Don't Ban Stages that seem the "same"

[Tbro]

I hope we don't always have hazards off. It makes FoD, Dreamland, and Yoshi's Story all just Battlefield Clones and makes stages like Lylat and Pokemon Stadium less fun

 

[TheBuzzSaw]

Sorry if my post sounded rude, that was not my intention (my native language is not english).
The intention was to show that the whole discussion is turning in circles with no progress beeing made, while the solution (from my point of view) is obvious and simple.
I just don't see the point of banning ~70% of the aviable stages because one tiny little thing in the stage deems it as "not viable for tournaments".

And I would love to organize a tournament for the german scene, but with the time I have to spend on my daily job this is (sadly) not possible.
I did hower organize or at least helped with some smaller Tournaments on local conventions, so I have some experience (~50 player Tournaments).

But if you like my ideas - where exactly do you see a problem for TOs with the idea I (and I think others, too) have suggested?
This is not meant to be rude, but from my personal experience with participating in tournaments and organizing / helping smaller tournaments I think this would even help TOs. Less time spent on stage banning / striking would lead to more time for matches and quicker tournaments in general. And time is almost always the main concern I hear when talking about stage selection in Ultimate.

Maybe I just can't see the bigger point since I don't have enough experience. Maybe those problems only rise up if the playerbase of the tournament is over 100 participants.

I would love to hear what you deem problemativ with the proposed idea, after all I, like everybody else here, want this game and the tournament scene for it to be the best, to be truly "ultimate".

When I first started hosting Melee tournaments, the first stage was randomly selected. So, leveraging the random stage selection has precedent in Smash tournaments. There are a few key differences between the old Melee days and today.

The first big one is the fact that Melee only had like 5 - 7 neutrals in the random list. This means that, when it comes to setting up the tournament, the TO (or even the players) can pull up the random list and quickly verify it's correct (with a single glance). With Ultimate, making sure the random list has the legal 20 - 40 stages configured correctly requires more prep time, which is difficult if you are relying on players to bring full setups (still a thing in small communities). Also, as I brought up before, we're still awaiting a few details on the Ultimate stage selection system. Can hazard and non-hazard variants of stages share the same random pool? Can Omega and Battlefield variants be added to the pool?

In my opinion, the best solution to all this complexity is to create a mobile app (with a web page version as a backup). This would mitigate having to explain a bunch of subtle rules and instead just present players with a super simple wizard. This would also allow us to use our own arbitrarily complex random selection algorithm. Plus, it would just be nice to visibly see only legal stages rather than having to mentally filter out all the banned ones. Granted, this goes against your desire to have the rules so simple that they hardly need explaining, but I propose this path as a way to wrangle the quantity/complexity and keep as many stages legal as possible! (And I'm a programmer, so I would even happily help develop such an app.) Another option, which I've seen TOs do, is print out and laminate really nice cheat sheets.

I hope we don't always have hazards off. It makes FoD, Dreamland, and Yoshi's Story all just Battlefield Clones and makes stages like Lylat and Pokemon Stadium less fun

This 1000%. The hazard switch is a godsend for competitive Smash, but I hate seeing people suggest that we should just use it across the board. Why break perfectly valid stages? I adore Frigate Orpheon, and I think the rotation should be kept in. It has minor jank, but it doesn't ruin sets.

 

[Kleric]

.

Heyo! You seem like the most experienced and credible person in the thread regarding the matter.

If I may ask, what is your take on the idea of simply removing stage striking as a thing in Ultimate? Is there any possibility for major abuse if counter picking is literally just like: Loser picks a stage among all those that are legal?

It just seems like a too good to be true fix on why people want to ban "similar" stages.

 

[TheBuzzSaw]

Heyo! You seem like the most experienced and credible person in the thread regarding the matter.

If I may ask, what is your take on the idea of simply removing stage striking as a thing in Ultimate? Is there any possibility for major abuse if counter picking is literally just like: Loser picks a stage among all those that are legal?

It just seems like a too good to be true fix on why people want to ban "similar" stages.

I actually did not like the introduction of stage striking, but I think I understand why it came about. I think returning to random stage selection for Ultimate makes sense due to the sheer quantity of legal stages, but I'm still waiting to see how that will work. There are still the confounding factors I brought up in my previous posts. I'm not worried about abuse. Direct counter picking is part of the experience. The losing player has an opportunity to hopefully take the winning player to a stage where the losing player has more knowledge or character advantages, but it's largely considered fair as the winning player has had plenty of opportunity to study all the legal stages prior to the tournament.

I'm just guessing here: the attempt to ban similar stages comes back to logistics. More is better for players/spectators; less is better for TOs and refs. I don't agree with the decision to ban stages for committing the crime of being similar to an existing legal stage, but I do understand the need to make stages bans/strikes meaningful. Short of treating all Battlefield-layout stages as a single bannable category, banning a triplat stage has literally no effect.

(Mind you that I have my opinions, but they may not align with those of the greater community. I'm just basing my responses off my time and experience running and attending tournaments.)

