GA Brawl PR updated 3/14/10. Now with Salt level status!

[Micaelis]

Where would I post an idea about changing Georgia's base rule set for tournaments and actually have it discussed officially and seriously?

In case you were wondering what it was, I just wanted to make the argument that we should either get rid of Yoshi's as a Neutral or add PS1 or Lylat as a Neutral and have stage striking as allowable if one player requests it. I believe it now stands as both players have to be okay with stage striking and we have four neutrals typically.

I purposely didn't post my actual argument because I didn't want this thread to be a discussion about that. Simply wanted to be sure I was correct in my understanding and ask where to post the argument in a place where it gets as official as GA gets.

 

[Player-3]

eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeewwwwwww neutral lylat

lylat isnt a neutral, CP yes, neutral no

yoshis eeeh i really dont care

ps1 should be a CP due to its ******** ledges

 

[FrozenHobo]

melee PS1 was a neutral. brawl has that ******** *** windmill.

lylat can be argued as a neutral.

everyone in GA hates YI.


this being said, it should probably be discussed in the waba topic.

 

[Nihongo-ookami]

Where would I post an idea about changing Georgia's base rule set for tournaments and actually have it discussed officially and seriously?

In case you were wondering what it was, I just wanted to make the argument that we should either get rid of Yoshi's as a Neutral or add PS1 or Lylat as a Neutral and have stage striking as allowable if one player requests it. I believe it now stands as both players have to be okay with stage striking and we have four neutrals typically.

I purposely didn't post my actual argument because I didn't want this thread to be a discussion about that. Simply wanted to be sure I was correct in my understanding and ask where to post the argument in a place where it gets as official as GA gets.

Lylat for Neutral.

I don't see the problem with it, nor why it's a CP.

"But it tilts!" Not very fast. It tilts at enough of a pace to allow someone to recover, undaunted. Unless you're Wolf, but nobody really plays Wolf.

 

[FrozenHobo]

when it tilts its sweet spot box shrinks, which means when its moving its ledges are constantly shifting. thats not neutral.

 

[BBQ°]

yeah......
what it should be is

have the two players to agree on either

first match:
random on the 4 neutrals (FD, BF, YS, and SV)

or

first match:
agree on stage striking out of 5 stages (FD, BF, YS, SV, and Lylat)

although if you were to do stage striking in brawl, it would be more sensible to have 7 stages.

 

[Player-1]

i am passing biglou next update. that is all

 

[Dynomite]

i am passing biglou next update. that is all

Have you vsed scatt yet? I am very interested to see that match.

EDIT: Thoughts about stages: Pokemon stadium 1 is a really fun stage and i would love it to be a neutral but as much as i love it i dont think it should qualify as a neutral. the windmill isnt much of a problem imo. the edge, yes a problem. Infinites =/ last but not least, King DDD.

YI: i think this should stay. its not a bad stage. i use to hate it but i have grown to it and now i really like it. I really dont see anything wrong with this stage. ceiling is normal, ghosts might save you sometimes, but it cant harm you.

Lylat: i think the reason most people dont like this stage is for the ledge. it moves and isnt very fun for characters such as falco or fox. background might be a bit annoying at times but no johns!

I would be fine with anything GA decides but i choose not to vote on the change.



Only read further if you want to feel better about yourself.

Spoiler

I would say that i am -- neutral?

 

[Player-1]

Have you vsed scatt yet? I am very interested to see that match.

last time we played offline was the july waba where i won 2-1

 

[Purple]

eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeewwwwwww neutral lylat

lylat isnt a neutral, CP yes, neutral no

yoshis eeeh i really dont care

ps1 should be a CP due to its ******** ledges

everyone using the ledge as a reason it's a problem, but that has an effect on every character, so it's neutral

 

[FrozenHobo]

everyone using the ledge as a reason it's a problem, but that has an effect on every character, so it's neutral

PS1? how about camping? rock, fire and now water all work well for camping. ledges aside, you can't ignore the wals that pop up every 5 seconds. CP.

lylat screws over characters with bad recoveries (why i take scatz there). the ledges are hard to grab and the constant tilting make getting back the stage incredibly difficult for character with bad recoveries. its a CP. however, if we do institute stage striking, its setup is closest to that of a neutral and can be seen as one of the few true neutral/cp stages: perfect for stage striking, but still not a true neutral.

 

[DanGR]

everyone using the ledge as a reason it's a problem, but that has an effect on every character, so it's neutral

Every character would have to deal with Port Town Aero Dive if it was legal, so isn't that a "neutral" as well?

 

[Player-1]

Port town for neutral.

