Full Stage List Striking - New name

[Jack Kieser]

So you're suggesting whomever needs to get the kill go out of his way to destroy something irrelevant to the fight itself in order to stop the opponent from living to insane percentages?

Who says it's irrelevant to the fight? It's VERY relevant. It's part of the stage. That's why it's ok on LM. The problem you're having is that YOU DON'T PERSONALLY SEE how it's relevant to you, because it's not something you WANT (desire) to deal with... so it must be bad. But that's bad logic. Remember, you are at ODDS WITH THE GAME. You and the game have a conflict of interest.

You want to win the game. The game is actively undermining your attempts to win all the time. So, you complaining about how the game has done something to stop you from winning is rather meaningless and scrubby; just treat Mansion's house or Skyworld's floors as you would anything else in this game that undermines your ability to win, like the ghosts on YI, or the windmill on PS1, or the acid and lava on Brinstar and Norfair, respectively. Those also undermine your ability to get the kill, and you have to go out of your way to get around them, in various ways.

This is seriously no different.

In fact, I think this is a good measure of scrubby talk: when you have a conflict of interest with the game and assume that the game is the one that's wrong. It's the GAME. It's probably more right than you are.

Edit @Albert: Um, and that match is supposed to prove WHAT, exactly? Knowledge =/= execution. So BPC lost a match? And? He's still a more EDUCATED (read: knowledgeable), LOGICAL poster than 90% of SWF. You don't need to be able to push the buttons well to know which buttons you SHOULD be pushing, you know. Bad ad hominem is bad. Stop it.

 

[#HBC | Red Ryu]

Susa, you were telling me why didn't they strike it? Speed, A Sonic main, was abusing Norfair to time people out. Who honestly expects this from Sonic?

Otherwise some people were being silly, but when Wario has Brinstar and Norfair it's like saying, "Pick your poison."

You're the guy that called BPC "educated"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8N5Zu53rL_U

done.

Uhhh...that's pretty rude actually.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E0hlxq_KsvY
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NC0KN0gD7-4

Should people right me off because I got 3 stocked twice half a year ago?

Edit @Albert: Um, and that match is supposed to prove WHAT, exactly? Knowledge =/= execution. So BPC lost a match? And? He's still a more EDUCATED (read: knowledgeable), LOGICAL poster than 90% of SWF. You don't need to be able to push the buttons well to know which buttons you SHOULD be pushing, you know. Bad ad hominem is bad. Stop it.

Typically if you can apply theory craft to in game, it means you understand it. If he can't then people are less likely to trust you.

I agree they shouldn't right him off because of that, but I am more likely to beleive someone who can theory craft well and do well in practice, like Susa, because he can theorycraft it and personally back it up.

 

[SuSa]

You're the guy that called BPC "educated"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8N5Zu53rL_U

done.

And Tyrant lost to a Fox.
M2K lost to a Ness.
DSF lost to a Yoshi.

Yep. These guys are "educated" as well o' right. Oh wait.. they're high level players?

Fuuucc--------------

Stop with the ad hominem, and him losing to a Lucas doesn't mean JACK ****.

Kindly draw Norfair's circle.

Every platform except the center one is rise-through (the center platform is slightly rise-through on the edges I think), and IIRC half of each of those platforms is drop-through.

Also, the lava.

edit: quad ninja'd

I'll draw the circle, and the fact that every platform except the center is drop through and have edges only worsens the fact.

Oh, and Pit can live in the lava using Down-B... but I won't count that since it's one character.

*opens Photoshop and finds a picture of Norfair*

EDIT:

A Sonic main, was abusing Norfair to time people out. Who honestly expects this from Sonic?

Considering Sonic's speed and stalling ablity. I would.

That being said, PEOPLE SHOULD. It just shows their LACK OF KNOWLEDGE ABOUT THIS GAME.

You know, maybe if you had to LEARN ABOUT STAGES in a full strike system, you wouldn't fall for **** like that.

:leek:

 

[Albert.]

Edit @Albert: Um, and that match is supposed to prove WHAT, exactly? Knowledge =/= execution. So BPC lost a match? And? He's still a more EDUCATED (read: knowledgeable), LOGICAL poster than 90% of SWF. You don't need to be able to push the buttons well to know which buttons you SHOULD be pushing, you know. Bad ad hominem is bad. Stop it.

You're assuming that he's smarter than he is, because when he posted those videos to MK boards it was with a definitively dumb-struck cluelessness. Not exactly "Well he knew what he supposed to do but he just didn't"

why are you johning for him?



You're an idiot.

Yep, I'm not saying why or backing myself with facts.

I'm just calling you a blibbering nonsensical idiot.

Deal

 

[Albert.]

Oh, and susa, those are all top players losing to top players of their characters

your point is ********.

 

[#HBC | Red Ryu]

Oh, and susa, those are all top players losing to top players of their characters

your point is ********.

