Meta Competitive Smash Ruleset Discussion

[oldkingcroz]

I don't really think the 2nd match in a set is in the winner of match 1's favor. Mainly because of the order of counter picking. The advantage for the loser is huge.

Captain Falcon banns FD and Duck Hunt, so Sonic chooses to go to Halberd. Falcon player stays as Falcon, because they won the last match and feel confident in the character, and Sonic switches to ROB or Palutina, characters that kill super early off the top. The character change is unknowing to the falcon player, and they're forced to play on a stage that isn't quite in their favor.
So, yes, stage first-> then character selection benifits the loser of match 1 a ton. Banning stages almost becomes futile, if your opponent plays more than one of dynamic characters: like Sonic (FD), DK (Battlefield & Lylat), Sheik (SmashVille), anyone who kills early off the top (Halberd & Delfino)- you can take your opponent to the best possible stage for your counterpick character, because your opponent was too busy banning against your previous character [Sonic].

I'd personally be in favor of counterpicking the character first, mainly because there is shenanigans that can be done on both sides in the current system.
"Oh, my opponent picked FD? Well in that case, I'm switching to Link".
Or
"Oh, my opponent banned FD and DH against my Sonic? Well, I'm picking Charizard on Delfino to get kills at 65%".

Nevermind this. EVO rules are: Character-> stage-> Custom moves. Not: stage-> character & customs as I originally thought.

 

[MajorMajora]

I don't really think the 2nd match in a set is in the winner of match 1's favor. Mainly because of the order of counterpicking. The advantage for the loser is huge.

Captain Falcon banns FD and Duck Hunt, so Sonic chooses to go to Halberd. Falcon player stays as Falcon, because they won the last match and feel confident in the character, and Sonic switches to ROB or Palutina, characters that kill super early off the top. The character change is unknowing to the falcon player, and they're forced to play on a stage that isn't quite in their favor.
So, yes, stage first-> then character selection benifits the loser of match 1 a ton. Banning stages almost becomes futile, if your opponent plays more than one of dynamic characters: like Sonic (FD), DK (Battlefield & Lylat), Sheik (SmashVille), anyone who kills early off the top (Halberd & Delfino)- you can take your opponent to the best possible stage for your counterpick character, because your opponent was too busy banning against your previous character [Sonic].

I'd personally be in favor of counterpicking the character first, mainly because there is shenanigans that can be done on both sides in the current system.
"Oh, my opponent picked FD? Well in that case, I'm switching to Link".
Or
"Oh, my opponent banned FD and DH against my Sonic? Well, I'm picking Charizard on Delfino to get kills at 65%".

Did I ever say the winner has the advantage? my bad. Anyways, don't we already CP the character first? I'm pretty sure that is what allows us to be informed on the stage CP.

 

[oldkingcroz]

It was a responce to BCE, Major.

And I'm pretty sure the stage is counter picked first, in EVO rules. Our Albuquerque local yesturday did it that way. It was either an error on our part (miscommunication) or a weird rule that EVO is doing. I'm gonna look into it.

Edit: Miscommunication.
It's Character first, then Stage, then custom moves. That's just weird. Disregard my last post XD

 

[BCE]

In other fighting games, stages don't do anything; if somebody stays character locked you essentially double CP them stage + character, allowing winner to change after you picked a stage mitigates the severity of the CP.
You ban two stages because you don't want to give the CPer an extreme advantage again.
You said the loser of game 1 is in a terrible state already while disregarding game 3; now the person who lost game 1 stays in a huge disadvantage because no bans and character locked.

there are other fighting games where stages really matter, injustice, soul calibur and doa are easy exemples. And in all these games, winner is char locked and cant say "i wont play in this ****ing allowed competitive stage because i dont want and deal with it"

 

[Ghostbone]

there are other fighting games where stages really matter, injustice, soul calibur and doa are easy exemples. And in all these games, winner is char locked and cant say "i wont play in this ****ing allowed competitive stage because i dont want and deal with it"

Other games aren't smash.

 

[NickRiddle]

there are other fighting games where stages really matter, injustice, soul calibur and doa are easy exemples. And in all these games, winner is char locked and cant say "i wont play in this ****ing allowed competitive stage because i dont want and deal with it"

The advantages aren't nearly as strong as advantages in Smash.

 

[BCE]

Other games aren't smash.

please, commentaries that smash is not a fighting game and should not use its logics to define its rules and unnecessary

 

[A_Kae]

please, commentaries that smash is not a fighting game and should not use its logics to define its rules and unnecessary

That's not what he was saying though.

