Ours:

1.) Loser chooses stage.
2.) Winner is allowed to change character
3.) Loser is allowed to change character

^Why the hell does the winning person get to change characters AFTER the CP stage is chosen? I hate seeing a DK CP Brinstar for nothing because the opponent (winner, at the time) just swaps to Meta Knight. >=[

I think it should be that the winner is allowed to change their character first, if they want to, then the loser picks the stage. >=[

Why is this how it is?!

And XIF, that second chick is ****ed ugly. Butter face.

 

[MK26]

OSHI-

MBR conspiracy theory confirm- boobs! (because t--- is censored lol)

RPGs: so teh loser of the first game (and, by extension, the loser of the second game) cant guarantee a win in the next game by counterpicking you on both stage and character

 

[XIF]

Is it just me, or do all lists that I see have a Counter Pick system as stupid as ours.

Ours:

1.) Loser chooses stage.
2.) Winner is allowed to change character
3.) Loser is allowed to change character

^Why the hell does the winning person get to change characters AFTER the CP stage is chosen? I hate seeing a DK CP Brinstar for nothing because the opponent (winner, at the time) just swaps to Meta Knight. >=[

I think it should be that the winner is allowed to change their character first, if they want to, then the loser picks the stage. >=[

Why is this how it is?!

And XIF, that second chick is ****ed ugly. Butter face.

Why are you looking at her face?

and the idea is that you choose stage to get your best stage, and then they pick character so as to not be completely boned, but then you get to counter their character pick thereafter to still retain the advantage.

numbnuts.

 

[RPGsFTW]

There's no guarantee anymore. Dedede doesn't infinite, MK isn't ridiculous. I don't think those rules should be applied anymore. =P

Isn't there some other kind of CP ruling out there?

Yeah, but XIF, MK WAS a universal CP, and people DID do that. =/ He isn't really now, but it's still stupid, I'd say.

 

[Joshu]

Why are people arguing about stages? That's the last thing that needs to be discussed.

Now that Sailor Saturn has officially been banned from tournaments in Bishoujo Senshi Sailor Moon Super S: Shuyaku Soudatsusen we need to discuss reevaluating the current tier list. Since she is banned, I don't think she has any place on the tier list and since the tier list is based off of matchups many characters placings will be changed dramatically.

Originally, the tier list looked like this:

Sailor Saturn Tier:
Sailor Saturn

Who Cares Tier:
Everyone who isn't Sailor Saturn


Obviously, this has changed and we need to get this updated. I think the biggest change is that Sailor Pluto will now be the best character in the game. Since Sailor Saturn's 2x4ing is not an issue anymore, we have to take into account Sailor Pluto's 2x4ing ability, which has always been weaker than Sailor Saturn's (enough to not make her tournament viable, anyway). However ,since she is now the only character that can still 2x4, I think it's obvious that Sailor Pluto will be top tier, most likely in a tier of her own. Since she can't spam aerial fireballs, however, I still believe this makes her tournament viable.

As for other top tier characters, I find that Sailor Mars and Sailor Uranus make for strong candidates. Sailor Mars's fire attacks have great priority and damage, while Sailor Uranus has unquestionably the best zoning game of all the cast (minus Sailor Saturn, which isn't an issue anymore).

Those are my current thoughts on the metagame, what about you guys?

 

[Isatis]

Okay, seriously, I appreciate the MBR's discussion in all of this and welcome their comments, but this isn't the place to post risque photos.

 

[MK26]

Bishoujo Senshi Sailor Moon Super S: Shuyaku Soudatsusen

Thats a ****in long-*** title...*googles*

Also, Bio, you didnt quite manage to get rid of everything...

EDIT: what comments? besides kink reaper, all theyve beenn doing is spamming

EDITEDIT: lmfao the gamefaqs forum has a grand total of 1 topic on this game...

 

[Kaye Cruiser]

Why are people arguing about stages? That's the last thing that needs to be discussed.

