Chatting with the BBR! Today's session cancelled :(

[Eddie G]

Alright, so I just played some money matches with a few friends of mine (a Pit main who is respectably skilled at the game, and two others a little above his skill level who main Metaknight and the other Marth) and some of our matches took place on Pokemon Stadium 2, PTAD, Green Greens, and Luigi's Mansion; and I must say...they're honestly not much of an issue at all, given a little open-minded observation. I'm neutral on Green Greens and Luigi's Mansion right now because I still need to play on those stages more and form a more complete perspective on them.

- Pokemon Stadium 2: The gameplay on Pokemon Stadium 2 closely resembled gameplay on Pokemon Stadium 1, and I play on the latter very often (it's my intended stage against MKs during stage striking), the air and ice portions (arguably the two most controversial forms due to their temporary effect on the physics of the characters) really do not degrade the quality of competition (or interfere with the aspect of competition itself, forgive my sub par wording) during a match. They both add another element for players to strategically use and watch out for, with no detrimental or broken factors included. In fact, I found the stage to promote even less camping and temporary halts to a match just from sheer stage layout alone, unlike its older counterpart. I really couldn't find anything wrong with the stage and it didn't grant either of us a significant advantage no matter what character we used from our respective pools, including my Metaknight. The stage, in my opinion, seems like a perfectly reasonable addition as a counterpick stage. Good choice, BBR.

- Port Town Aero Dive: You know...I'll admit that I used to refuse any association with this stage with a passion, just from my initial encounter with the stage's hazards. I didn't understand how to play on the stage correctly, but after a quick review of the detailed PTAD stage observation thread and how to avoid the hazards, I didn't get hit by any of the cars at all. I played on the stage a few more times to learn the order of the stage's transformations, and there are only a few portions that even present hazards, all of which are completely avoidable. This stage also adds an additional element to the gameplay: the "fight for the safe spot" factor, especially on the transformation that has the three platforms with the cars temporarily passing by underneath; both players must temporarily try to overtake the other and keep the safe spot for themselves. That's still competition, fighting to stay safe and put the other in danger/limit their options, plain and simple. After finally putting personal bias and beliefs about the stage aside, and actually researching it during gameplay, I didn't find it much different at all from playing on Mute City back in all of the Melee tournaments I went to. Mute City also had a specific concept about its layout. Both players had to fight to keep control of the edge-less platform during its floating duration, both players were susceptible to gimps and characters like Peach and Jiggs had an advantage because of their air-prone playstyles; they have an advantage there because it is a perfectly acceptible counterpick stage that just so happens to mold well with the way those characters play, that's perfectly fine, and by all means those players will utilize it if it's not struck by the opponent. I will give it a little more time, but as of right now I see Port Town as an acceptable counterpick stage. Those who do not understand...I'll be frank and say you need to play more Melee and/or try to become a little more mature when it comes to having a competitive perspective. It stretches far beyond your initial, possibly subconscious self-serving impression of what competition is.

I put aside any personal bias, tried everything out for myself, and can honestly say that I've overcome ignorance for the sake of enlightenment, and I'm glad I did. Thumbs up on those two stages, BBR.

 

[-Vocal-]

More people need to be like you, KB Unless I'm reading things wrong, you

A) Were firmly against the stages.
B) Tried them.
C) Changed you mind and decided that things you thought would be issues were not big deals after all.

I think this is what the BR is trying to get people to do, and I hope more people follow your example. Plus I'd count you as a top player so that gives your post even more weight with some people. (I forget exactly where you are on the Power Rankings, but I know you are high.)

 

[WindMajor]

+1 Respect for KBizzle, for actually trying out the stages with an open mind. Very good post. I especially liked this line:

Those who do not understand...I'll be frank and say you need to play more Melee and/or try to become a little more mature when it comes to having a competitive perspective. It stretches far beyond your initial, possibly subconscious self-serving impression of what competition is.

 

[Eddie G]

I've actually been demoted to an Honorable Mention and got overtaken by Fizzle (for now ), but I appreciate the compliment, thanks.

