Meta Competitive Smash Ruleset Discussion

[Pazx]

@ Oracle

how did you forget about the entirety of asia and oceania (minus japan)

also your stage list is kinda.... eeeeeeh. I don't suppose you can edit the form?

 

[Amazing Ampharos]

@ Oracle

how did you forget about the entirety of asia and oceania (minus japan)

also your stage list is kinda.... eeeeeeh. I don't suppose you can edit the form?

He just omitted every non-contentious stage from the list (since a vote on the legality of Smashville is meaningless; we all know it will always be legal). I'm actually not sure what he omitted other than Windy Hill Zone (which is actually legal at some set of tournaments at least local to me)... but somehow I think we'll live with that omission. It's actually a shame he incorrectly spelled the stage name of Kongo Jungle 64, but hopefully everyone will know which stage he means anyway. His poll seems to hit up every major point of common ruleset debate as far as I can tell.

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

@ Oracle quick thing on survey design here... I kind of take issue with the "with problematic customs banned" option, because it's unclear what the question is. If there actually are customs which are a problem for competitive play, of course I think they should be banned. But given what people call "contentious" around here, I can't help but feel like I'm stuck with an impossible choice - either I'm voting for "customs on never ban anything ever regardless of how dumb it is", or I'm voting for "customs, but ban Kong Cyclone and Trip Sapling and Exploding Ballon Trip and Heavy Skull Bash and Dark Fists and and and...". Could you please clarify this point?

Also, what's Pilotwings doing among those other stages? That stage isn't contentious, everyone knows it's completely broken. Is that our control or something? Like, to make sure people are paying attention? That really should be Kalos or something instead.

 

[Pazx]

He just omitted every non-contentious stage from the list (since a vote on the legality of Smashville is meaningless; we all know it will always be legal). I'm actually not sure what he omitted other than Windy Hill Zone (which is actually legal at some set of tournaments at least local to me)... but somehow I think we'll live with that omission. It's actually a shame he incorrectly spelled the stage name of Kongo Jungle 64, but hopefully everyone will know which stage he means anyway. His poll seems to hit up every major point of common ruleset debate as far as I can tell.

Norfair, Kalos, OGA (which I despise but can recognise... some sort of competitive merit), Luigi's, WHZ and a question about walkoffs were the obvious omissions to me (obvious given that they're all better than Pilotwings). I also agree with BPC's comment about the customs question, it was something I would have preferred not to answer in all honesty. It wasn't a bad set of questions by any means but it could and should have been fine-tuned if it aims to be the form that gets spread around the entire community.

 

[Thinkaman]

Banning customs that can be used to stall indefinitely against unknowledgeable players (Villager) is heavy-handed and dubious, but is at least a coherent and well-defined position to hold.

Banning Kong Cyclone is even more dubious, but I can still understand why someone would hold this opinion. It's a stupidly designed move that is simultaneously boring and stressful to play against, and is especially cruel to inexperienced players; almost all of us would nerf/change Kong Cyclone significantly, given the chance. It just nonetheless seems jarring to want to ban a move from a non-top-tier character for being "too good."

Banning Thunder Wave or any other such move is only worth discussing if practical infinites are discovered.


Beyond this, I don't really buy the slippery slope arguments. Like, does anyone actually want to ban Heavy Skull Bash, Luma Warp, Dark Fists, Jumbo Hoops, or any other strong custom options? If so, these are people we can safely ignore.

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

Beyond this, I don't really buy the slippery slope arguments. Like, does anyone actually want to ban Heavy Skull Bash, Luma Warp, Dark Fists, Jumbo Hoops, or any other strong custom options? If so, these are people we can safely ignore.

Dude, do you really have to ask? This is the Smash community.

 

[Thinkaman]

Dude, do you really have to ask? This is the Smash community.

Well, let me be more clear.

Is there actually a non-trivially-sized bloc that wants one of these moves banned and isn't just trolling to get all customs banned?

 

[deepseadiva]

Pretty excited to see the results of the poll. Seems a poll like this hasn't been used before on this scale? Is social media just getting stronger and useful for these kinda things? Or am I just noticing

 

[John12346]

Interestingly, this poll can also serve to show how good certain regions are about spreading news and information, maybe...