 

[Purple]

Every character would have to deal with Port Town Aero Dive if it was legal, so isn't that a "neutral" as well?

lol, that's just stupid bull**** XD i'm talking about lylat's ledges.

 

[benaji261!]

Skater betta get his **** together and make that PR! XD

 

[Rayku]

Stage and character legality is to be discussed here.

Yoshi's Island is a neutral. I don't know what is wrong with it for it to not be considered as such. In fact, I think anyone who thinks otherwise simply "doesn't like that stage," which seems to be the driving force behind peoples' opinions.

I personally think Lylat is also a neutral. If you have any half of a brain playing any character, the ledges aren't going to mess you up in any regard. Scatz, play carefully on your ledge game, Yoshi's about the only character that can seriously be affected by them. The death boundaries are reasonable, and platforms well-spaced enough to make the stage legitimate.

Pokemon Stadium 1: I don't think this is neutral, much to my dismay. I'd like it to be, but the ledge is a problem for a few characters, and the stage hazards (mainly the windmill) create obnoxious long-lived fights. Who cares about camping, you can camp on any stage in the game. Unfortunately, Counterpick.

I would love to implement stage striking, but the most annoying part about that is getting everyone to know what it is. -MOST- people don't read OP's anymore (I don't, typically), so even if it were to be explained, you'd have random people who are 12 and don't know what it is.

 

[BBQ°]

We should just do what I said and have the players agree on stage striking or "the normal way". If one of the players doesn't know what stage striking is, have them go "the normal way" or just have his opponent explain it to him.

 

[bigman40]

Whoa, I prefer Lylat over Yoshi's anyday. Lylat may have harder ledges, but in no way does it affect my overall gameplay. This seriously doesn't affect Yoshi like the way Frozen thinks it does compared to recoveries that are more inclined to sweetspotting. I'm all for stage striking simply cause it would be easier than having annoying stages where the tilts and overall setup of the stage gives a lot of power to the people that can camp under the platform.

 

[Micaelis]

Well, my opinion is this... I think we should have stage striking as the normal process unless the player does not wish to do so and both players agree to do random (if they can't take the time/brain power to learn stage striking for some reason aka being 12 then just ask them politely if doing random is fine).

The neutrals should be as followed:
Battlefield
Final Destination
Smashville
Yoshi's Island
Lylat Cruise

This gives us five stages in order to have an odd number that works with strikes. People who are complaining about certain aspect of the stage... I understand your concern but at the same time I think you fail to realize part of the point of stage striking

By performing stage striking, each player will be able to eliminate the stages out of the neutrals that they feel like their respective character has the hardest time on in the match-up. Both players get to perform this so at the end of the process you should have a neutral stage that is as CLOSE to being neutral according to each player's knowledge. So in reality, you actual end up with a more neutral first match than "random".

I vote yes to changing that ASAP. Most other states already perform systems such as this and I'm not 100% sure why we don't either.

P.S. - I only said PS1 because I know some tournaments use that as a neutral but I agree that it is definitely more of a CP than a neutral and that Lylat is the best middle man for the 5th stage needed.

 

[Player-1]

Personally, I like the stage list as is, stage striking I wouldn't mind, actually I'm a bit for it, but it requires another stage. Personally, I think PS1 is more of a neutral than Lylat. The reason being is because some characters get a large advantage on it and others get a large disadvantage (well amybe not large, but for a neutral it's large), which IMO calls for it to be a CP. Ex would be like Marth vs Wolf on lylat. PS1 there isn't many characters that get a large advantage or disadvantage on it (the character that would gain the most of an advantage here would probably be D3 because of wall CGs, but that still is pretty easy to avoid). The ledges aren't really a problem, they're not really any different than FD's ledges except the way it LOOKS, just know where you have to sweetspot the ledge and you should be fine. The windmill is the biggest problem I guess, that's really the only thing from keeping it from being a neutral so I'll give you that, but that's just a 1/4 chance of getting it.

The reason for PS1 being a neutral over Lylat, IMO, gets the same argument that some people think FD should be a CP (IMO, it's neutral, obviously, but just saying). FD is probably the least 'neutral' and if any of the 4 neutrals get voted off then it would probably be FD for the same reasons stated before, some characters get a large advantage and others get a large disadvantage. Ex Diddy/Falco/IC Vs DK/Bowser etc. Same thing I think applies to Lylat, but I think Lylat just pushes it a bit more than FD because of the tilting and smaller sweetspot, if either of the 2 traits I just stated were gone then I'd think it'd be worthy of neutral status, no doubt.

 

[Micaelis]

I personally think an argument can be made equally for both stages but I think Lylat is the best choice due to it being a "more practice more neutral" stage instead where PS1 is a "better location better neutral" stage.

