How I think we should handle all of these FD's

[Joe73191]

Each Omega stage is slightly different. FD should be a starter but no Omega stage should be a starter. That way you don't need to strike endless FD like stages. For subsequent games if you ban FD it will ban all Omega stages however If the losing player gets to pick FD in a game 2,3,4 or 5 they should be able to pick any Omega stage.

 

[AugsEU]

What about blast zones? Are they the same?

 

[ParanoidDrone]

What about blast zones? Are they the same?

I believe they are.

 

[T0MMY]

I have come up with an idea for how we should handle having so many FD's. The problem being this: each FD is too different to be considered the same, but each FD is too similar to be considered it's own stage.

Any questions?

The question of needing to back up your claim with supporting evidence comes to mind. Why does FD need to be limited needs to be addressed first and foremost.

 

[Gea]

Come on now, T0mmy. It's reasonable to lump all FDs together because otherwise it would be impossible to ban FD for the reasons why someone would pick it. No one is picking a stage as radical as FD for the straight edges or empty underside. A player may consider these items as secondary perks and choose accordingly, but by not limiting FD you are always giving the counterpicker access to FD. More so, I'd even assert that it would allow the counterpicker to even select an FD very similar to the one they were after.

This same question would be answered the same if they were all perfectly the same BF stages except for recovery options. This is even more clear cut because none of them even have lips, meaning they do not hinder certain recoveries by nature. Or do you assert that the ability to walljump closer to the blastzone on some of these stages a more important feature than disabling the ability for players to remove this stage from the counterpicking process?

 

[Chiroz]

Come on now, T0mmy. It's reasonable to lump all FDs together because otherwise it would be impossible to ban FD for the reasons why someone would pick it. No one is picking a stage as radical as FD for the straight edges or empty underside. A player may consider these items as secondary perks and choose accordingly, but by not limiting FD you are always giving the counterpicker access to FD. More so, I'd even assert that it would allow the counterpicker to even select an FD very similar to the one they were after.

This same question would be answered the same if they were all perfectly the same BF stages except for recovery options. This is even more clear cut because none of them even have lips, meaning they do not hinder certain recoveries by nature. Or do you assert that the ability to walljump closer to the blastzone on some of these stages a more important feature than disabling the ability for players to remove this stage from the counterpicking process?

I actually believe FD needs to be divided into 2 groups. Pillars and Floating. Pillars do provide a completely different recovery game to more than half the cast making it different in many attributes.

 

[Gea]

Even that makes more sense than setting every FD as separate, though I respectfully disagree. I see your point, though.

 

[Yodude57]

Come on now, T0mmy. It's reasonable to lump all FDs together because otherwise it would be impossible to ban FD for the reasons why someone would pick it. No one is picking a stage as radical as FD for the straight edges or empty underside. A player may consider these items as secondary perks and choose accordingly, but by not limiting FD you are always giving the counterpicker access to FD. More so, I'd even assert that it would allow the counterpicker to even select an FD very similar to the one they were after.

This same question would be answered the same if they were all perfectly the same BF stages except for recovery options. This is even more clear cut because none of them even have lips, meaning they do not hinder certain recoveries by nature. Or do you assert that the ability to walljump closer to the blastzone on some of these stages a more important feature than disabling the ability for players to remove this stage from the counterpicking process?

I definetly see your point because if you have limitless FD's to choose from then a person who plays with a character that likes that stage will always have an advantage over someone who doesn't. As it stands right now I think they should be treated as one or do what the OP said.

 

[Chiroz]

I definetly see your point because if you have limitless FD's to choose from then a person who plays with a character that likes that stage will always have an advantage over someone who doesn't. As it stands right now I think they should be treated as one or do what the OP said.

We shouldn't have so many FDs they will ruin the metagame. Having either all Omegas banned with only original FD legal or separating all Omegas + FD into 2 options, Pillars and Floating, seems like the only 2 sensible options I believe.

In my opinion the latter is the best choice as all Pillar stages are believed to be exactly the same in length and blastzones and all Floating stages, while they seem to have different underbellies, have been proven to not have lids and to have very similar blastzones and proportions as the others. Thus there's only really 2 types of FD with different themes. (Some Omega's such as Corneria are a bit different than others but I don't think that's enough to warrant it's own identity as a stage).

 

[Tomo009]

The problem I have with 2 separate FDs is that this would mean we would basically NEED 2 bans in the ruleset, with as few stages as it looks we will have, that is overkill I think.

I think having the person who picks the stage chose which version of FD to go to should be fine, then we only need 1 ban to ban all FD variants and don't have situations where the only stage you can pick is FD because your opponent banned both legal non FD stages.