 

[#HBC | Dark Horse]

*applauds* Great job, KB.

And you're lucky your even mentioned in the PRs.

 

[Juushichi]

Alright, so I just played some money matches with a few friends of mine (a Pit main who is respectably skilled at the game, and two others a little above his skill level who main Metaknight and the other Marth) and some of our matches took place on Pokemon Stadium 2, PTAD, Green Greens, and Luigi's Mansion; and I must say...they're honestly not much of an issue at all, given a little open-minded observation. I'm neutral on Green Greens and Luigi's Mansion right now because I still need to play on those stages more and form a more complete perspective on them.

- Pokemon Stadium 2: The gameplay on Pokemon Stadium 2 closely resembled gameplay on Pokemon Stadium 1, and I play on the latter very often (it's my intended stage against MKs during stage striking), the air and ice portions (arguably the two most controversial forms due to their temporary effect on the physics of the characters) really do not degrade the quality of competition (or interfere with the aspect of competition itself, forgive my sub par wording) during a match. They both add another element for players to strategically use and watch out for, with no detrimental or broken factors included. In fact, I found the stage to promote even less camping and temporary halts to a match just from sheer stage layout alone, unlike its older counterpart. I really couldn't find anything wrong with the stage and it didn't grant either of us a significant advantage no matter what character we used from our respective pools, including my Metaknight. The stage, in my opinion, seems like a perfectly reasonable addition as a counterpick stage. Good choice, BBR.

- Port Town Aero Dive: You know...I'll admit that I used to refuse any association with this stage with a passion, just from my initial encounter with the stage's hazards. I didn't understand how to play on the stage correctly, but after a quick review of the detailed PTAD stage observation thread and how to avoid the hazards, I didn't get hit by any of the cars at all. I played on the stage a few more times to learn the order of the stage's transformations, and there are only a few portions that even present hazards, all of which are completely avoidable. This stage also adds an additional element to the gameplay: the "fight for the safe spot" factor, especially on the transformation that has the three platforms with the cars temporarily passing by underneath; both players must temporarily try to overtake the other and keep the safe spot for themselves. That's still competition, fighting to stay safe and put the other in danger/limit their options, plain and simple. After finally putting personal bias and beliefs about the stage aside, and actually researching it during gameplay, I didn't find it much different at all from playing on Mute City back in all of the Melee tournaments I went to. Mute City also had a specific concept about its layout. Both players had to fight to keep control of the edge-less platform during its floating duration, both players were susceptible to gimps and characters like Peach and Jiggs had an advantage because of their air-prone playstyles; they have an advantage there because it is a perfectly acceptible counterpick stage that just so happens to mold well with the way those characters play, that's perfectly fine, and by all means those players will utilize it if it's not struck by the opponent. I will give it a little more time, but as of right now I see Port Town as an acceptable counterpick stage. Those who do not understand...I'll be frank and say you need to play more Melee and/or try to become a little more mature when it comes to having a competitive perspective. It stretches far beyond your initial, possibly subconscious self-serving impression of what competition is.

I put aside any personal bias, tried everything out for myself, and can honestly say that I've overcome ignorance for the sake of enlightenment, and I'm glad I did. Thumbs up on those two stages, BBR.

I don't particularly like cosigning on people, but this is just about the same sort of experience that I've had in playing stages at OUGA events that have Port Town Aero Dive on. The only grievance I had with the stage was where I was just outplayed by my competition, and suspiciously my issue was gone when I was doing the same. I was actually playing PS2 against a friends metaknight as Falco and had secured the stable platform in the steel transformation and found myself in a wonderful position to defend and keep my advantage. Given the opposite, I would be hard pressed to get in (I've got opportunities however) but I think it's a perfectly viable strategy. This is just one such example I recognize, however.

Kudos for your work, KB.

 

[Raziek]

Huzzah, someone actually tested the stages and saw the idea. Your post gives me hope.

 

[B!squick]

First, the ruleset is not meant to be broad, the stagelist is.