Yeah but those disadvantages that Lylat gives are only for a couple of characters anyways and they should just stage strike the stage anyways (chain grabbers and the Stars have some difficulty I'd imagine). Lylat doesn't give a huge advantage to most characters anyways (except I feel like Yoshi is the bomb on that stage based off what I know of him).

PS1 on the other hand has areas where there are infinites but don't forget that any character with a good Dtilt can also do locks on those same places. The lip is not a big deal like some say, FDs is probably worse. But PS1 has many aspects of it that constantly change whether the map is currently neutral or not and due to walls and the windmill it kind of forces limitations for some characters on the map itself.

I just feel that Lylat is the "lesser of two evils" I suppose.

 

[Rayku]

A poll has been added to this thread. Please, all members of GA (Brawl) Smash vote on your choice. Once this poll is done, Stage legality/neutrality will be discussed according to the option that was selected.

 

[BBQ°]

Well, my opinion is this... I think we should have stage striking as the normal process unless the player does not wish to do so and both players agree to do random (if they can't take the time/brain power to learn stage striking for some reason aka being 12 then just ask them politely if doing random is fine).

The neutrals should be as followed:
Battlefield
Final Destination
Smashville
Yoshi's Island
Lylat Cruise

It would make more sense to have 9 or even 11 stages.
Battlefield
Final Destination
Smashville
Yoshi's Island
Lylat Cruise
Pokemon Stadium 1
Battleship Halberd
Delfino Plaza
Frigate Orpheon
[Brinstar]
[Castle Siege]

I say we just make that the list of stages to strike from. Who knows.. maybe both players will agree on Frigate being the most neutral between them or even Halberd.

 

[Player-1]

Where's the stage striking option with ps1 instead of lylat >=[

 

[Dynomite]

I dont care you guys can decide. I think its was a good idea to have a poll though. When will the poll close/when will the new rule (if it does vote in favor) be active?

 

[Rayku]

The poll will close when it's either impossible for one option to win or when enough time has been alotted.

Use logic there, Dyno. Probably the following tournament

 

[Dynomite]

The poll will close when it's either impossible for one option to win or when enough time has been alotted.

Use logic there, Dyno. Probably the following tournament

i wasnt sure.

thanks for boosting my self confidence rayku

 

[Rayku]

I honestly think the 3rd option of the poll is the most reasonable.

Stage striking is available now, even though "Random Select" is the tournament standard at Waba. Both players just have to agree on it. I don't see why one player should have to do something they don't want to do just because the other said so.

Jamaal and I both feel this way. Basically, option 3 is just repeating what is already there. It's just that hardly -anyone- takes advantage of the opportunity TO offer stage striking.

 

[BBQ°]

yeah, what rayku said.

and one of these polls needs to be created for melee with the new stage list and all.

 

[Micaelis]

But there is nothing "bad" about actually stage striking that I can see. It gets the best results out of what should be a theoretically "neutral match".

You don't want "random" things to enter into the equation in a tournament match. It's the whole basis behind having "No Items". I don't get what the big deal is about making Stage Striking the norm. If you want to random, then agree on it and just do it. Most likely you won't get someone to say no to it unless they have reasons similar to ones explained below.

Having it be mutual means that means one one can say no to it and it's most likely due to an unfair advantage they have over the other player in the random choosing. Such as they are really good against you on say 2 or 3 of the stages and not so on the other 1 or 2. They have a high chance of randoming a favorable stage where the person who wants the stage striking doesn't get it and is forced to random. With stage striking you can at least attempt to make it a bit better.

Example: Say I'm doing a tournament match against Dyno's Wario. The match-up is very bad for my DK and platforms make it even more so. But Yoshi's, BF, and Smashville all have platforms that help him. He has a 3/4 chance to random a decent or very good neutral. I have a 1/4 chance. With stage striking however, I get to "most likely" play on Smashville which is still good for him but not has horrible as BF or Yoshi's is for me.

Example 2: Player-1 is playing Lounis in a tournament match. He's probably going to have a similar issue and prefer to have less platforms etc.

I just haven't heard an argument towards why it shouldn't be the norm besides that some shouldn't "have to do something they don't want to do". I obviously very much don't want to randomly select so why am I forced to do that?

I just don't see how changing this has any negative side effects. It only has good ones to level the playing field a bit. Call it a handicap for some characters I guess but the first match is suppose to be neutral anyways so I don't understand the issue.

 

[Rayku]

But there is nothing "bad" about actually stage striking that I can see. It gets the best results out of what should be a theoretically "neutral match".

You don't want "random" things to enter into the equation in a tournament match. It's the whole basis behind having "No Items". I don't get what the big deal is about making Stage Striking the norm. If you want to random, then agree on it and just do it. Most likely you won't get someone to say no to it unless they have reasons similar to ones explained below.