Even if he is wrong about using that vid of BPC, he has a point.

 

[#HBC | Red Ryu]

Considering Sonic's speed and stalling ablity. I would.

That being said, PEOPLE SHOULD. It just shows their LACK OF KNOWLEDGE ABOUT THIS GAME.

You know, maybe if you had to LEARN ABOUT STAGES in a full strike system, you wouldn't fall for **** like that.

:leek:

I would expect it on Pictochat, Speed's CP stage, not Norfair.

edit: woops, double post.

 

[Albert.]

Double double post

 

[ADHD]

Who says it's irrelevant to the fight? It's VERY relevant. It's part of the stage. That's why it's ok on LM. The problem you're having is that YOU DON'T PERSONALLY SEE how it's relevant to you, because it's not something you WANT (desire) to deal with... so it must be bad. But that's bad logic. Remember, you are at ODDS WITH THE GAME. You and the game have a conflict of interest.

...OR, you just have a different viewpoint from myself and see it as good logic. I personally don't see what's so competitive about trying to stop something that takes you to be distracted from your opponent and go out of your way to do something. You have to be kidding me to be telling me that you're on the absolute right viewpoint, and that everything other than that is ludicrous and biased for that player.

This isn't Norfair. This isn't PTAD. This isn't Pictochat. Unlike those stages, on LM and Skyworld you actually have to fight the stage itself AND THEN fight your opponent. It's a different realm from any other stage in the game, and that could be considered as acceptable, or unacceptable.

You want to win the game. The game is actively undermining your attempts to win all the time. So, you complaining about how the game has done something to stop you from winning is rather meaningless and scrubby; just treat Mansion's house or Skyworld's floors as you would anything else in this game that undermines your ability to win, like the ghosts on YI, or the windmill on PS1, or the acid and lava on Brinstar and Norfair, respectively. Those also undermine your ability to get the kill, and you have to go out of your way to get around them, in various ways.

That is a ridiculous analogy. You don't have to combat the ghosts to get to a kill on your opponent. You don't have to destroy the lava on Brinstar or Norfair to kill your opponent, and etc. If you have this viewpoint on everything within the game, then why ban anything at all? "The game is actively undermining your attempts to win all the time." So, circle camp or be circle camped on Hyrule Temple, right? That's absolutely acceptable then, so maybe we can agree on something.

In fact, I think this is a good measure of scrubby talk: when you have a conflict of interest with the game and assume that the game is the one that's wrong. It's the GAME. It's probably more right than you are.

The game has an optional item switch, as well as an optional stage switch and adjustable time limit. The game is set by us, so stop being snobbish and acting as if your version of the game is the only way to play it--that it's at a natural state of purity, because it's not.

If we set bomb-ombs on high for every match played on Luigi's Mansion because they are hard to tech and easy to kill with, then they are part of the game. It has become part of the newer interest if the game.

Don't you see that the players who play the game control how we do it? There is no right or wrong, I'm just debating by using my opinion here. So are you, but you're being a snob.

 

[Albert.]

But snobs are educated right?

Then it's fine.

 

[ADHD]

But snobs are educated right?

Then it's fine.

I don't know what Jack knows about the game.

 

[SuSa]

Oh, and susa, those are all top players losing to top players of their characters

your point is ********.

Ravenlord is a Lucas, whom I saw in Loser Semi Finals. How do you know he's not one of their top players?

Ad hominem is ****ing ad hominem, but then you defend the top players because their losing to "the top players of their characters".

You should..like... google "what is ad hominem" because I don't think you get it's relevance.

Is he using his experience as supporting evidence?
No.

Therefore pointing at it is meaningless. You cannot beat his logos so you attack his ethos.

Also, since I'm agreeing to a lot of what he's saying.. shall we use my results instead?

Brawl Singles Pools (entered as Susa)
Defeated Ehkoes
Lost to Havok - Top MK player
Defeated Lucas Luu
Defeated m7H
Defeated Vital
Placed 2 out of 6

Brawl Singles (entered as Susa)
Defeated Layzee
Lost to Mew2king - Top MK player
Defeated Fluxus
Defeated Saske
Defeated Valdens
Lost to Tyrant - Top MK Player
Placed 13 out of 70

Doubles (entered as Havokkkkkkkkkkkkk)
Defeated Dao ain't got **** on us (itsWillyo + Awesome)
Defeated Daolux (Dao + DEHF)
Defeated Black Drak and Josh (MikeHaze + Tyrant)
Lost to Black Drak and Josh (MikeHaze + Tyrant)
Lost to Black Drak and Josh (MikeHaze + Tyrant)
Placed 2 out of 8

Singles (entered as SuSa)
Defeated Zekey
Defeated Raz
Lost to Tyrant - Top MK Player
Defeated Miku
Defeated Dao - Top Diddy Player in SoCal (Was PR'd)
Lost to CPU - One of the best DDD's in SoCal (Used to be PR?)
Placed 5 out of 28

Singles (entered as susa)
Defeated 3des
Defeated Edrees
Defeated Jmex
Defeated Champ
Defeated dao
Placed 1 out of 17

:leek:

This isn't Norfair. This isn't PTAD. This isn't Pictochat. Unlike those stages, on LM and Skyworld you actually have to fight the stage itself AND THEN fight your opponent. It's a different realm from any other stage in the game, and that could be considered as acceptable, or unacceptable.