Smash is a different game than what you mentioned. And because of that, the competitive community has different priorities with the rules.

Smash is a fighting game. That doesn't mean it should have the same rules as a different fighting game.

 

[BCE]

ok, i wont talk about injustice or soul calibur where stages are ridiculously in favor / against some chars, i just want one explanation, are you guys, seriously saying, that in smash 4, forget about melee, in smash 4, your sheik or your charizard is simply unplayable in at least one of the commonly used 10 stages ? if the loser chooses final destination sheik is so severelly cripped that is about sure the player will lose ? if someone agree with this, that means we have to ban that stage from the "competitive allowed"

 

[MajorMajora]

I always thought the ability for the winner to change character was courtesy. Like, if you want to play a different character that's cool. Of course, you're opponent can CP whatever you choose, so it's still fair.

And if we don't do this, it completely renders characters like little mac who get severe disadvantages from stages unplayable since you essentially get locked into an insta-lose game 2 if you play them game 1.

 

[Thinkaman]

And if we don't do this, it completely renders characters like little mac who get severe disadvantages from stages unplayable since you essentially get locked into an insta-lose game 2 if you play them game 1.

I think the only truly awful configurations we have are LM on Duck Hunt/Smashville/Dream Land, and Ganon on Duck Hunt in many matchups.

Others are bearable but less bad.

Keep in mind that this isn't just about game 2, but also game 3.

 

[BCE]

but in game 3, the rule: "the players cant choose the last 2 stages that happened a victory", in this scenario, the first game was decided to be battlefield, the second game the loser can freely choose final destination if he wants, the third game will be in one of the 8 remains stages chosen by the loser of the second game. The idea is that the last game will be on a stage out of their confort zone and the better player will be filtered

 

[BCE]

I always thought the ability for the winner to change character was courtesy. Like, if you want to play a different character that's cool. Of course, you're opponent can CP whatever you choose, so it's still fair.

And if we don't do this, it completely renders characters like little mac who get severe disadvantages from stages unplayable since you essentially get locked into an insta-lose game 2 if you play them game 1.

its not fair because the little knowledge of the loser player over the winner on his playstyle ( does he grab a lot ? does he like to pressure me with these attacks ? ) is completely discarded if you let the winner choose a totally different char, like the winner using charizard changing to rosaluma. This topic is not MY idea, is simply a basic logic rule used in EVERY other fighting game, smash has nothing specific about it that you can claim is a total different scenario from other games. And please, are you saying that there some stages insta-lose to little mac ? what are they ? basicly every other stage but final destination ? in this exemple, the mac player win in final, he is locked in the second game and the player chooses a insta-lose stage with some plataforms, the mac obviously loses, the winner is locked, mac can change char and choose any of the 8 stage remaining, how exactly this is not fair ?

 

[MajorMajora]

its not fair because the little knowledge of the loser player over the winner on his playstyle ( does he grab a lot ? does he like to pressure me with these attacks ? ) is completely discarded if you let the winner choose a totally different char, like the winner using charizard changing to rosaluma. This topic is not MY idea, is simply a basic logic rule used in EVERY other fighting game, smash has nothing specific about it that you can claim is a total different scenario from other games. And please, are you saying that there some stages insta-lose to little mac ? what are they ? basicly every other stage but final destination ? in this exemple, the mac player win in final, he is locked in the second game and the player chooses a insta-lose stage with some plataforms, the mac obviously loses, the winner is locked, mac can change char and choose any of the 8 stage remaining, how exactly this is not fair ?

So your reasoning is that it gives the loser more of an advantage? There are better ways of giving them more advantages (read: fewer bans) that add variety to the game instead of limiting it. Not to mention how used to the opponent's character the loser is is such a hard variable to make a fair ruleset around.

What I mean is this: we are trying to craft a ruleset where there is just the right amount of advantage to the loser, not too much not too little. Whether or not the opponent can change the character is one variable we can change in order to properly balance loser's advantage. However, this is a terrible variable to change because its effects are hard to predict and too variable. It depends on how experienced the players are with the new match up, how similar the new character is to the old one, and how well the 2 players know one another. What you are suggesting is a solution to a problem we may or may not have that, if we do have it, has a better solution already.

Not to mention there are a lot of bad things that happen if we implement this. It lowers the game's skill cap in a number of ways. It gives less reward to the ability to quickly adapt to the enemy, and it adds less variation to sets, which once again lowers skill cap in addition to making the game boring to watch. This is pretty much the opposite of removing stage bans, which adds to variation and skill cap. Also, your system makes characters with hard counters nearly unusable and further pushes character selection towards the 20XX style top-tier singularity we all fear and dread.