 

[kackamee]

Banning customs that can be used to stall indefinitely against unknowledgeable players (Villager) is heavy-handed and dubious, but is at least a coherent and well-defined position to hold.

Banning Kong Cyclone is even more dubious, but I can still understand why someone would hold this opinion. It's a stupidly designed move that is simultaneously boring and stressful to play against, and is especially cruel to inexperienced players; almost all of us would nerf/change Kong Cyclone significantly, given the chance. It just nonetheless seems jarring to want to ban a move from a non-top-tier character for being "too good."

Banning Thunder Wave or any other such move is only worth discussing if practical infinites are discovered.


Beyond this, I don't really buy the slippery slope arguments. Like, does anyone actually want to ban Heavy Skull Bash, Luma Warp, Dark Fists, Jumbo Hoops, or any other strong custom options? If so, these are people we can safely ignore.

I feel that banning a move just because it heavily punishes players who don't know how to combat it is a terrible criteria to try and fill.
Just because you don't know how to beat it doesn't mean it shouldn't be allowed. You should learn how to beat what is strong, it's a part of competition.
If it proves over a span of events to be "too problematic", then I think is the time to consider bans.

On a side note: I'm scared of the effect that this polls results will have. I'm more so concerned that people who have not given customs their due respect and time, will vote to have customs banned, and our chance to really try custom moves will be gone forever. I hope that it isn't the case, but I think it's too soon to ask the public opinion on customs when they haven't been given a legitimate fair chance to work themselves out yet.

 

[Strong-Arm]

Imo its way too early to start banning any customs yet lol. Customs have been legal for what? like a month and a half. Its way to early to ban anything yet. Stuff like Kongs custom upB can be easily neutered (Links bomb for example) so its not like those moves are OP. I think it just has to do with people and the general lack of care or knowledge towards customs. They see something and freak out cause they don't know what it is instead of learning it. I have yet to encounter and overly broken custom yet really.

 

[LiteralGrill]

I'm going to be honest... I don't care at all about the poll because it was so horribly done. We used to do polls like this on /r/smashbros that had some serious quality to them and he can't even get all the stages people have discussed nor spell some of them right. Not to mention there is a serious lack of options for answering questions on the stages. I'm going to make my own very detailed poll to cover everything and get it spread out, I'll pop it in here as soon as it's approved but you guys will be able to see the difference a LOT.

 

[RobinOnDrugs]

I'd be content with either 2 stocks with Bo5 or 3 stocks with Bo3.

I feel like Oracle's poll should have mentioned the option of Bo3 or Bo5 when it comes to the ruleset as well.

 

[LiteralGrill]

THE ULTIMATE SMASH 4 RULESET POLL​

It's on the front page of Smashboards and stickied on /r/smashbros. This thing has the chance to have more eyes than any other poll before it, so let's make this happen.

 

[Thinkaman]

My only complain is that I think 2 stock vs. 3 stock should be a question of preference, with 5 levels.

Additionally, character main questions are weird for us oddballs who... don't have those, but that isn't a big deal.

 

[Oracle]

I'm going to be honest... I don't care at all about the poll because it was so horribly done. We used to do polls like this on /r/smashbros that had some serious quality to them and he can't even get all the stages people have discussed nor spell some of them right. Not to mention there is a serious lack of options for answering questions on the stages. I'm going to make my own very detailed poll to cover everything and get it spread out, I'll pop it in here as soon as it's approved but you guys will be able to see the difference a LOT.

Are you really going to make an entirely new poll because you didn't like a few things with mine, except your poll copies my format to a T? This is extremely childish and selfish. I already have thousands of responses, and even if the data isn't exactly the way that you think it should be, it's USEFUL DATA. But now that there are two polls, people could get confused on which they should vote on, or they might not vote on yours because they already voted on mine.

There are a ton of better ways to handle this than what you have just done; I could go back and add options to the poll, as well as allow people to change their responses once I've done so, and you could have just messaged that to me or posted it here, but instead you chose to make a new poll so you could take credit and get the 'fame'. Newsflash: I didn't do this to get notoriety or fame, I did it FOR THE COMMUNITY. Most of the people didn't even know I made the poll! If you actually had the community's best interest in mind you would have done one of a thousand other things besides making a new poll, which divides the community on another issue, which is WHAT I'M TRYING TO HELP FIX IN THE FIRST PLACE. Please take down your poll, if you have changes you think I should make to the poll, feel free to list them here and I can do so.