The lava can stop me from killing my opponent.

If you feel having to destroy part of the stage to fight your opponent is bannable, please bring up Brinstar, Skyworld, and Luigi's Mansion to the BBR and decide if that's worthy criteria. Since those three above stages are changed drastically when parts are broken.

That is a ridiculous analogy. You don't have to combat the ghosts to get to a kill on your opponent. You don't have to destroy the lava on Brinstar or Norfair to kill your opponent, and etc. If you have this viewpoint on everything within the game, then why ban anything at all? "The game is actively undermining your attempts to win all the time." So, circle camp or be circle camped on Hyrule Temple, right? That's absolutely acceptable then, so maybe we can agree on something.

Circle camping is a player tactic outside of the stage, the stage can just "support it" and make it EASIER TO DO. You can circle camp on every stage, just to various levels - and not every stage "supports it". Those that support it ARE BANNED.

Your comparison to fighting a stage to circle camping IS HORRIBLE.

The game has an optional item switch, as well as an optional stage switch and adjustable time limit. The game is set by us, so stop being snobbish and acting as if your version of the game is the only way to play it--that it's at a natural state of purity, because it's not.

Item's are banned under a different criteria.
Stages have no criteria AFAIK for "starter" and "Counterpick" only from "legal" and "banned"
Timer is there to keep tournaments running on time.

I already countered these points.

If we set bomb-ombs on high for every match played on Luigi's Mansion because they are hard to tech and easy to kill with, then they are part of the game. It has become part of the newer interest if the game.

Really now?

Don't you see that the players who play the game control how we do it? There is no right or wrong, I'm just debating by using my opinion here. So are you, but you're being a snob.

There is competitive and anti-competitive.

Don't you think there is a reason we laugh at those who wish to play EVERY game on Temple with ALL items on high?

:leek:

 

[#HBC | Red Ryu]

You see I'm more likely to beleive someone that places better like Susa over someone who can craft but can't apply it, sometime even high placing players spout BS, Look at M2K's Fox/Olimar/Diddy is a counter. Just like there will be players who can spout good things but don't always place well.

It's better if they have both of course, but hey no ones perfect.

Not hating on BPC before someone jumps on me for saying this.

 

[Jack Kieser]

Albert, if you don't stop the personal attacks, I'm going to start reporting your posts. Seriously. That's enough.

Now, onto the REAL poster:

...OR, you just have a different viewpoint from myself and see it as good logic. I personally don't see what's so competitive about trying to stop something that takes you to be distracted from your opponent and go out of your way to do something. You have to be kidding me to be telling me that you're on the absolute right viewpoint, and that everything other than that is ludicrous and biased for that player.

You're right about one thing: we DO have two different viewpoints. Part of why I'm so harsh about mine is because it's based off of assuming that we're playing Brawl for a reason, instead of some other game. You say that you shouldn't have to fight anything other than your opponent, but that's only true in OTHER fighting games, not in Brawl. Every facet of Brawl has you fighting against the stage, even FD (stupid lip... *grumble*)! Fighting against the stage is an integral part of Brawl, just as integral as getting the KO by out-of-bounds instead of stamina. If you get to the point that you are complaining about integral parts of the game, parts of the game that are EXPRESSLY THERE to differentiate Brawl from other games, then you should really just admit that you don't like Brawl.

You, ADHD, if I'm reading you correctly, do not like Brawl. You like what you want Brawl to become, that is to say a very static 1v1 fighter without outside elements. And, I'm really sorry to tell you this (again), but you =/= Brawl. If you are to seriously suggest that we make such a deep, over-arching, far-reaching change to Brawl like removing the effect of stages on the outcome of a match, then you are better off just trying to convince us all that SF is a better game.

Part of why we play Brawl is because it is different. It has different win condition, tests different skill sets, has different elements... it is only peripherally a fighting game because there are people in it, and indeed those people hit each other. Other than that, the similarities with traditional fighting games start to end... so why should WE FORCE BRAWL to forgo all of those differences just because we WANT it to?

The difference between you and me is that you think the game should cater to us, and I know that forcing the game to cater to us is hubris of the first degree.

This isn't Norfair. This isn't PTAD. This isn't Pictochat. Unlike those stages, on LM and Skyworld you actually have to fight the stage itself AND THEN fight your opponent. It's a different realm from any other stage in the game, and that could be considered as acceptable, or unacceptable.