And I'm not going to type out the long response to the second part of your post. Suffice it to say that there are much larger implication in the BBR instituting a LGL as opposed to TOs doing so individually; it would pave the way for much more argument.

I do feel your pain at the removal of the suicide rule, though. Then again, let me ask you out of curiosity: have you ever won a game this way in tournament? I'm really am curious, no hidden motives behind asking ^_^

I doubt anyone has won a tourny from a Bowsercide. As for me personally, I don't go to tournies. I'd love to, but I don't have the means or the money. I do frequent this message board ALOT and watch Smash vids almost religiously.

Now, as for friendlies, I have won with Klaw before, but in all the many months of play time I've clocked with this game, I could count the number times I've won with Klaw on one hand.

I can see why they'd disallow Klaw wins, but I just don't see the point of nerfing a bad character. :/

I'm more concerned with infinites and planking MKs which hurt more than just Bowser.

 

[-Vocal-]

Before someone else points it out, it's not a nerf if they're returning the game to its original state; the rule in 3.0 (or whatever the last one was) was actually a buff. Though if we lived in Europe you'd win anyways I do find it an interesting point that it's very rare for people to win with suicide moves though; probably the most common users of the strategy are Kirbies and DDDs, though they have many other ways of winning in the first place

 

[The Real Inferno]

Hrm. I have a lot to read.

I doubt anyone has won a tourny from a Bowsercide. As for me personally, I don't go to tournies. I'd love to, but I don't have the means or the money. I do frequent this message board ALOT and watch Smash vids almost religiously.

Now, as for friendlies, I have won with Klaw before, but in all the many months of play time I've clocked with this game, I could count the number times I've won with Klaw on one hand.

I can see why they'd disallow Klaw wins, but I just don't see the point of nerfing a bad character. :/

I'm more concerned with infinites and planking MKs which hurt more than just Bowser.

Looks like you're the only person that needs responding to. Everyone else is pretty much taking care of themselves.

HI!

Anyway. As I said. Klaw wins are legal. In fact, you should never lose if you klaw your last stock. Buffer jump. Problem solved. You won. GGs. Go read my last two posts for a more thorough response, but I won't be repeating that wall again.

As for infinites: Most games don't ban infinites. That's just a typical kind of fighting game things that I've experienced in the many different fighters I've been in the competitive scenes for. Good current example? Carl in BlazBlue. My personal opinion is, that infinites are fine, since to get caught in one usually requires you are either one of 5 characters vs DDD or fighting the ICs. I don't believe in discrimating against infinites based on difficulty as it amounts to the same thing: Buffing a character in a matchup they would otherwise suck in. Sure ICs require considerably more skill, but it's not really fair to nerf DDD because his doesn't require he turn around or buffer more imputs. Of course there are other infinites, every character has one on Diddy. To you ban that? How about all the ones on Wario? Or Zss on ROB? Where does it stop? It's a huge can of worms not worth opening and banning infinites almost always ends up treating some characters unfairly in the end.

And for planking: In my opinion, if someone is planking with MK, since it's nearly frame perfect (or is, I don't really recall) , it's just stalling. There's a rule for that I believe, as this makes the game literally unplayable, making it fall under this rule. An LGL doesn't affect MK much as he still has scrooging and air camping to fall back on. Other characters who tend to need to grab the ledge a lot suffer in an environment where someone can force them to the ledge and run up their limit then time out. For example. MK vs ROB (or anybody lol), he forces ROB to the ledge. ROB will generally need to regrab the edge several times in order to find a safe way back on. MK can just wait and keep forcing him back, racking up those ledge grabs through most of the match...then scrooge a time out or just generally run. ROB loses by LGL. Not fair is it?

There was a scrooging rule proposed, but we ended up not liking it for the same reason. Characters like Pit, ROB and Jiggz (and Charizard? lol) may need to go under the stage to get to a safe position, which is actually covered in our stalling rules as not counting as stalling. It requires you to set some kind of limitation in that case, which would normally be something like "not flying under it multiple times" but then THAT leads to what counts as multiple times? Do I need to fly under only once in a match? What if I do it again a minute later, is that not okay? And once again we've opened a can of worms.