 

[Kleric]

I actually did not like the introduction of stage striking, but I think I understand why it came about. I think returning to random stage selection for Ultimate makes sense due to the sheer quantity of legal stages, but I'm still waiting to see how that will work. There are still the confounding factors I brought up in my previous posts. I'm not worried about abuse. Direct counter picking is part of the experience. The losing player has an opportunity to hopefully take the winning player to a stage where the losing player has more knowledge or character advantages, but it's largely considered fair as the winning player has had plenty of opportunity to study all the legal stages prior to the tournament.

I'm just guessing here: the attempt to ban similar stages comes back to logistics. More is better for players/spectators; less is better for TOs and refs. I don't agree with the decision to ban stages for committing the crime of being similar to an existing legal stage, but I do understand the need to make stages bans/strikes meaningful. Short of treating all Battlefield-layout stages as a single bannable category, banning a triplat stage has literally no effect.

(Mind you that I have my opinions, but they may not align with those of the greater community. I'm just basing my responses off my time and experience running and attending tournaments.)

Alright, I was just wondering if I was missing something that could be abused. If abuse isn't an issue, it still seems like counter picking is one of the root issues on why having all the non-degenerate stages legal becomes convoluted. As you mentioned "Short of treating all Battlefield-layout stages as a single bannable category, banning a triplat stage has literally no effect". This is only a convoluted issue if stage striking is a thing to begin with.

I am starting to think this as something strong to be considered. If we just have the actual in-game rules set to "loser picks", wouldn't the only thing TO's would have to make sure of is that the stage being played on is legal? Or am I missing something? :0

 

[Necro'lic]

I actually did not like the introduction of stage striking, but I think I understand why it came about. I think returning to random stage selection for Ultimate makes sense due to the sheer quantity of legal stages, but I'm still waiting to see how that will work. There are still the confounding factors I brought up in my previous posts. I'm not worried about abuse. Direct counter picking is part of the experience. The losing player has an opportunity to hopefully take the winning player to a stage where the losing player has more knowledge or character advantages, but it's largely considered fair as the winning player has had plenty of opportunity to study all the legal stages prior to the tournament.

I'm just guessing here: the attempt to ban similar stages comes back to logistics. More is better for players/spectators; less is better for TOs and refs. I don't agree with the decision to ban stages for committing the crime of being similar to an existing legal stage, but I do understand the need to make stages bans/strikes meaningful. Short of treating all Battlefield-layout stages as a single bannable category, banning a triplat stage has literally no effect.

(Mind you that I have my opinions, but they may not align with those of the greater community. I'm just basing my responses off my time and experience running and attending tournaments.)

I think a nice compromise here would be to do this:

1. Keep stage hazards on for some stages, especially those that might become too close to a vanilla triplat otherwise (Dream Land 64)
2. Coin flip the picker of the first stage. Player that doesn't pick gets two/three (depending on what feels right) vetoes against the winner of the coin flip for what to pick
3. Loser next round gets a unanimous pick with no veto against them, treating this as the counterpick stage
4. Third round works the same as the first round

This is a pretty simplistic way of going about it. No neutral/counterpick dichotomy because the stage picking process kinda does that for you, and even if you get the counterpick-esque stages for the first and third rounds, you can always pick an appropriate fighter for that stage, since they always get picked after the stage anyway. It also brings up a new dynamic of picking a stage to counter your opponent's main so that they may be forced or nearly forced to use a secondary, which is only more interesting to see.

 

[TheBuzzSaw]

If FoD has "hazards" disabled in competitive play, we riot.

 

[GabeLincoln]

I feel like a lot of this thread has been people who love the idea of having a billion tri-plats yelling at each other about how terrible for the game not having a billion tri-plats would be. I would like to say that as cool as I think the Hazard toggle has the potential to be, there's also something to be said about keeping the stage list as simple as possible. Don't get me wrong, I'm not a fan of having just three or four legal stages, but if we have all these stages that could work, why do we need more than one kind of Battlefield? The Hazard toggle should be used to give stages that have interesting platform layouts (such as Warioware), rather than as an excuse to have a dozen different very slightly different battlefields as legal stages. I like there being multiple stages, I played 3DS almost exclusively on Omega Stages for years. However, I believe that leaving multiple versions of the same stage is unnecessarily confusing and doesn't actually add anything to the game competitively.

 

[kendikong]

I feel like a lot of this thread has been people who love the idea of having a billion tri-plats yelling at each other about how terrible for the game not having a billion tri-plats would be. I would like to say that as cool as I think the Hazard toggle has the potential to be, there's also something to be said about keeping the stage list as simple as possible. Don't get me wrong, I'm not a fan of having just three or four legal stages, but if we have all these stages that could work, why do we need more than one kind of Battlefield? The Hazard toggle should be used to give stages that have interesting platform layouts (such as Warioware), rather than as an excuse to have a dozen different very slightly different battlefields as legal stages. I like there being multiple stages, I played 3DS almost exclusively on Omega Stages for years. However, I believe that leaving multiple versions of the same stage is unnecessarily confusing and doesn't actually add anything to the game competitively.