It's not different from Green Greens, where you have to destroy the blocks, or YI: M, where you have to hit the yellow blocks, or Castle Siege, where you have to destroy the platform statues, or Onett, where you have to attack the cars and platforms, or Brinstar, where you have to attack the little balls that hold the stage together...

See my point? A LOT of stages have elements where you have to focus on the stage for a second in order to get a better advantage against the opponent. You have to subvert the stage before it will submit to helping you. It's part of a LOT of stages, just LM and Skyworld put it more to the forefront than other stages. Doesn't mean that it's not a part of the game that you just have to deal with. Again, unless it skews matchup results, it's not a problem.

That is a ridiculous analogy. You don't have to combat the ghosts to get to a kill on your opponent.

You don't have to hit them, but you should be planning your spike attempts around when they might pop up and undermine you.

You don't have to destroy the lava on Brinstar or Norfair to kill your opponent...

No, but if you time your kill move wrong, the lava / acid will save your opponent.

The point here is that various stages in a myriad of ways REQUIRE you to fight around THEIR schedule, mechanics, etc., because if you don't, they will **** you over... but never in ways you can't predict or overcome. It's just a part of the game. If you don't like having to plan your gameplay around a 3rd party (the stage), then I'm sorry, but you're playing the wrong game. Playing around, against, and with the stage is a critical part of Brawl, and to suggest that it shouldn't be for itself, for you, AND for ANYONE because you say so is self-importance of the highest caliber.

If you have this viewpoint on everything within the game, then why ban anything at all? "The game is actively undermining your attempts to win all the time." So, circle camp or be circle camped on Hyrule Temple, right? That's absolutely acceptable then, so maybe we can agree on something.

The difference in circle camping is that circle camping undermines the game. the whole point of Brawl is conflict, but circle camping aims to END ALL CONFLICT for the rest of the match. It's an attempt to make the game end early, as it were. It is, ultimately, an attempt to circumvent playing the game at all, which is unacceptable. That's why we ban it. That's not the stage fighting you; that's the opponent undermining the game itself in a core way. If circle camping is legal, why play the game at all?

The game has an optional item switch, as well as an optional stage switch and adjustable time limit. The game is set by us, so stop being snobbish and acting as if your version of the game is the only way to play it--that it's at a natural state of purity, because it's not.

Who said anything of the sort? I'm not arguing, nor have I ever argued, that vanilla-out-of-the-box Brawl is the way to go. What I'm arguing is that when we make changes to the game, WE HAD BETTER HAVE A **** GOOD REASON. And "I don't like this" is not a good reason.

If we set bomb-ombs on high for every match played on Luigi's Mansion because they are hard to tech and easy to kill with, then they are part of the game. It has become part of the newer interest if the game.

It is part of the game because we forced it there. That's not good competitive game design. That's a bunch of scrubs saying "I don't really have a good reason to do this, but I want to anyway! Bombs on high, hooray! ^_^". Again, if you can't justify something, you don't do it.

Don't you see that the players who play the game control how we do it?

That's the problem. The players who have to win the game are deciding what winning means. That's not good. It's like murderers being able to write the laws deciding what "self-defense" means. If you are trying to win the game, you shouldn't be able to change what winning means, because then you can make it simply whatever you want it to be. Again, you don't change things because you WANT to, you change them because you HAVE to. That is THE MOST BASIC tenant of ANYTHING using logic and reason. Law works that way. Science works that way. Sports work that way. So, we work that way, because it is the most logical way to work.

I'm sorry, but thems the breaks.

There is no right or wrong, I'm just debating by using my opinion here. So are you, but you're being a snob.

I'd apologize for coming off that way, but I'm honestly not sorry. What you're suggesting is an overt and purposeful subversion of established competitive design ideology on the basis of "opinion". I don't let that slide.

 

[Rabbi Nevins]

The objective of smash in general is simply to stay on the edge. Not to remove all of your opponents stocks. That is a subset of the main goal. Hence the reason that sudden death exists, to settle who would win after both players have successfully played the match without dying. If the goal was strictly to get as many kills as possible, wouldnt you play a time match and not stock? Or wouldnt the game have been programmed with a lifebar?

Due to the nature of smash in general, the idea of having different stage options doesnt even seem like an opinion. It is just an element of the game that cannot be neglected. Removing the broad variety of stage options turns this game, which was designed to be a survival game, into a strict fighting game where each player just tries to kill and combo non stop. Thats not how smash was started and I certainly dont beleive this is how smash should evolve into. To answer this question would take some thought processes that do not take into account the metagame.

 

[Albert.]

Dude he called you a snob and you're just gonna take it??

 

[Jack Kieser]

What do I care if he calls me a name over the internet? It's still ad hominem. It's still attacking me, and not my logic. It, in no way, affects my argument; my argument is no more or less correct after he calls me a name than it was before.

So, I ignore it. It's, as Jon Stewart would say, the reasonable thing to do.