 

[DaomarIsBear]

What's the problem with a LGL rule that only applies in the case of a time out? That shouldn't harm any character's ledge game unless they plan on taking the game to time, which should be counted as degenerate gameplay.

 

[The Real Inferno]

What's the problem with a LGL rule that only applies in the case of a time out? That shouldn't harm any character's ledge game unless they plan on taking the game to time, which should be counted as degenerate gameplay.

If you had paid close attention you would notice my scenario shows why that doesn't always work, because if you are forced over the LGL, your opponent can then try to time -you- out instead. Since you have more Ledgegrabs, you lose, even though you weren't trying to time them out with it.

 

[DaomarIsBear]

If you had paid close attention you would notice my scenario shows why that doesn't always work, because if you are forced over the LGL, your opponent can then try to time -you- out instead. Since you have more Ledgegrabs, you lose, even though you weren't trying to time them out with it.

Lol, sorry, didn't even see your post.

In the event that you're forced above a hefty enough ledge grab limit like 45 regrabs, I imagine you've played to the point where you're going to lose anyway. Sure this is rather arbitrary, but the current ruleset if filled with arbitrary rules.

 

[The Real Inferno]

The problem with that is of course, that it's possible then to plank intermittently enough not to run it up anywhere near that high. When I plank, I run about 30 with Pit. It's all so hard to define well. The LGL seems like a really good rule on the surface, but it opens up the door for so many other problems. But yeah if you were forced to grab the ledge 45 times by the opponent, you're probably getting your *** kicked.

 

[DaomarIsBear]

The problem with that is of course, that it's possible then to plank intermittently enough not to run it up anywhere near that high. When I plank, I run about 30 with Pit. It's all so hard to define well. The LGL seems like a really good rule on the surface, but it opens up the door for so many other problems. But yeah if you were forced to grab the ledge 45 times by the opponent, you're probably getting your *** kicked.

You're timing people out with thirty ledge grabs?

Of course the rule will be flawed, but without anything else, how do we properly stop people from abusing planking to the point where the other player can't win?

 

[The Real Inferno]

lol I've timed people out with ZERO ledge grabs. As I said before. Planking to that extreme should just fall under stalling in my opinion. They should lose the game automatically for doing it in the first place, there doesn't need to be a LGL for that.

 

[-Vocal-]

I know an answer. But no one likes it

 

[da K.I.D.]

After reading and participating in the ruleset thread and reading most of pages 1, 2, 6, and 7. Ive decided that I would like to express my interest in joining the BBR.

i would have applied in the application thread before, but I was in a position in my actual life where I didnt think it would be beneficial for me. I have since changed my mind about this and would like to see if I can still be admitted.

 

[The Real Inferno]

You got to be pro like me and read every single post in there, man. I don't want things to stray off topic right now, but I know there is a new application coming up soonish, you should definitely get in on that. As for me, that will have to be all the questions I answer tonight as I away to my chambers. *whoosh*

 

[DaomarIsBear]

lol I've timed people out with ZERO ledge grabs. As I said before. Planking to that extreme should just fall under stalling in my opinion. They should lose the game automatically for doing it in the first place, there doesn't need to be a LGL for that.

Lol, well yes there is that. But we're only concerned about planking leading to timeouts do to the inability of the other player to do anything about it, right?

How do we monitor whether or not people are planking to win?

 

[The Real Inferno]

Lol, well yes there is that. But we're only concerned about planking leading to timeouts do to the inability of the other player to do anything about it, right?

How do we monitor whether or not people are planking to win?

*shrugs* The only time it was an issue at one of my tournaments, I was called over to look at the guy planking. I then had him forfeit the game and play another one, citing him as stalling. He then fought a regular game. We had no LGL at that tournament, but that's how I handled it.

 

[DaomarIsBear]

*shrugs* The only time it was an issue at one of my tournaments, I was called over to look at the guy planking. I then had him forfeit the game and play another one, citing him as stalling. He then fought a regular game. We had no LGL at that tournament, but that's how I handled it.