As for everyone else's concerns, thanks for the tags. Forgetting to add south/latin america and asia were oversights that just slipped my mind, I've added then to the poll now. I also added a "none of these stages" and an "other" option to the stagelist. I think you should be able to go back and edit your response, someone would need to check for me though because I'm not sure.

 

[LiteralGrill]

Are you really going to make an entirely new poll because you didn't like a few things with mine, except your poll copies my format to a T?

Let's start here. If this is the poll that you made then it had a LOT of problems. There were stages spelled wrong, it lacks any sort of details on selected stages, doesn't mention Miis nor Omega stages which are hot topics in the community. Not to mention it originally there were no options to not say you wanted one of those stages legal, gave no options to say if people wanted stages banned, forget to mention doubles only stages, never mentioned stages people would like tested, never considered the folks who want FLSS for stages vs Starter/Counterpicks since that skews poll results (which I know from the past), never included stages people already assume legal to see what results they might bring, missed loads of stages that have been contested upon and had discussion within the community, lacked any way for people to comment as to WHY they made their decisions, didn't include a stock count and timer option that's commonly debated, the way character mains were asked for make getting end results much more difficult, and lacked a way for anyone to explain the reasoning behind their choices.

TLDR: I didn't just take your poll and copy a few questions, I restructured the entire thing, added more details, and overall made it a lot better.

This is extremely childish and selfish. I already have thousands of responses, and even if the data isn't exactly the way that you think it should be, it's USEFUL DATA. But now that there are two polls, people could get confused on which they should vote on, or they might not vote on yours because they already voted on mine.

The data from voluntary polls already has issues as is, but unfortunately the way you formatted your poll the data really ISN'T that useful. It misses far too many things to do so.

There are a ton of better ways to handle this than what you have just done; I could go back and add options to the poll, as well as allow people to change their responses once I've done so, and you could have just messaged that to me or posted it here

Most people will not go back to the poll even if you make changes to change their responses in any way. Unfortunately that means a fresh poll that asks everything is required to actually get all of the results. Not to mention you want everyone taking the SAME poll, not half the people who took it one way and half the people who took it after adjustment were made.

but instead you chose to make a new poll so you could take credit and get the 'fame'. Newsflash: I didn't do this to get notoriety or fame, I did it FOR THE COMMUNITY.

If you think I'm being selfish or just making this for fame or something else you're really on the wrong track. I don't need anything like that, I'm just a guy who has a lot of time on his hands stuck at home who uses Smash to keep busy and have fun and that's all I want it to be. I'm disabled and on a fixed income, writing is the closest thing I can get to having a "job" and feel like I can still contribute something to the world. Not to mention this disability makes it hard for me to play the game so this is one of the only ways I can contribute to something I love. So to be as polite as possible, you know nothing of my motivations nor have any right to comment on them as they are very personal and a highly emotional subject.

Most of the people didn't even know I made the poll!

Well I write for Smashboards and other writers are around. All it would have done is to send one message to someone and maybe more people would have known. Not my fault that you lacked that initiative. half of what I showcase and write about comes from folks who directly give me news tips, could have been one of them.

If you actually had the community's best interest in mind you would have done one of a thousand other things besides making a new poll, which divides the community on another issue, which is WHAT I'M TRYING TO HELP FIX IN THE FIRST PLACE. Please take down your poll, if you have changes you think I should make to the poll, feel free to list them here and I can do so.

I wont be taking down the poll. Sorry, it's being spread across a lot of channels now and taking it down will just cause more confusion. To be harsh if you want to do work for the community do it right the first time and put more effort into it. Your idea and what you wanted to do was a good thing but the execution was honestly just too poor to be used. I am sorry if doing this or saying these things somehow offended you because the last thing I need or want to do is make someone upset, but the truth is the truth.

 

[Oracle]

Can you at least send me the link to your results so I can attempt to incorporate them into the study I'm doing?

 

[NekuShikazu]

While I don't understand any of your lives, and much of this event, plagiarism could have been avoided if you asked for permission to begin with.

 

[T0MMY]

Let's start here. If this is the poll that you made then it had a LOT of problems.