 

[Ripple]

So you're suggesting whomever needs to get the kill go out of his way to destroy something irrelevant to the fight itself in order to stop the opponent from living to insane percentages?

why do you have to go out of your way? get the lead in %. try and time them out. the burden is now on the other for just doing more damage.

LM is a weird stage where I can see a player not even taking a stock but winning thanks to camping and the Tie stock rule in which those with more % win

 

[SuSa]

Dude he called you a snob and you're just gonna take it??

"Oh noes! He called me a name!"

Stop trolling the thread or GTFO. Going to start reporting posts soon.

@Red Ryu
Now imagine if I hadn't placed well. In fact, I didn't ever attend.

Does that change my theorycraft?

Not.
At.
All.

That's why it's ad hominem. Just because I don't put it into practice DOESN'T MEAN ITS BAD.

@sapphire
LM can be destroyed and that actually makes it pretty hard to time someone out. (Destroy all but 1 piece and timing out becomes no harder than if you were playing on Final Destination)

:leek:

 

[Nidtendofreak]

Albert, you're just digging yourself deeper and deeper into the same whole at Inui did, just at a different angle.

Might I advise pulling out before irreversible damage is done? There are a lot of people who have more knowledge about the game than they can bring to play in tournament. I have basically all of Ike's grab releases memorized, but I'm so terrible at anything tech related I can't pull them off. Judging a person's knowledge off of their game play is not only stupid, but as Jack pointed out: worthless ad hominem. Unless the arguer brings up their own personal characteristics or personal experience as evidence for an argument, you can't use the arguer himself/herself as a counterpoint.

 

[Ripple]

.

@sapphire
LM can be destroyed and that actually makes it pretty hard to time someone out. (Destroy all but 1 piece and timing out becomes no harder than if you were playing on Final Destination)

:leek:

I know, my point was that LM doesn't need to be destroyed to win. you can still win by doing more damage..

ADHD said there is a burden of fighting the stage to get the kill, when in reality, you don't even need a kill on that stage. You could fight the stage in an attempt to get a stock lead but it is not necessary. it doesn't even put you into a disadvantageous position since the winner is most likely camping.

tl;dr: pick Rob, or olimar on mansion and you don't even need to take a stock. pick DK/wario/sonic and you'll never die

 

[SuSa]

Funny. I've beaten Olimars and ROB's on LM.

ROB's laser goes through the pillars, knowing this I just shield it because I don't expect it to stop. Alas, his Gyro does not and his Utilt is SDI'able (or you can simply avoid the bottom floor or otherwise avoid utilt)

Olimar's side-B also goes through the pillars, and knowing this I don't try to hit him with a projectile from behind the pillar. His usmash is also **** good here, but he better not have a white pikmin in his lineup. Lot's of characters can actually avoid this, but if he gets it it IS some free damage against the ceiling. I won't deny that.

That being said, neither of them is broken and nearly every character in this game has some sort of ceiling juggle on LM - so it's not a reason to ban the stage.

The stage is destroyable meaning you can rid of the cave of life effect, and I've yet to see a highly degenerate tourney match played there. (I've seen some go to time, but that's not exactly degenerate.. since I've seen matches go to time on BATTLEFIELD....)

Upon destroying 3/4ths of the stage, it's hardly different than a slightly longer Final Destination. Sonic can time you out just as well as any other stage, DK survives long but he survives long ANYWHERE and it's EXTREMELY hard for him to recover, Wario would time you out just as well as he could on FD.

If your opponent is AVOIDING CONFLICT than destroying the stage IS NOT HARD.

:leek:

 

[Ripple]

uhhh.....susa,

have you never seen a DK/wario/sonic momentum cancel on LM?

they should LITERALLY never die (if they hit the ceiling first at least, and then, if there is no ceiling, just camp).

I have lived to 547% on LM because of the stupid exploit

 

[SuSa]

Wario and Sonic can MC? May I ask with WHAT?

I've played Bigfoot and M7H, pretty sure I played Big on LM.

Yes, they live to STUPID HIGH %'s with their up-B cancel. But guess what?

Up-B cancel puts them into helpless. You just hit them again.

:leek:

 

[Albert.]

You guys are overusing "ad hominem"

 

[SuSa]

No, you're overusing it and we're trying to tell you stop because it's making you look like an idiot.

Ad hominem is a fallacy. It's an argument that doesn't hold any weight.

Read
Read

Ad Hominem is not fallacious if the attack goes to the credibility of the argument. For instance, the argument may depend on its presenter's claim that he's an expert. (That is, the Ad Hominem is undermining an Argument From Authority.) Trial judges allow this category of attacks.

Ad hominem abuse (also called personal abuse or personal attacks) usually involves insulting or belittling one's opponent in order to invalidate his or her argument, but can also involve pointing out factual but ostensible character flaws or actions which are irrelevant to the opponent's argument. This tactic is logically fallacious because insults and even true negative facts about the opponent's personal character have nothing to do with the logical merits of the opponent's arguments or assertions.