I feel as though this method has just as many flaws as a LGL rule.

 

[MarKO X]

*shrugs* The only time it was an issue at one of my tournaments, I was called over to look at the guy planking. I then had him forfeit the game and play another one, citing him as stalling. He then fought a regular game. We had no LGL at that tournament, but that's how I handled it.

What exactly did the player do within the planking that made you feel as though you needed to DQ him/her?

 

[The Real Inferno]

What exactly did the player do within the planking that made you feel as though you needed to DQ him/her?

Hit his opponent once and then literally grabbed the ledge as MK for 8 minutes without leaving it (vs. Falco if you care). He didn't complain and actually beat his opponent in a legit match afterward and we all moved on with our lives. I simply told him why I considered this to qualify under the No Stalling rule and he said okay and that was that.

 

[moomoomamoo]

Seeing how some of the questions followed the idea of "Is BBR (re)discussing -insert bla bla bla-, and if not will BBR (re)discuss -insert bla bla bla-," wouldn't it be a good idea just to keep a stickied thread listing all the topics that are floating about in the BBR. It wouldn't have to have any hints to its outcome or have any main detail outside the fact that it is being discussed. This would illustrate that the BBR is doing a lot more than sitting around and would prepare our mindset for any maybe changes coming our way as a community. I think one of the biggest factors that made this new change in the rule list a huge miss is that the changes sorta came out of no where.

 

[gallax]

We made this thread to let the community in on what we were discussing.

 

[The Real Inferno]

I get what he's saying. Something that basically lists like:

Things the BBR is currently discussing.

Stalling Discussion
Ban Mario Discussion
75m Discussion


Something like that only less stupid.

 

[moomoomamoo]

I get what he's saying. Something that basically lists like:

Things the BBR is currently discussing.

Stalling Discussion
Ban Mario Discussion
75m Discussion


Something like that only less stupid.

Exactly. This way after 20 pages of questions, the same questions don't reappear. Also the list can include things like "Will be discussing...". Maybe if the BBR is up to it, the thread can have due dates and etc. Most important, it would save a lot of time to just type up everything that is being discussed and what is planned to be discussed (or rediscussed).

 

[C.J.]

You mean like this:
http://www.smashboards.com/showthread.php?t=264241

 

[The Real Inferno]

I think he meant a more specific list of exactly what topics were being discussed. That topic doesn't really accomplish that, but I don't think we could really post exact topics either.

 

[gallax]

You mean like this:
http://www.smashboards.com/showthread.php?t=264241

I knew we had this somewhere lol.

 

[MarKO X]

Hit his opponent once and then literally grabbed the ledge as MK for 8 minutes without leaving it (vs. Falco if you care). He didn't complain and actually beat his opponent in a legit match afterward and we all moved on with our lives. I simply told him why I considered this to qualify under the No Stalling rule and he said okay and that was that.

No LGL, and yet the MK player gets DQ'd for abusing the ledge.

I got 5 questions right off the bat concerning this, but this isn't a ban MK thread, so I'll leave it alone.

 

[Jack Kieser]

Wow, I just realized Pierce locked the v3.0 thread and moved the discussion here. Well played, sir. I'm glad to see this thread is devoid of trolling / flaming.

I have a couple of questions. First of all, I noticed that T-block is only posting writeups of certain stages (I guess the most controversial), but all of those stages are ones that ended up legal. Are there any plans to get writeups for stages that were just narrowly banned, too?

I ask partly because my second question is, what was the Skyworld discussion like in the Back Room? I've always been confused about Skyworld and why it was considered as bad as it is... Just a curiosity of mine.

As always, please and thank you.

 

[-Vocal-]

Wow, I just realized Pierce locked the v3.0 thread and moved the discussion here. Well played, sir. I'm glad to see this thread is devoid of trolling / flaming.

I have a couple of questions. First of all, I noticed that T-block is only posting writeups of certain stages (I guess the most controversial), but all of those stages are ones that ended up legal. Are there any plans to get writeups for stages that were just narrowly banned, too?