 

[Kaladin]

This all assumes anyone is stupid enough to use mac in tournament


I think whether or not character lock is on should be based on set length. Mac is a good example because he's so extreme and loses on duck hunt so badly, so we'll go with that. In a 2/3: P1 uses mac and beats P2's diddy (somehow). Character lock is on. In P2 stage counterpicks to Duck Hunt, and character counterpicks to ness. If both players are even close to even skill, that is an insta lose for Mac. His worst nightmare. Now we're at game three. P2 is character locked into ness. P1 pulls out the pocket Rosa everyone has, and shrekts ness' recovery with down B. As you can see, character lock in a Bo3 makes characters that have super polarizing stages and/or MUs unplayable, because assuming similar skill levels, whoever wins game 1 wins, period.

However, in a Bo5, we don't have that problem for obvious reasons, and character lock should at least be considered.

 

[BCE]

ness has a terrible recovery no matter what is the MU, lol. And using your specific example scenario, i really think that the player that won diddy using mac deserved this victory and should continue on the tourneament, dont you agree ? =p

 

[Ansou]

its not fair because the little knowledge of the loser player over the winner on his playstyle ( does he grab a lot ? does he like to pressure me with these attacks ? ) is completely discarded if you let the winner choose a totally different char, like the winner using charizard changing to rosaluma.

The thing is, this goes the same way for the loser. Sure, the winner has the option to be unpredictable by choosing a new character. But the loser can do the exact same thing and even counterpick at the same time. The loser still has the advantage because of that.

 

[Thinkaman]

This all assumes anyone is stupid enough to use mac in tournament

EVO money match?!?

 

[Kaladin]

The thing is, this goes the same way for the loser. Sure, the winner has the option to be unpredictable by choosing a new character. But the loser can do the exact same thing and even counterpick at the same time. The loser still has the advantage because of that.

That is an excellent point.

EVO money match?!?

If only I were going...

 

[ぱみゅ]

Customs aside, what's the competitive value of Team Attack On?
The other day I was at a dubs event with Team Attack Off, and other than being messy, and the fact you couldn't attack your teammate to help him, it wasn't much of an issue.

 

[Kaladin]

Customs aside, what's the competitive value of Team Attack On?
The other day I was at a dubs event with Team Attack Off, and other than being messy, and the fact you couldn't attack your teammate to help him, it wasn't much of an issue.

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=q69sHGY89v0

 

[BCE]

well, i would love to read an opinion from someone like zero, mewtwo king or even a TO like wizard

 

[Kaladin]

Customs aside, what's the competitive value of Team Attack On?
The other day I was at a dubs event with Team Attack Off, and other than being messy, and the fact you couldn't attack your teammate to help him, it wasn't much of an issue.

More seriously, team attack adds depth. Without team attack, you don't get manado kirby, villager pocket awesomeness, or any other cool plays. Further, a lack of team attack lowers both the skill cap and the skill floor. It makes it so less awareness of your partner is required, and makes team positioning less important because you can't hit your partner with a stray attack or save them.

 

[MajorMajora]

well, i would love to read an opinion from someone like zero, mewtwo king or even a TO like wizard

I legit laughed at this.

I can agree with TO's to an extent but pro players are not a good source of opinions on this. They may have hands on experience, but they are clouded by bias and personal agendas more than anyone else.

 

[NickRiddle]

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=q69sHGY89v0

Maybe Palu should have used Reflect against a double Megaman team?

 

[dav3yb]

Maybe Palu should have used Reflect against a double Megaman team?

considering she had customs i dont think it was available to her.

 

[ParanoidDrone]

considering she had customs i dont think it was available to her.

I think the unstated question is "Why didn't Palutena pick Reflect when playing against a Mega Man x2 team?"

 

[Ritios]

I'm new to competitve smash, but in my point of view, it should be only allowed one omega form stage, eg. Onet town, be cause it doesn't end on the screen. This stage should be treated like a normal stage, and you could ban FD and still play it.

 

[MajorMajora]

I'm new to competitve smash, but in my point of view, it should be only allowed one omega form stage, eg. Onet town, be cause it doesn't end on the screen. This stage should be treated like a normal stage, and you could ban FD and still play it.

Are you referring to the fact that it has ledges as opposed to being a floater? i can see where you're coming from, but that really isn't considered a big enough difference for a separate slot on the stage list.