Examples:

* "You can't believe Jack when he says the proposed policy would help the economy. He doesn't even have a job."
* "Candidate Jane's proposal about zoning is ridiculous. She was caught cheating on her taxes in 2003."

In case you were lazy....

"but what does this mean" you ask?

"You can't believe Jack when he says the proposed policy would help the economy. He doesn't even have a job."

You can't believe BCP when he says that the stages would help competitive play. He can't even beat a Lucas.

Do you see it now? Do you?





Do you?

:leek:

 

[Albert.]

No, I wasn't lazy

From wikipedia: he ad hominem is a classic logical fallacy[2], but it is not always fallacious. For in some instances, questions of personal conduct, character, motives, etc., are legitimate and relevant to the issue.



Oh and If you think I care about looking like an idiot to a bunch of fellow losers than you obviously live in a much different world of deluded-self-respect than I do.

 

[SuSa]

Read my edit. Especially the given issue.

They are not legitimate or relevant to the issue.

"BPC can't beat Lucas, this means Pokémon Stadium 2 is a bad starter stage."

How does the stage have jack **** with his ability to beat Lucas? It's IRRELEVANT!

Want to see relevance?

BPC says MK has a 90:10 matchup against Lucas due to his experiences with Lucas.
BPC loses to Lucas every time he fights Lucas.
"Because BPC lost to Lucas, his opinion on the matchup is false."

That is not ad hominem, because it's RELEVANT.

:leek:

 

[Ripple]

Wario and Sonic can MC? May I ask with WHAT?

I've played Bigfoot and M7H, pretty sure I played Big on LM.

Yes, they live to STUPID HIGH %'s with their up-B cancel. But guess what?

Up-B cancel puts them into helpless. You just hit them again.

:leek:

wario can with bike, and sonic can with side b also.

and I don't think you've properly seen MC on LM.

susa, I need to show you sometime. DK won't be in helpless, buts its possible to get hit. but with G&W/wario./sonic it's almost impossible to hit them

 

[SuSa]

Living to stupid %'s isn't exactly banworthy either.. it's a character strength. <_<'

But besides that fact.

Never knew Bike actually MC'd, but I haven't kept up with Wario's metagame much, so.... yeah.

If you can ever show me, then alright.

Also DK uses up-B to MC? Right? So he'd be in helpless... <_<'

G&W I can see living to stupid high %'s using bucket brake...

:leek:

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

While it's destroyable, it doesn't change the fact many characters can be ceiling spiked and die at a pretty low %.

...Or you play well and don't miss your techs like a stupid noob?

Also destroying them removes the ledges of the stage so some characters can be completely screwed over.

Bad characters.

The other two aren't legit stages to be CP imo.

On Norfair I've seen at MLG Columbus characters running circles around other players, Speed in particular did this, Hunger three stocked CO18 on this stage with Wario because of the layout. This is with a LGL by the way.

Vids or GTFO?

Also good luck catching a Wario that wants to time you out on this stage.

O.o How the ****?

PTAD is extremely polar towards characters with the best recoveries on the flying portions, no grabable ledges really hurts this stage.

1. Don't fall offstage
2. If you do, hit the bottom, come up through the stage
3. ???
4. PROFIT!
Srsly, it's not HALF as bad as you think.

It changes to some nicer portions when it stops moving, but it adds some sections with walk offs/walls

PS1, Castle siege, Delfino.

and adds in hazards, the cars, that can kill around 40-50% which some of the hazards can hit people on the platforms above the cars.

Learn to avoid them? I have, in about 20 matches there, never gotten hit once by the cars.

It's a mix of Rainbow Cruise, Jungle Japes, and Delfino only it amplifies it. Sorry I don't see this stage doing anything but being a very very big hard counter stage for a large portion of the cast.

I don't even know what the **** you're talking about.

Your opening the door for banned stages if your saying just strike it.

You have like 20 strikes, just strike it. :V

Instant win stages are not healthy for competitive play at all, this is exactly what happened with Norfair at MLG Columbus.

Proof plz?

Who cares if you can strike it, the stage is degenerate.

It forces a strike. God dammit I'm too drunk to do this ****. >.>

I laughed, because BPC's veneer of intelligence should be seen through, instantly, if you're not dumb as nails and can actually actively read his drivel.

Yeah, this is bull****, I'm sorry. Albert, you're a moron. You're some ****ing random spouting reasonless bull**** and trying to just get by with ad hominem. Kindly go jump off a bridge, kthx?

So you're suggesting whomever needs to get the kill go out of his way to destroy something irrelevant to the fight itself in order to stop the opponent from living to insane percentages?

It's ****ing relevant. Just as relevant as the blastzones. Goddammit you people are thick.