I ask partly because my second question is, what was the Skyworld discussion like in the Back Room? I've always been confused about Skyworld and why it was considered as bad as it is... Just a curiosity of mine.

As always, please and thank you.

Oh god. You want SKYWORLD legal?

Jack, I can agree to many things, and I have only a few doubts about this stage list (though I'm willing to try it).

But Skyworld would be a step way too far.

If you destroy the ground, there are no ledges. This is terrible for tether characters - this isn't just bias it's fact, and it's incomparably worse than PTAD for the fact that there is no track to bounce tether characters back up.

Second, if the ground is destroyed but the upper level is intact, someone can be hit with a Usmash, bounce off of the upper level , and go flying downwards if he is still in hitstun. Many moves have low trajectories, yes, but none of them send you from standing on the stage to directly down towards a blastzone.

But the biggest issue I see is the no ledge threat in combination with the blast zone at the bottom. Destroying the stage here is not a good enough justification for the stage since it can go wrong in many different way.

Jack, please don't take away ledges and put a blast zone directly underneath us and allows some characters to send you directly down towards that blast zone with no ledge for you to recover with. I do not have a problem with stages being good for a character, but that large of a buff is simply broken.

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

Also, minor cave of life and severe overcentralization around Metaknight AFAIK. As far as a counterpick being "too good", we should probably draw the line before or just barely after Brinstar; I'm going to guess that Skyworld is not only better for MK than Brinstar, but way better.

I'm more curious about Onett, personally.

 

[-Vocal-]

Also, minor cave of life and severe overcentralization around Metaknight AFAIK. As far as a counterpick being "too good", we should probably draw the line before or just barely after Brinstar; I'm going to guess that Skyworld is not only better for MK than Brinstar, but way better.

I'm more curious about Onett, personally.

You're completely right about that becoming MK's best stage. All he would have to do is destroy the ground in ordinary combat with you and then hit you off, punishing your attempts to land without a ledge. Kind of irrelevant to my character since all he has to do is hit me out of my second jump or send me out far enough, but we're looking at the bigger picture here.

Onett...I don't know enough about this stage and I haven't played on it enough myself. I'm staying out of this one.

 

[da K.I.D.]

isnt there 4 ledges on skyworld(6 if you count the bottom scrolling platform)? keeping all 4 of them broken at once (or even the two on the side your edgeguarding) seems unfeasible.

 

[-Vocal-]

isnt there 4 ledges on skyworld(6 if you count the bottom scrolling platform)? keeping all 4 of them broken at once (or even the two on the side your edgeguarding) seems unfeasible.

Against MK, I can somewhat see your point. I can see many characters feasibly being able to travel to one of the outside ledges to return to the stage, but this is theorycraft and would require gameplay testing.

However, you're forgetting the part where I can be hit in a nearly vertical downward direction, far from those other ledges. MK cannot abuse this as his Usmash is not very good, but others can. That is what makes this threat particularly lethal, and why it doesn't really seem worth it to discuss the other ledges because they won't matter. If you get hit by Falco's/Marth's/Pikachu's/ROB's or several other character's Usmash (and perhaps even some characters utilt [more theorycraft]) the chances of you recovering are not very good.

I wouldn't use moving to another part of the stage as a good way around this either. As I pointed out before, the ground will oftentimes break in the process of ordinary combat and there may not be time to run to a safer position. This I have seen with my own eyes - the threat is real and far too dangerous to be legal.

Side note: I'm not sure if we're allowed to discuss this here or not

 

[John12346]

MK also has a teleport glitch on Skyworld.

Use Drill Rush from underneath a breakable platform, hold up, and he phases through the platform to the top just as the attack finishes(assuming, of course, MK didn't break the platform during the attack).

Also, at Vocal, couldn't MK's grounded UpB serve for his "upward spike" in the bottom center of the stage?

 

[MetalMusicMan]

Skyworld is a pretty broken stage, imo. Constant stage-spikes from the "ceiling" platforms followed by inability to recover from the broken platforms not having ledges. It's not like Port Town, where if you miss the ledge you just take some extra damage.