 

[Chiroz]

The problem I have with 2 separate FDs is that this would mean we would basically NEED 2 bans in the ruleset, with as few stages as it looks we will have, that is overkill I think.

I think having the person who picks the stage chose which version of FD to go to should be fine, then we only need 1 ban to band all FD variants and don't have situations where the only stage you can pick is FD because your opponent banned both legal non FD stages.

I can definitely see where you are coming from. I understand that notion.

It seems like the 3DS has very few legal stages, but the Wii U version seems to have many more legal stages. Maybe the separation could be done in the Wii U but not in the 3DS? I feel that even though both are flat stages, the differences in underbellies and length (possibly blastzones but no one has tested it yet) make them different enough in my opinion where certain characters will excel much more at one of the 2 types of FD over the other. I guess we'll have to see how the meta and stage list evolve later on.

 

[ParanoidDrone]

I can definitely see where you are coming from. I understand that notion.

It seems like the 3DS has very few legal stages, but the Wii U version seems to have many more legal stages. Maybe the separation could be done in the Wii U but not in the 3DS? I feel that even though both are flat stages, the differences in underbellies and length (possibly blastzones but no one has tested it yet) make them different enough in my opinion where certain characters will excel much more at one of the 2 types of FD over the other. I guess we'll have to see how the meta and stage list evolve later on.

At the risk of veering off topic, I don't really understand why everyone says we have next to no legal stages, and if I'm being honest I don't really like that it's happening at all considering a) the game is less than two weeks old, b) a very small minority of us actually have the game to test any questions with, and c) most of our knowledge of the game comes from streams which are mostly either doing For Glory matches or just not playing anything other than Battlefield/FD/Omega. In other words, we know very little about a lot of the stages and I don't like how a lot of them are getting written off based on what I see as preconceived notions and hearsay. (Case in point: In the Paper Mario stage discussion thread, the OP requested video footage of the Blooper in the second transformation, since apparently it was incredibly disruptive. However, an actual ingame tip explicitly states it does not attack but merely makes waves that rock the boat you fight on, which is borne out by a stream I happened to be watching a day or two prior on that stage. This tells me that other stage "knowledge" is also suspect and deserves a thorough, honest experimentation and review stage.)

More on topic, I believe FD and Omega stages should all be grouped together under one heading for the sake of stage striking and DSR. In game 1, it's probably best if only the real FD is allowed just for simplicity's sake, but for counterpicks I think it should be up to the player who picks FD to possibly pick an Omega stage in its place. Although the under-stage geometry may be different between Omegas, I do not feel it impacts the match enough to warrant multiple copies of what is in all other respects the exact same stage. It would give characters that do well on FD an unfair advantage in the stage selection process that could only be overcome by additional stage strikes, in which case why not do away with the middleman and just lump them all together to begin with.

 

[Gea]

More on topic, I believe FD and Omega stages should all be grouped together under one heading for the sake of stage striking and DSR. In game 1, it's probably best if only the real FD is allowed just for simplicity's sake, but for counterpicks I think it should be up to the player who picks FD to possibly pick an Omega stage in its place. Although the under-stage geometry may be different between Omegas, I do not feel it impacts the match enough to warrant multiple copies of what is in all other respects the exact same stage. It would give characters that do well on FD an unfair advantage in the stage selection process that could only be overcome by additional stage strikes, in which case why not do away with the middleman and just lump them all together to begin with.

I 100% agree with this for the reasons provided.

 

[guedes the brawler]

you know how we have a counterpicking process for normal stages? just have one extra one for the /fds, however lumpin them in categories.

if there are /any differences /9i heard /magicant is unique, for example//0...

 

[Lukingordex]

Like who...? I notice no real apparent advantage to any character in FG just because we only have FD.

You may have not noticed it now because it's too soon to know which character is better or worse in FD.

But if you look back at brawl, you know that Falco, Dedede, Ice Climbers, Diddy Kong and some others were characters that really liked that stage and were better there.

The metagame will develop, and we will notice that there are characters that have noticeable advantages on FD sooner or later.

Because of this, I believe the omega stages will be really troublesome for stage striking and we will have no choice but to ban it, unless we wish to give a disadvantage to characters that needs platforms.

 

[SaintChairface]

I can definitely see where you are coming from. I understand that notion.

It seems like the 3DS has very few legal stages, but the Wii U version seems to have many more legal stages. Maybe the separation could be done in the Wii U but not in the 3DS? I feel that even though both are flat stages, the differences in underbellies and length (possibly blastzones but no one has tested it yet) make them different enough in my opinion where certain characters will excel much more at one of the 2 types of FD over the other. I guess we'll have to see how the meta and stage list evolve later on.

Isn't there actually a third meaningful variant you haven't mentioned though and that is the pillars with a lip at the top vs flat pillars (ex: wario ware vs arena ferox). This third variant has the same little gimmicks of the pillar stage with its wall jumps and clings, with the added difference of stage spikes, which some characters may want and others may want to avoid.

This could be more trouble in that we would now require 3 strikes to ban all flat stages, or it could present an opportunity. Maybe some balance could be struck where you are allowed to strike any 2 stages, or all 3 flat types?

 

[Chiroz]

So apparently you can wall jump and wall cling on all Omegas. In fact you can wall jump and wall cling to even the slantest of underbellies, it's extremely weird.

I guess the FDs aren't as different as I thought. Maybe they should all just be grouped as 1 stage as everyone is suggesting.

 

[AugsEU]

Has anyone actually tested size and blast zones? Or is it all guess work?

 

[Chiroz]

Has anyone actually tested size and blast zones? Or is it all guess work?

Size was tested apparently (this is from hearsay, it might be lies) and it was seen that there were very slight differences. Nothing really outstanding enough to make a difference.

Blast zones hasn't been tested.

 

[smashbro29]

There's 2 versions of the FD stage, with walls all the way down to the end and the floating platform. Basically just treat them as 2 different stages and that's it the rest is all set dressing.

 

[Chiroz]

There's 2 versions of the FD stage, with walls all the way down to the end and the floating platform. Basically just treat them as 2 different stages and that's it the rest is all set dressing.

I tested and you can wall jump and wall cling on the floating platforms,it also works there. I mean, the different underbellies do make a difference but I think it is a very slight one.

 

[AugsEU]

I think if there is any differences in the blast zones and size then we should use the ruleset I suggested.

 

[guedes the brawler]

we could leave the coice of the omega mode to the person being forced to play on FD.

like, if player 1 wants to go FD, player 2 gets to choose the omega level.

 

[AugsEU]

Pretty much what I suggested except less methodical.

 

[Cuccu Maestro]

The point of counterpicks is to give a slight advantage to the loser of the previous game, giving the winner the option of which fd to go to is completely arbitrary and kind of defeats the point.

What I think is an important underdiscussed topic is which fd we use for neutral stages and WHY. Going normal fd from previous games is arbitrary; we should have sound reasoning for decisions like this that affect the meta. Wall jumping adds variety to fd play, why should we shun it to counterpicks only?

 

[Chiroz]

The point of counterpicks is to give a slight advantage to the loser of the previous game, giving the winner the option of which fd to go to is completely arbitrary and kind of defeats the point.

What I think is an important underdiscussed topic is which fd we use for neutral stages and WHY. Going normal fd from previous games is arbitrary; we should have sound reasoning for decisions like this that affect the meta. Wall jumping adds variety to fd play, why should we shun it to counterpicks only?

You can wall jump and wall cling on all FD variants. Their slanted underbellies still act as walls for some reason.

 

[B0NK]

More on topic, I believe FD and Omega stages should all be grouped together under one heading for the sake of stage striking and DSR. In game 1, it's probably best if only the real FD is allowed just for simplicity's sake, but for counterpicks I think it should be up to the player who picks FD to possibly pick an Omega stage in its place. Although the under-stage geometry may be different between Omegas, I do not feel it impacts the match enough to warrant multiple copies of what is in all other respects the exact same stage. It would give characters that do well on FD an unfair advantage in the stage selection process that could only be overcome by additional stage strikes, in which case why not do away with the middleman and just lump them all together to begin with.

I see this as the best way to handle it, thanks.

 

[Gidy]

I think there are 3 versions of FD not including the original one so why would we not use them?

Also what about Yoshi's Island and Battlefield?

 

[AugsEU]

Revised ruleset:

Game 1:
For game 1, all variations of FD are striked except for the standard FD. Then the striking is done as usual.

All Other Games:
For these games, the loser of the previous match(the counter picker) gets to select a version of FD(either floating or pillar) then all the others get striked. Then the winner does his bans, then the two players pick a stage. If it ends up going to FD, then it may go to any stage as long as it fits the category that the counter-picker chose earlier(Either Pillar or Floating).

Though this isn't that different and the old one still works, so you can really do either one. But this one just lets you chose in-case you don't like the look/music on a certain omega form.

Never mind any of this.

 

[Tomo009]

Sounds too complicated, I don't get why the loser can't just pick which version of FD they want when chosing FD. When you strike FD, you strike ALL variants of it.

 

[AugsEU]

Sounds too complicated, I don't get why the loser can't just pick which version of FD they want when chosing FD. When you strike FD, you strike ALL variants of it.

That was my original suggestion. Personally, I think the original one was best.