You're the guy that called BPC "educated"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8N5Zu53rL_U

done.

Yes, because game skill obv = ability to argue intelligently over the ruleset. Furthermore, Ravenlord is not some random, he happens to be the best Lucas in germany and a ****ING GOOD PLAYER. You'd lose to him too, you ****bag.

You're assuming that he's smarter than he is, because when he posted those videos to MK boards it was with a definitively dumb-struck cluelessness. Not exactly "Well he knew what he supposed to do but he just didn't"

why are you johning for him?



You're an idiot.

Yep, I'm not saying why or backing myself with facts.

I'm just calling you a blibbering nonsensical idiot.

Deal

Which is why I don't pretend to know much about MK matchups. This isn't hard to grasp. I know almost everything there is to know about stages when it comes to discussions like this, which is why I'm smart here. I don't know **** about MK's low tier matchups (come on, they're ****ing LOW TIERS), and I don't pretend to. But you know what? It has almost NOTHING to do with this discussion, so I will kindly ask you to **** OFF YOU GIGANTIC ******** IDIOT ****BAG.

Seriously, you're some random claiming that my logic is bad because I lost to a really ****ing good player; get the **** out.

Even if he is wrong about using that vid of BPC, he has a point.

Yeah, and because your hairstyle sucks, your logic is completely irrelevant. Loving the fallacies.

You guys are overusing "ad hominem"

No, YOU ARE. By even using it once! Kindly go loop your forehead you massive ******!

 

[Ripple]

Living to stupid %'s isn't exactly banworthy either.. it's a character strength. <_<'

But besides that fact.

Never knew Bike actually MC'd, but I haven't kept up with Wario's metagame much, so.... yeah.

If you can ever show me, then alright.

Also DK uses up-B to MC? Right? So he'd be in helpless... <_<'

G&W I can see living to stupid high %'s using bucket brake...

:leek:

I'm telling you, weird thinks happen when you MC on LM. I'll try and get a video to demonstrate it

 

[SuSa]

Thanks Ripple. (You are Ripple...right? **** name changes..)

I mean... I can see an argument against 500% + being... well... worse than a cave of life effect... it's practically the same thing...

:leek:

 

[Ripple]

Thanks Ripple. (You are Ripple...right? **** name changes..)

I mean... I can see an argument against 500% + being... well... worse than a cave of life effect... it's practically the same thing...

:leek:

yeah, I'm ripple. time to name change back

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

Yep that's ripple

 

[Jack Kieser]

...there is a distinct lack of reasonableness in this thread at times. That needs to be remedied.

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

...there is a distinct lack of reasonableness in this thread at times. That needs to be remedied.

Tends to happen when:
-ADHD posts a post that is unusually bad
-Albert posts at all
-I'm drunk

:V

 

[DMG]

G&W as long as he slides off the bottom floor and then goes offstage should never die, even at 999% because once you slide offstage you should be able to immediately use Bucket (don't Nair, you get to bucket at the same time as you would normally try to Nair). This makes DIing everything into the ceiling quite ******** for him unless it's a semi spike you can't really DI up very hard. That aside, no one else has something that good for a Momentum Cancel (DK comes close but helpless state can be a problem. Wario's can work but it's much worse than the instant ones.)

The biggest issue on LM is circle camping. Bar none. If the stage was not breakable in any way, it would be insta banned for that problem quite fast. Every "phase" the stage goes through enhances circle camping, to varying degrees. The full house greatly enhances it to a ban worthy level. Removing the top half still leaves 2 floors people can use to outmaneuver the opponent over and over. Removing 1 part of the bottom half turns shapes it more into a BF like stage for platform campers than a real "loop".

No House is like FD except the small platforms to the side. Those can be quite useful for someone looking to run out the brief time it takes for the house to regen. People like Wario who would jump and bike away, running vertically, would be able to start off from somewhere higher than ground level which is a big plus (unless you are someone like Pikachu or MK, you aren't easily stopping him from crossing over and playing the guessing game with him).

People don't like LM because most matches will focus on the stage. The full stage gives me strong incentive to run away. To try and stop this, you have to focus on the stage and break it down. Then, even when you DO break it down, what's my best option? Keeping my distance/keep running until the stage regens back to that highly favorable form, where the cycle loops over and over. I spend my time abusing the stage to run, you spend your time not fighting me but trying to alter the stage to the point where I can't insta win by running away. Now sure, if two people WANT to fight each other on the stage head to head, there's not much of a problem besides potentially living to stupid %'s cause of the layout. But if you assume people are out there to use or exploit a stage to the fullest, what I described is exactly what you get.

There's no " DK/Olimar/ROB/etc is too good on this stage", it's more of a general "Well these characters can run on here too **** well" group.

 

[#HBC | Red Ryu]

...Or you play well and don't miss your techs like a stupid noob?