 

[Pazzo.]

So the general consensus on Customs are we ban them post-EVO 2015?

 

[Illuminose]

So the general consensus on Customs are we ban them post-EVO 2015?

It's a little complicated...on this forum, probably not, but in general yes. Smash Con, TBH4, most likely Apex 2016, and CEO 2016 won't have customs which is pretty much the bottom line. Practicing for customs is practicing for nothing unless customs end up at EVO again next year (assuming Smash 4 is there). I'm sure we'll still see some regions running them although there won't be as many customs tournaments. Most of the major regions aren't too in favor of customs at this point though. Florida dislikes customs, Tristate is mixed (and SKTAR is no customs), and Cali dislikes customs. Japan and Europe both run pretty much nothing with customs. I would be surprised to see customs tournaments totally die out after EVO though in regions that really like them.

 

[19_]

It's a little complicated...on this forum, probably not, but in general yes. Smash Con, TBH4, most likely Apex 2016, and CEO 2016 won't have customs which is pretty much the bottom line. Practicing for customs is practicing for nothing unless customs end up at EVO again next year (assuming Smash 4 is there). I'm sure we'll still see some regions running them although there won't be as many customs tournaments. Most of the major regions aren't too in favor of customs at this point though. Florida dislikes customs, Tristate is mixed (and SKTAR is no customs), and Cali dislikes customs. Japan and Europe both run pretty much nothing with customs. I would be surprised to see customs tournaments totally die out after EVO though in regions that really like them.

Pretty much this. I wont be surprised to see some fallout in the customs meta. I think evo may have them again but seeing the constant hate from popular voices I would suspect they could be trying to make it look as bad as they can just so they can get rid of them. Hopefully people against customs are not vitriolic as they seem and don't go to such lengths to hurt this game's growing community just to prove a point. Regardless of what happens it is what it is. I don't like the idea of customs being kicked out for the time being but I will chose to adapt when others will not.

 

[SoniCraft]

I just hope they don't die forever...I'm keeping my fingers crossed that they'll come back a couple years later when the meta starts staling a bit.

 

[Thecombosetups]

If customs die out post evo what going to be the rule on the miis. Will they be able to use all of their special moves or be restricted to 1111?

 

[Kaladin]

If customs die out post evo what going to be the rule on the miis. Will they be able to use all of their special moves or be restricted to 1111?

Well, I'd hope miis get all their moves (cuz as I've said in the past, those little numbers are totally arbitrary). But then we have a slippery slope. Palutena has mii-esque customs. Should she get hers? But if Palutena gets hers, why not allow the rest of the cast?

It's silly.

 

[19_]

I just hope they don't die forever...I'm keeping my fingers crossed that they'll come back a couple years later when the meta starts staling a bit.

90% sure they will be back. More time goes buy the better chance they have. Customs are the future as paranoid as that sounds.

If customs die out post evo what going to be the rule on the miis. Will they be able to use all of their special moves or be restricted to 1111?

Most likely 1111 unless Coney manages to take a stand making 2222 and 3333 sets happen at xanadu.

 

[SoniCraft]

Honestly I don't think miis deserve any set other than 1111 if other characters don't get get them. You're just giving other characters more options. I don't think it matters how the characters are designed in the first place, we can still give the miis a standard they have to adhere to. I think it's only fair to limit the miis to one set like every other character is.

 

[b2jammer]

Well, I'd hope miis get all their moves (cuz as I've said in the past, those little numbers are totally arbitrary). But then we have a slippery slope. Palutena has mii-esque customs. Should she get hers? But if Palutena gets hers, why not allow the rest of the cast?

It's silly.

On that particular case, Palutena does have a default 1111 moveset, as crappy as it is, so she can be forced to use it. Miis, on the other hand, don't have any "default", as the fighters themselves have to be created before they can be used. IMO, this should be enough to ban Miis from competitive play, but if people want to use them, give them one moveset - doesn't have to be 1111 (although it probably should be), but they can only have one set of custom moves.

 

[MajorMajora]

Eh, I don't think it would necessarily hurt the meta if only miis got more options. I mean, it's not like the miis start overpowering all the competition and make other characters significantly less viable, and it still adds a fair amount of cool variation. Of course, if someone making a ruleset had that point of view, they would be legalizing customs regardless, so I'm not getting my hopes up,

 

[DeLux]

Wrote this about rules, seemed like an appropriate place to drop it -

http://smash4u.net/what-happens-in-vegas-should-stay-in-vegas/