Having it be mutual means that means one one can say no to it and it's most likely due to an unfair advantage they have over the other player in the random choosing. Such as they are really good against you on say 2 or 3 of the stages and not so on the other 1 or 2. They have a high chance of randoming a favorable stage where the person who wants the stage striking doesn't get it and is forced to random. With stage striking you can at least attempt to make it a bit better.

Example: Say I'm doing a tournament match against Dyno's Wario. The match-up is very bad for my DK and platforms make it even more so. But Yoshi's, BF, and Smashville all have platforms that help him. He has a 3/4 chance to random a decent or very good neutral. I have a 1/4 chance. With stage striking however, I get to "most likely" play on Smashville which is still good for him but not has horrible as BF or Yoshi's is for me.

Example 2: Player-1 is playing Lounis in a tournament match. He's probably going to have a similar issue and prefer to have less platforms etc.

I just haven't heard an argument towards why it shouldn't be the norm besides that some shouldn't "have to do something they don't want to do". I obviously very much don't want to randomly select so why am I forced to do that?

I just don't see how changing this has any negative side effects. It only has good ones to level the playing field a bit. Call it a handicap for some characters I guess but the first match is suppose to be neutral anyways so I don't understand the issue.

I don't see why keeping it as is has any negative side effects.

Most of your complaints come with playing the game. The reason the neutrals in Smash Brothers are neutrals is because they are the stages with the least amount of randomness incorporated into them. If you're going to complain about the neutral stages, then the solution is simple: Play a different game altogether. Or play casual Brawl on Spear Pillar with me :D

I heard a long time ago the art behind stage banning in random select, as well. Ban a neutral that you don't like. It's the most favorable choice. This will increase your chances to even out the playing field (You said 2 or 3 non-favorable stages and 1 or 2 for your opponent. Delete one of those non-favorable for you stages and you get 1-2:1-2, therefore being decided by a coin flip). Don't ban counterpicks, because if both players are at equal skill level, the winner of the first game should ultimately be the winner of the set.

Ultimately, I'm game for both choices. I just don't really like the idea of having a firm set of rules in the decision of choosing the first stage, because eventually, someone will ***** and whine about it. Right now it's a choice between players, and you're essentially asking that choice be taken away.

 

[Micaelis]

@Jason

Obviously not going to play another game (especially after I just got my leet new secondary! lol) but overall it doesn't matter too much for me. The idea of stage striking just greatly appealed to me and I figured it would to everyone else too since it seems a lot more organized and preferable than the random picking out of a list of stages that are "supposedly" neutral. A lot of other places do it but when has GA ever followed trend? lol

The choice wouldn't be taken away... you can still random if you both agree on it. All I proposed was swapping the norm from random to striking and the requested version from striking to random. Just a switching of choices. This is of course due to my previous arguments about making it in actuality more neutral, etc etc.

And hey, there is going to be someone to ***** about anything, just depends on when and where. Sadly true, heh.

 

[Rayku]

Indeed. This isn't the first time this has come up, honestly. The old PR thread had a poll as well, pertaining to stage legality. The results were tallied, and nothing was ever done about it.

 

[BBQ°]

I think there should be either 9 or 11 stages to strike from.
(lol why am I in this thread)

 

[FrozenHobo]

I think there should be either 9 or 11 stages to strike from.
(lol why am I in this thread)

really. go play your obviously superior, but significantly more complex game.

 

[BBQ°]

yessssssssss
come join the dark side

 

[DanGR]

Alabama is better than y'all.

I say you guys come to our tournaments to prove us wrong. ;P

...

T_T

 

[Rayku]

@BBQ: Melee isn't the dark side, I don't know what you're talking about

@Dan: We already did a while ago (rather, Lounis/Kismet did)

 

[Dynomite]

Here is a stage list that i found interesting. The Chinese inn tournament in Louisiana

Stage List:

Starter

Battlefield
Final Destination
Pokemon Stadium 1
Smashville
Yoshi's Island


Counterpick

Brinstar
Castle Siege
Delfino Plaza
Frigate Orpheon
Halberd
Lylat Cruise
Rainbow Cruise

Corneria (Teams Only)


Thoughts?

 

[Micaelis]

@dyno

Pretty much the same as ours minus the additional neutral (PS1) for stage striking I assume. That is common in a lot of places but I'm still partial for Lylat being the 5th neutral on our list.

Also the Corneria for Teams is interesting. The major issues on that stage (like camping DDDs etc) are nullified due to having a partner with you. I wouldn't be against allowing that stage in teams. It definitely would work as a solid CP for some team setups.