To tech, the user must press the shield button 20 frames or fewer before hitting the surface; after that, a player won't be able to tech for 40 frames. Other button or control stick input can cause different types of techs.

Tech once, get hit again and you die.

Bad characters.

I must have missed the part where having a bad recovery made someone a bad character.

Vids or GTFO?

Your right, hundreds of smashers are lying about what he's done at multiple events...oh wait.

O.o How the ****?

I'm Wario, your DDD/anyone slower than me in the air.

GG.

1. Don't fall offstage
2. If you do, hit the bottom, come up through the stage
3. ???
4. PROFIT!
Srsly, it's not HALF as bad as you think.

Did you know that at low % most characters have trouble making it back up at certain parts and have to get hit/die before making it back up to the ledgeless platform only to be hit off again.

Don't get knocked off? It's going to happen and unless you have one of the five best recoveries in the game your not getting back up.

PS1, Castle siege, Delfino.

All of which are tamer compared to this stage.

Learn to avoid them? I have, in about 20 matches there, never gotten hit once by the cars.

So the stages cars can decide a match rather than the characters or players? Are they avoidable? Yes. Does that change how they affect the match and/or when someone does get hit? No.

I don't even know what the **** you're talking about.

This stage is super polar, worse than Brinstar.

You have like 20 strikes, just strike it. :V

So they can CP me there later and wreck me because I don't have the best recovery in the game or have control of the stage list?

Proof plz?

Ask anyone who watched his matches, which is at least 20-30+ at each one. Unless your implying that hundreds of people are lying about what happened at nationals.

It forces a strike. God dammit I'm too drunk to do this ****. >.>

Which is bad.

 

[SuSa]

G&W as long as he slides off the bottom floor and then goes offstage should never die, even at 999% because once you slide offstage you should be able to immediately use Bucket (don't Nair, you get to bucket at the same time as you would normally try to Nair). This makes DIing everything into the ceiling quite ******** for him unless it's a semi spike you can't really DI up very hard. That aside, no one else has something that good for a Momentum Cancel (DK comes close but helpless state can be a problem. Wario's can work but it's much worse than the instant ones.)

The biggest issue on LM is circle camping. Bar none. If the stage was not breakable in any way, it would be insta banned for that problem quite fast. Every "phase" the stage goes through enhances circle camping, to varying degrees. The full house greatly enhances it to a ban worthy level. Removing the top half still leaves 2 floors people can use to outmaneuver the opponent over and over. Removing 1 part of the bottom half turns shapes it more into a BF like stage for platform campers than a real "loop".

No House is like FD except the small platforms to the side. Those can be quite useful for someone looking to run out the brief time it takes for the house to regen. People like Wario who would jump and bike away, running vertically, would be able to start off from somewhere higher than ground level which is a big plus (unless you are someone like Pikachu or MK, you aren't easily stopping him from crossing over and playing the guessing game with him).

People don't like LM because most matches will focus on the stage. The full stage gives me strong incentive to run away. To try and stop this, you have to focus on the stage and break it down. Then, even when you DO break it down, what's my best option? Keeping my distance/keep running until the stage regens back to that highly favorable form, where the cycle loops over and over. I spend my time abusing the stage to run, you spend your time not fighting me but trying to alter the stage to the point where I can't insta win by running away. Now sure, if two people WANT to fight each other on the stage head to head, there's not much of a problem besides potentially living to stupid %'s cause of the layout. But if you assume people are out there to use or exploit a stage to the fullest, what I described is exactly what you get.

There's no " DK/Olimar/ROB/etc is too good on this stage", it's more of a general "Well these characters can run on here too **** well" group.

IF he slides off the bottom floor. I'm talking about getting hit during any phase of destruction.

Agreed about IF it was not breakable. The point in case? It is.

I have yet to see the stage support circle camping to a large degree. Once you start breaking the stage it makes it much harder, leave he last part of the stage up (so the stage doesn't regenerate) and you're focused on getting to that platform to start off from not-ground level. Also a lot of characters can actually deal with vertical camping. (Snake, Pit, Meta Knight, DeDeDe, Pikachu, G&W, Wario, Luigi, Kirby, Jigglypuff, Zamus, IVYSAUR and I'm sure I'm leaving some out....)

A majority of characters can handle it, and only a few characters can even abuse it. It's not highly degenerate or overcentralizing.

Unless of course, someone can bring up evidence. (Several videos, possibly even one displaying the tactic would work)

Until then, in theory, it's a pretty gray area.

EDIT:

So they can CP me there later and wreck me because I don't have the best recovery in the game or have control of the stage list?

If they CP you later, why didn't you ban it? Remember, you strike and ban in accordance to the character you are playing and your opponent's character. So use your ****ing brain.

Does that change how they affect the match and/or when someone does get hit? No.

So does Lava, so do PS transformations, so does the Support Ghost, and COUNTLESS other things that happen on OTHER (and LEGAL) stages that affects the match. Your point is?

:leek: