I can't (nor am I going to) please everyone. If you decide to play a character that only has good matchups against top tiers on counterpicks, that's your problem.
I've already figured the reason you want 7 starters is so you can strike BF, FD, and SV and force your opponent to pick between one of four counterpick-worthy stages.
BF, FD, and SV are BY FAR the most starter-worthy stages in the game. Zero stage hazards, flat throughout, no gimmicks. I can name at least one ideal that every stage on that list breaks, except for those 3.
A starter list's goal should be the attempt to minimize the amount of interference a stage has on the first match of a set. Ideally in concept, we'd have every single legal stage as a gigantic starter list. This is because a "starter-worthy" stage is
match-up dependent. When we whittle away each opponent's best and worst stages, we reach a stage where
both characters are simply "okay" with - an equal first match.
This doesn't happen with three stages. It's not a fair starting match when we don't whittle down to an "okay" stage, what we whittle down to is "X character's least best." Why not just choose a single "most neutral" stage at this point then? Let's just all play on Smashville.
"But when you eliminate all stage bias, the best characters are going to win."
I agree - they do and should. But it seems your mistaking
stage bias in a match-up with
stage bias in a vacuum. We're aiming to remove the former. Lack of damaging hazards does not make a fair starter, lack of "gimmicks" does not make a starter - a stage is only a starter when both characters are "okay" with it.
With shortening the starter list you're only adding bias, not eliminating it.
I can also explain how FD is actually one of the worst starters. When considering Brawl overall - a lack of platforms and closer space - FD is actually one of the more polarizing and powerful CPs in the game.
I can also explain how I'm not being biased.
Seven starters isn't my secret plan to throw my CPs into the starter list, but simply the best solution to our fifth stage complaints. The three stages you mentioned are actually my favorite in the game - along with being (IMO) some of Peaches best stages. You're just being silly now.
As for the timer, tell me what preconceived notions you have that 8 minutes is better. You'll know why a 7 minute timer is a better option once you do that.
I always assumed it was the time a stock took times three...? I dunno really, that's why I asked.
If I want a 7 minute timer, I also want measures to be taken to prevent blatant forms of stalling. 150% is an extremely fair kill percent for Dedede, what would be the player's reasoning to go any higher? To shave some time off the clock, of course.
If you get grabbed at 120% on, say, the rooftop transformation of Delfino, and get stuck against one of the walls, Dedede could go for a good 30 seconds, well over a feasible kill percent. It's simply unnecessary, that's just one example.
I'd agree with Z, 150% seems a bit low.
)