Hard disagree, because this kind of viewpoint would lead to the removal of superior and perfectly-viable stages like dreamland and FoD for the entirety of the ultimate lifespan.

 

[lucasla]

If stages are the same, cause all of them have now a battlefield and omega form, there's no reason to ban all stages just because they have a different skin. and use only the original Battlefield stage. It's riddiculous, it's like complaining that you can't fight in a stage just because the original has a blue background and other have trees or some metalic background. It's the same stage, with different skins because visual variation is good.

 

[Luigifan18]

If stages are the same, cause all of them have now a battlefield and omega form, there's no reason to ban all stages just because they have a different skin. and use only the original Battlefield stage. It's riddiculous, it's like complaining that you can't fight in a stage just because the original has a blue background and other have trees or some metalic background. It's the same stage, with different skins because visual variation is good.

I'm pretty sure this precise sentiment is a big part of the reason why Omega Form and Battlefield Form are a thing.

 

[MintyTwister]

1) DotA analogy was addressed.

2) This isn't a debate.

3) Your opinion and views became meaningless as soon as you laughably decided to go the route you have in this post. It's clear you have no desire to "debate" with anyone.

But that's enough for now. I won't feed the troll anymore. I hope no one else does, either.

"Debate: a formal discussion on a particular topic in a public meeting or legislative assembly, in which opposing arguments are put forward."

And how was it a troll? I gave sound points. I read everyone's replies and what did I get? "Didn't read"s left and right. "You're wrong I'm right".

The people defending removing hazards have been extremely disrespectful in this thread except for a few that actually try to give some points. So don't complain if someone bites back. By your logic everything you've said doesn't matter either, as well as many other people in this thread because of how dismissive they are. Because of your response you gave me alone, I can now say everything you said 100% doesn't matter and you're a troll. See how that works? Gets no one no where. Teapot calling the kettle black, too. Just look at this:

There's really nothing to say about DotA or LoL or many other esports. For starters, they simply aren't Smash. From there, the creators of those games dump millions of dollars into the competitive aspect. Meanwhile, Sakurai has expressed that he dislikes that people are trying to make a lifestyle out of Smash. He doesn't directly fight it, but Nintendo seems to echo that sentiment by only very lightly sponsoring tournaments. I'll need confirmation on this, but it is my understanding that players like Mang0 make more money from streaming now than from tournament winnings. That's unfortunate. You have to admit that competitive Smash would look very different if the first place prize were in the tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars.

As for no one addressing your comments, yeah, I guess you won the debate... or no one finds you credible or worth arguing with...? For being your first posts on this forum, you made it abundantly clear the kind of cage match you're interested in. Forgive us for not acquiescing to your request.

This ignored my message and didn't even bother to think about it. He ignored all my power points with Dota and just said "Lol but it's Dota not smash" and ignored my points about how really good players have learned to deal with all aspects of games. Dota isn't the only game, but I'm sure what he's going to do is jsut say "lol but theyre no smash. He purposely ignored everything I pointed and went into detail with, then at the end admitted to everyone ignoring what I'm saying and not giving it good thought. This is how insanely disrespectful you people have been, it's an extremely classic case of plugging your ears going "la la la" to what anyone says for the pettiest reasons. People that go for any possible low hanging fruit to completely avoid a message are usually people that don't want to admit to something, so of course that's the vibe I got from you people.

I will admit I got heated as hell in my 2nd comment, but seeing how fully disrespectful and dismissive every reply I had was.. it would make almost any calm guy snap a bit. Assuming you're all adults, it was pretty dumbfounding to see your replies. I apologize for it, but my points are still 100% valid and have reason to at the very least be read & thought about.

I think all battlefield forms of stages should be allowed to be interchangeable with battlefield. They should all be nearly identical after all, and some people might vastly prefer some battlefield version of stages over the default battlefield.

I agree, but problem is they want to ban more than half of all of them even in Battlefield mode. There's litteraly no reason for this and it just harms the game. It's unnecessary. At this point it's only "Pros" banning things to sound like they know what they're doing and "Fixing" the meta when it's just convoluted choice after another.

 

[TheBuzzSaw]

This is how insanely disrespectful you people have been, it's an extremely classic case of plugging your ears going "la la la" to what anyone says for the pettiest reasons.

Oh hey! Welcome back! Where'd you disappear to these past few weeks?

Look, you're conflating "disrespect" with "people simply don't want to engage with you". You entered this thread quite violently. You told people off and blasted your opinion as indisputable fact. That generally turns people off. Personally, I'm more than happy to address all your points individually, but you have to make it worth my while. I have to see some degree of humility. I have to see some indication that I could maybe change your mind. If I see that, I'll happily show some in return.

You simply need to understand how this all looks from our perspective. This community has been built up over the course of almost 20 years. It's not perfect, but people pour a lot of passion into building this community up. You join Smashboards in 2018 and tell everyone they're doing everything wrong? Yeah... not gonna end well. Next time, I recommend trying this approach: "I've seen X, Y, and Z done in the Dota community. I'm curious as to why you all think those same principles don't apply in Smash."