To be honest it was obviously working off that poll. If you saw a lot of problems with it you could have offered to help improve it and get a poll both of you and the community could be happy with. Because, honestly, your poll isn't perfect either - "always room for improvement"

I went ahead and filled BOTH out.
Since, y'know, I'd rather try to have an honest effort to improve things.
Interested in seeing the results for both polls.

 

[Timbroslice]

THE ULTIMATE SMASH 4 RULESET POLL​

It's on the front page of Smashboards and stickied on /r/smashbros. This thing has the chance to have more eyes than any other poll before it, so let's make this happen.

Oh wow, that poll is almost word for word the same thing with a couple different options. That's borderline plagiarism.

 

[LiteralGrill]

Can you at least send me the link to your results so I can attempt to incorporate them into the study I'm doing?

Well the results are gonna be available to the entire public in about a week, so just look then and it's all fine.

 

[Pazx]

You guys who are claiming plagarism clearly haven't actually answered the second poll as it has many additional questions which the first one was admittedly lacking.

 

[erico9001]

If this is truly for the community it shouldn't matter who it came from.

I'm interested to see if there are any differences between the polls.

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

Hey @ LiteralGrill , while you were copying that poll, you also copied the single most problematic part about it - that stupid "customs that are problematic" bit. SERIOUSLY WHAT DOES THAT EVEN MEAN.

 

[CyberHyperPhoenix]

Hey @ LiteralGrill , while you were copying that poll, you also copied the single most problematic part about it - that stupid "customs that are problematic" bit. SERIOUSLY WHAT DOES THAT EVEN MEAN.

My understanding of it that it means that customs are a problem or a nuisance to the current metagame.

Something like that.

 

[LiteralGrill]

My understanding of it that it means that customs are a problem or a nuisance to the current metagame.

Something like that.

Pretty much this, some people like certain customs but find others to be a pain. And that got a surprisingly high number of results so far.

 

[kackamee]

I would imagine that it would get many results. People who have only played with customs for a little while, got dumpstered by wind Kong, then decided they want to ban it before learning how to beat it, would naturally pick that choice over the other two.

Edit: In terms of the whole poll for poll thing, Oracle, you shouldve probably got someone to proof read it before putting it out there. It was a bit lackluster admittedly. Capps, you shouldve probably asked permission, or at least waited until his poll was finished.

 

[LiteralGrill]

Enjoy this for what you will:

There was a problem fetching the tweet

 

[DavemanCozy]

I'll just ask to access my music then in future matches.

By the by, Enthusiast Gaming Live! this weekend in Canada. Note the starter list:
Battlefield
Final Destination
Lylat Cruise
Town & City
Smashville

http://live.enthusiastgaming.com/super-smash-bros/

Progress!

 

[SuaveChaser]

The change from 2 to 3 stock would be tough for me. I like melee/pm more and the 2 stock format help the match pacing feel natrual having to shave off a extra stock will be tough and make somewhat unenjoyable. I hope there will still be places running 2 stock.

 

[DavemanCozy]

THE ULTIMATE SMASH 4 RULESET POLL​

It's on the front page of Smashboards and stickied on /r/smashbros. This thing has the chance to have more eyes than any other poll before it, so let's make this happen.

From my non-US view:

Canada shouldn't be lumped together like we all have the same player-base. From where I live (just outside of the Greater Toronto Area), it takes me less time to reach Michigan than to reach Montreal. Both Ontario and Montreal, for example, have their own tournaments that are separate from each other. Travelling from one province to the other can take up to 12 hours. Then there's British Columbia, who have their own region separate from ours as well. It takes a very long time to reach BC from Ontario, let alone Quebec.

EDIT: I also know that Ontario does not like custom moves in majority. I'm sure that's not necessarily true for all of Canada.

 

[New_Dumal]

The major argument against 3-stocks battles were they are too long, boring to watch.
I'm honestly distant from Customs-ON metagame, but I'm watching competitive Smash 4 with frequency.
And I'm not seeing long/slow games anywhere.

Okay, we saw Dabuz in APEX.
Some people (most of community and viewers) don't like Dabuz play-style that much, or at least in this tourney.
But I'm guilty enough to say, since I was a Pit player in Brawl, and camped out my enemies as much as I could.
So yeah, there will be some characters/players that will play their slow matches...
But they're a few in Smash4. Smash4 is defensive, but it is not Brawl, or it isn't developed that well yet.