Now that Sailor Saturn has officially been banned from tournaments in Bishoujo Senshi Sailor Moon Super S: Shuyaku Soudatsusen we need to discuss reevaluating the current tier list. Since she is banned, I don't think she has any place on the tier list and since the tier list is based off of matchups many characters placings will be changed dramatically.

Originally, the tier list looked like this:

Sailor Saturn Tier:
Sailor Saturn

Who Cares Tier:
Everyone who isn't Sailor Saturn


Obviously, this has changed and we need to get this updated. I think the biggest change is that Sailor Pluto will now be the best character in the game. Since Sailor Saturn's 2x4ing is not an issue anymore, we have to take into account Sailor Pluto's 2x4ing ability, which has always been weaker than Sailor Saturn's (enough to not make her tournament viable, anyway). However ,since she is now the only character that can still 2x4, I think it's obvious that Sailor Pluto will be top tier, most likely in a tier of her own. Since she can't spam aerial fireballs, however, I still believe this makes her tournament viable.

As for other top tier characters, I find that Sailor Mars and Sailor Uranus make for strong candidates. Sailor Mars's fire attacks have great priority and damage, while Sailor Uranus has unquestionably the best zoning game of all the cast (minus Sailor Saturn, which isn't an issue anymore).

Those are my current thoughts on the metagame, what about you guys?

...What. THE. Hell. Is wrong with you? That's my current thought. XD;

If this is some elongated joke of sarcasm..well you're trying too hard. It ain't funny. ¦D The Sailor Soldiers may look sexy in a Black Dog doujin but this is Smashboards, isn't it? XD

Edit: Also I'm googling this game. ¦3 [/hypocrite]

 

[Isatis]

Also, Bio, you didnt quite manage to get rid of everything...

EDIT: what comments? besides kink reaper, all theyve beenn doing is spamming

Busy night...

Only a few people were spamming, there have been some good points made by others though. Regardless, infractions have been issued sadly

 

[XIF]

Okay, seriously, I appreciate the MBR's discussion in all of this and welcome their comments, but this isn't the place to post risque photos.

no you a-hole.

 

[Swordplay]

i feel like im preachin to the choir but here it goes.

Fist and most importantly

counterpicking is and always has been about banning strategies.

thats why you counterpick characters. to get a matchup advantage because strategies work for you against their character and their strategies that were effective become less effective. I'm sure you can think of great examples of matchups your main struggles with but you have a secondary to help with a particular matchup because the character your counterpicking has strategies that become less effective against you or your stratagies become more effective against them.


the same should apply for stages. counterpick strategies not stages. what that means is that if you can't counterpick a stratagy because the same stratagy is on every stage. THEN WHATS THE ****ING POINT

Secondly

Is it just me, or do all lists that I see have a Counter Pick system as stupid as ours.

Ours:

1.) Loser chooses stage.
2.) Winner is allowed to change character
3.) Loser is allowed to change character

^Why the hell does the winning person get to change characters AFTER the CP stage is chosen? I hate seeing a DK CP Brinstar for nothing because the opponent (winner, at the time) just swaps to Meta Knight. >=[

I think it should be that the winner is allowed to change their character first, if they want to, then the loser picks the stage. >=[

Why is this how it is?!

And XIF, that second chick is ****ed ugly. Butter face.

thats dumb, in vb, if winner chooses character first, they'll always pick meta on the counterpick because he is the safest, and can't be stage or character counterpicked so no matter what, choosing metaknight on the counterpick is the best choice.

 

[VietGeek]

It is how it is simple due to the nature of currently accepted stage lists in Smash. The conservative direction would make it so such rules would and could be deemed obsolete.

Other (and very likely more mechanically sound) traditional fighting games only allow the loser to re-select since more often than not the counterpick system really only deals with character vs character. Smash and its plethora of "unique" stages that can easily tilt the balance of the match made it rather odd to uphold such a rule.

 

[Veril]

I support this stage list, and am not in the mbr. Their presence here is awesome though. Maybe B+ hate from some of the hardcore melee players will decrease... dare I dream.

 

[The Cape]

<3 Veril.

Veril 2 gudz.

So why did this discussion wear down?