I just wrote about this because...
I will be very surprised if 2-stock wins over 3-stock in this poll.
I'm not saying this pool will be used by any TO at all, but yet is a info.
If we take only metagame players in consideration, we will have someone as good as Zero talking about how TOWN AND CITY is unfair and should be a counterpick...
And actually, we stage-strike starters already.I'm anxious and worried about this future results.

EDIT: I would be okay if polls stays 2-stock, and top 16 turns to 3-stock.
It's weird to change the number of the stocks in the middle of the tourney, but saves time for TO's.
And someone who don't know how to play 2 or 3 stocks, must be punished anyway.

 

[T0MMY]

I suggest Swiss Bracket: 3-stock, Best of One.
Take the top 8 out of that and then do usual bracket: 2-stock, Best of Three.

Works great for weeklies and smaller events, although keep in mind Swiss isn't very efficient for large numbers of people. Round Robin Pools may be substituted in that case if needed.

 

[smashmachine]

why only show that and not the rest of the results?

 

[LiteralGrill]

why only show that and not the rest of the results?

Fun? It's an issue I see a TON of and figured people might find the results interesting. I don't want to show EVERYTHING in case it changes (especially the close parts) but with obvious majorities unlikely to change that can be fun to look.

 

[Cyrrona]

This might sound pedantic, but I wish the customs compromise choice said something like "with specific customs banned" instead of "with customs that are problematic banned." The latter suggests that certain customs are indisputably problematic right now, and that kind of implication might discourage respondents from choosing the other custom option.

Regardless, thanks to @ Oracle and others for taking this initiative.

 

[Oracle]

Well the idea is that the only reason you would want to ban customs is if some were problematic to the metagame Ie degenerate or broken. Determining the criteria for that isnt really something you would put in a poll

 

[Becko]

Hey guys, for those of you who don't know me I'm SamuraiPanda. Old school smasher who played a role in the original rulesets of Brawl and helped TO many different tournaments in the past (although never ran my own). I'd like to open a discussion on the rulesets that we should use going forward with Smash 4. I'll outline each section with a header and give my 2 cents. A lot of this includes options hat we have and then my personal opinion. Some topics are too large to discuss in this thread and I'll try to provide a better place to discuss them.

And if I'm stepping on any toes here Shaya, then just give it a lock. I'll just shift my reasoning to respective threads that already exist later on.

KEEP IN MIND that 3DS tournaments will likely be few and far inbetween once the Wii U version is out, so many of these rules are tailored for the eventual Wii U tournament scene rather than specifically playing to the strengths of the 3DS. Also if you have options or ideas other than those stated here then please share them!

FORMAT

How many stocks/how much time should we run?

Options:
- 3 stock 8 minutes (Brawl rules) best of 3
- 2 stock 5 minutes (Sakurai's For Glory mode format) best of 3
- 2 stock 5 minutes best of 5

Arguments =
- [3 stocks]
Many pro players like M2K advocate that 3 stocks is the most "fair" in a competitive match. They believe this is the best test of skill and allows appropriate time to read your opponent, get read, and read back in return. They believe combacks are more possible and leads to closer matches overall. 3 stocks were first used as tournament standard at the beginning of Brawl's life. IIRC we either rarely used or never used 4 stocks in Brawl tournaments because it was clear at the beginning of the game's lifespan that Brawl was not as fast as Melee and so Melee's rules should not apply.

- [2 stocks bo3]
(a) Competitive Smash Bros tournaments take a VERY long time. Absurdly long compared to other modern fighting games. 8 minutes is the length of a best of 3 set normally. Smash tounaments run all day and night while other fighters can be fit in half a day's time. 2 stocks would alleviate a lot of that. It would be easier to find venues because they don't need to be open so early/late, more players would have time to attend, etc
(b) It is much easier to go UP on stocks later in a game's life than go DOWN on stocks. This is because the relative impact on competitive gameplay of going UP on stocks is much less than the impact of going down.
(c) [thanks to @popsofctown for this] Players in the future who have trained on For Glory mode and are now looking for in-person tournaments to test their mettle will find this to be easiest to transition to, and players who want to practice online will be able to practice in this format as well.

- [2 stocks bo5]
The time equivalent of 3 stocks best of 3. This format is simply a variance on the current default Brawl ruleset that some believe could lead to more exciting matches, larger variety of stages/counterpicks/characters used, and other various things which would improve the overall competitive metagame. Still has the advantages of B and C from the previous argument.

My personal preference = 2 stocks bo3 at the beginning of Smash 4's lifespan. Even if Smash 4 turns out to be a SIGNIFICANTLY faster game than we currently have, I think 2 stocks would help alleviate many of Smash's underlying tournament issues. I believe that fatigue in tournaments is a very important and very real problem in Smash. The number of people getting to grand finals and just wanting to split because its 2am and they're exhausted would be cut down, and I've seen perfectly legitimate grand finals have absolutely no hype at all because a best of 5 set followed by a reset to another best of 5 set when each game was nearly 8 minutes long is draining to both players and viewers. Additionally, finding venues that are open early/late enough and running tournaments all day long would be a concern of the past.
\
EDIT2: Thinkaman and Amazing_Ampharos also a thread with data illustrating that times are not too different between 2 stock and 3 stock.

How should we run the tournaments?

Options:
- Swiss format for pools/early matches, then top 8/16/whatever uses traditional double elimination
- Double elimination for full tournament
(Open for more suggestions)

Arguments =
- [Swiss to double elim]
This format favors the 3DS. To be honest it is not very viable for tournament play on the Wii U simply because of time it would take to run a tournament. Inifinty, a TO from Texas, did a great write up on why Swiss would be ideal for 3DS (among other things). Some arguments brought against this idea by people who have run large scale Mario Kart and Pokemon 3DS tournaments are that Wifi instability is very difficult to deal with, and Wifi tends to become unstable with a large number of people connecting at the same time. The conversion to double elim later on is to preserve hype and interest.

- [Double elim]
Traditional format, time tested to be more-or-less one of the best ways of testing skill (Swiss is superior here though) while running a smooth and fast tournament. For logistical issues, this will likely be the de-facto format for Wii U tournaments in the future.

Personal preference = Double elimination. People playing the 3DS version are practicing Smash 4 for the eventual Wii U release. I don't think people should have to adapt to new formats they are uncomfortable with just for a month.


STAGES

What stages should we use?

Let's not discuss this huge topic here. Please refer to this thread for further discussion.

How should stage selection work?

Options:
- Random stage selection from a given "starter" list
- Rock Paper Scissors for first stage selection from a given list prior to selecting characters
- Stage striking
- For Glory Mode (IE ONLY FD AND OMEGA STAGES)
(Open to more suggestions)

Arguments =
- [Random stage]
You will have to pick a character for your first match with enough versatility to fit all stages in this "starter" list and not be signfiicantly weak to one. Limits character selection.

- [RPS]
Both you and your opponent have time to consider who to play on the given stage. Player who wins the RPS can clearly choose the stage best for them.

- [Striking]
This is the given format for Smash tournaments now for a reason. While not a perfect solution, it is by far the best option we've had in tournament play since the inception of competitive Smash bros.

- [For Glory Mode]
(thanks to @popsofctown for this) Players in the future who have trained on For Glory mode and are now looking for in-person tournaments to test their mettle will find this to be easiest to transition to. This severely limits viable character choice and limits variety in competitive play. It may allow for a larger early and middle-lifespan fanbase, but it would likely severely hinder the longevity of the game.

Personal preference = Yeah I didn't really hide that clearly stage striking is the best from this list in my opinion. I'd find it hard for anyone to argue that one of the other points here is superior to striking. There are other suggestions I've seen floating around for a ruleset superior to stage striking but nothing viable quite yet.

How should stage banning work?

This is really up to the TO for how many stages they allow you to ban. I believe this should reflective of the number of stages they have but again its up to them. However, in this section I'd like to address a big issue people have been sleeping on (IMO). Omega stages, which are the "FD" versions of almost all the stages in the game. They have SLIGHTLY different properties form FD. There may or may not be differences in blast zones (yet to be tested extensively) but stage length is the exact same among all of them. They have 5 different platform types apparently though; Pillar, Floating, and Wall formats. The exceptions being the Mother stage and Arena which may have slightly different properties to these three (thanks to @ParanoidDrone for the info).

How should we address Omega stages in tournament play? Specifically in banning?

Options:
- Banning FD bans FD+all Omega stages
- Banning Omega bans ALL Omega stages, but they are separate from FD
- Omegas are all individual stages
(Open to more suggstions here)

Arguments =
- [Ban FD+Omega together]
When banning stages in competitive play, you are USUALLY banning to get rid of a "type" of stage. When someone bans FD against the Ice Climbers, that means they want a stage with platforms to utlize vs the ICs. Similarly, some characters will be extrodinarily strong on flat stages vs flat+plat stages and otherwise. Little Mac is the perfect example of a character who will without a doubt thrive on a flat stage. By combining the ban, you are allowing players to ban the entire flat stage "type" at once. In tournaments with only 1 stage ban but allowing FD and Omega, how can ban out that type?

- [Banning Omega bans ALL Omega stages]
Yes Omega stages have different properties between them so lumping them all together may be "unfair" to certain stages. However this may be the best solution for the aforementioned "type" banning.

- [Omegas are individual stages]
If you run this, then your tournament better have 20 stage bans.

Personal preference = Banning Omega bans ALL Omega stages. This does not mean you cannot ban individual Omega stages you may not like (Warioware's Omega seems HUGE) but it allows you to ban the full "type". Lumping FD+Omega together IMO causes an unfair lumping. Not all Flat+plat stages are lumped together (i.e. Brawl Smashville and BF) so why should one ban cover every single version of a single, often-used type? Given, if there is only one version of a single type on a stage list (i.e. only one walkoff stage) then they suffer from that issue.


CUSTOM EQUIPMENT

This discussion should be focused in this thread. My favorite quote from the thread that perfectly reflects one of the biggest reasons I'm personally against equipment is from @Tristan_win :


CUSTOM SPECIALS

Discussion regarding SHOULD they be allowed should go to this thread. I also believe that Thinkaman's thread regarding the issue is a wonderful overview of the potential merits they could have for the competitive scene.

CAN they be allowed in tournaments?

Oh boy this is a loaded question that proves a large dichotomy between 3DS and Wii U. As it is now, YES they are easily possible for the 3DS and should be a TO decision whether they are or not.

However, for the Wii U to have Custom Specials usable in tournaments there will have to be a quick way to unlock everything for every Wii U. Likely if the 3DS can transfer unlocked specials over to the Wii U (and can do so for multiple Wii Us) then logistically they could work. If every Wii U requires as much time as it currently does on the 3DS to unlock custom special attacks for every single character in the game, then it is unlikely for custom specials to ever be legal in large-scale tournaments simply due to the difficultly and time required for unlocking for all of the Wii Us.

Miis Plz??
Should they be allowed in tournaments?

Ugh another loaded question. I wish this had its own thread to discuss I could redirect to.

Okay, again I'm going to talk about the LOGISTICS of Mii fighters in Wii U tournament play. There is NO ISSUE with Mii fighters for the 3DS and that is a TO-dependent decision to make. There IS however an issue for Wii U tournaments:

The balance of the Mii fighter depends on the height (and width??) of the Mii fighter.

Taller ones have longer reach and shorter ones are faster. If you were to main the Mii fighter, you would have a specific size you want to use. Logistically allowing Mii fighters for the Wii U would require standardized Miis to be used. And how to you make sure that PlayerXX who graciously brought his Wii U for you to use in your tournament is using the CORRECT standardized Mii and didn't paste the standardized Mii's face on a different size body? As a TO, checking every Wii U has the correct standardized Miis is absurdly difficult. And then you have to figure out WHO makes the standardized Mii and which Mii becomes the standard. That is a huge logistical nightmare.

There are TWO scenarios (I can think of) where the Miis would pose no issues being part of the Wii U tournament scene. The first lies in the reliability and speed of connecting a 3DS to the Wii U. If you can quickly connect to sync your Mii fighter via your 3DS without adding much time to a tournament, then they could work. The second is if they give us premade Miis with the Wii U version as well, allowing us to simply chose one of those to play with.

About Omega Stages
They should seriously put them in a few categories (wall fds; pillar fds; flat fds; and different proper fds) and ban all the omega's in that category only.
This might take time to make, but putting each fd in these categories (or something similar to these categories) it might be easier. Plus it might give omega stages much more thought in picking them and knowing which type of advantages/disadvantages would be pretty interesting)

 

[LiteralGrill]

Since I keep sharing, a few things on stages:

There was a problem fetching the tweet

There was a problem fetching the tweet