Hyrule should be counterpick only

[M!nt]

Nice novel you guys are writing, whens it getting published?
(nvm these looked way longer when i was viewing them on my iPod lol)

 

[rawrimamonster]

God damn you guys have been goin at it ITT. Hahaha

If we go by your standards I can say that Dreamland is similar to Hyrule temple also, since you can camp and run around in a circle on Dreamland.

It just doesn't help your argument when you make a comparison like that. What you can do on Temple (run around a circle and literally NEVER get even close to fighting anyone) simply isn't comparable to the "camping" on any 64 stage.

anyway on topic, your logic is flawed in itself. You CAN do it on any stage (on any game and stage in the smash series) but the point at hand is the reason this topic exists in the first place. It's maximized on hyrule (both of them, but to a lesser extent on 64. see my original post you qouted) to the point where its arisen legit complaints within the community that it may be breaking the game for some characters and creates a unbalance.

Thus, my argument still stands.

 

[cyoonit123]

Sorry, Pink Kirby, but I don't really understand why you wrote that long post at all.

-I don't think anybody claimed stages can make terrible match-ups even.
-I don't think anybody claimed that a perfect stage exists in this game, or that they are searching for one.
-Stage striking only allows somebody to avoid their hated (but legal) stage for the first game, unless you are suggesting the entire set is played on the first stage chosen. You know how the counter-pick system works, right?

And I really didn't like the general mindset you presented in that post. There is no perfect stage, so we should just "deal with it"? I see no reason why we shouldn't try to create the fairest stage list possible. It may never be perfect, but it can certainly be better. Same goes for character balance - no, nobody believes achieving perfect character balance with a stage is possible, but some stages can be more balanced than others.

Oh, and how do you plan on enforcing a ban on camping? And why would you ban a playstyle in the first place? There's nothing inherently wrong with camping being present - only with camping being too powerful.

Sorry for being a bit late.

P.S. Randall is a lot easier to keep track of because of the in-game timer. I really don't see the relevance anyways.

the only time i "hate" a stage is when i have bad luck on it, setting up for an edgeguard or something and DL's wind messes me up, but its not like it makes a big difference and its not like it doesnt help me at times. I would like to have a "perfect" stage but my opinion of perfect is probably not the same as everyone else's.

Also the only reason i dont like camping is because i dont like when people just projectile away and run/tent combo you to a high percent or death... if they are atleast a little bit aggressive then i have no problems because the better you are, the more i will try to use this strategy.(this only relates to hyrule. camping on any other stage is fine with me exluding starfox's stage.)

Nice novel you guys are writing, whens it getting published?
(nvm these looked way longer when i was viewing them on my iPod lol)

lol'ed

 

[ballin4life]

FYI guys the way you keep track of the barrel is by watching the platforms, not by keeping track of the timing over the course of a 4 minute match.

God damn you guys have been goin at it ITT. Hahaha



anyway on topic, your logic is flawed in itself. You CAN do it on any stage (on any game and stage in the smash series) but the point at hand is the reason this topic exists in the first place. It's maximized on hyrule (both of them, but to a lesser extent on 64. see my original post you qouted) to the point where its arisen legit complaints within the community that it may be breaking the game for some characters and creates a unbalance.

Thus, my argument still stands.

all i was saying is that you can't point to hyrule temple for your argument, because what you can do there is not like what you can do on the 64 stages. what you can do on hyrule 64 is much closer to what you can do on dreamland.

so it doesn't help to say "hyrule 64 is like hyrule temple" since I don't accept the comparison at all. you can still argue that there is "too much" camping on hyrule 64, it's just not even close to hyrule temple.

 

[Zack353]

It's not stupid. Keeping track of the barrel is just impractical. It's basically of no use.

Even in that one specific instance where it *might* be of some use, it's really not. If it becomes clear that they're going downwards towards the barrel, the other player will easily be able to see the barrel (or at least be able to see if it's not by them - and since it moves quickly they'll know that it'll be by them shortly). If they're at a high %, their best chance is to make it onto the ledge somehow. If they don't get barrel hogged, they'll be so stunned after they shoot out of the barrel that the other player will obviously kill them.

Point in case - barrel is so punishable that it's pointless to worry about it. The only scenario where it can really help is at low %, and realistically speaking, you're not going to be able to decide if you want someone to get low % gimped on the left or right side of the stage (like I said). It's just going to happen based on the openings your opponent leaves in their spacing and whether or not you decide to act on them.

 

[Glöwworm]

I'd like to use my analogy again. Using that barrel is like having Ness' up-b. That is all

 

[kys]

I've played a lot of Congo, especially in the last couple of months and these are just a few random notes I've made off the top of my head:

The barrel is NOT comparable to Ness' upb, because Ness' upb doesn't get him flying to the middle of the stage, with the option of recovering high. Lol it really doesn't compare at all. Ness' upb leaves you hanging off the edge or right near it. It makes a world of difference. The barrel saves more than many here might think.

Falcon seems to get a boost from Congo; he's much harder to edgeguard. Doug hug through the stage is pretty solid. This is Falcon's best stage imo.

Luigi also gets a boost because the platforms gives him more vertical approach options.

Kirby definitely gets a recovery boost, but he's a lot more susceptible to being combo'd (all of the chars are on Congo, but I believe this is a bigger deal for a lightweight like Kirby; same goes for Jiggs)

The side boundaries are smaller and gives DK's bthrow a boost.

The lack of ledge DI seems to hurt Pikachu the most, but who's crying about that?

Samus gets a significant improvement. The platforms allow for more bomb spacing and her recovery is greatly helped by the floor and barrel.

These are a few observations I've made in the last couple of months. Not terribly scientific, just a spur of the moment post. And I think Congo is hella fun. Not enough love for FAT KONG LAND.

 

[Glöwworm]

The barrel is NOT comparable to Ness' upb, because Ness' upb doesn't get him flying to the middle of the stage, with the option of recovering high. Lol it really doesn't compare at all. Ness' upb leaves you hanging off the edge or right near it. It makes a world of difference. The barrel saves more than many here might think.

It's comparable because if you read Zack's post, you're vulnerable exactly like Ness' up b because a) it's predictable b) can't do anything until the peak of the launch and c) slow which allows your opponent to think up of 20 hit combos lol

 

[Battlecow]

Falcon can't control Congo with uairs like he can on DL, he's not as good there.

@ pink kirby-- I'm gonna have to go with SK (gasp) and also add that the main "problem" people have with DL (and note that few people have so far suggested that it not be a neutral--only that it not be the sole neutral) is gimping, not wind. Wind is irrelevant to most people just as it is in melee--it can **** you up once in a very great while, but it has no effect whatsoever on the VAST majority of games.

To reiterate what SK said--I see your point about not having a "perfect" stage (I guess) but how does this lead to hyrule->legal? If hyrule camping breaks the game, and I'm confident that it does, it should be banned.

Also, circle camping isn't practical or even really possible on DL. We did see one long-*** match in G2 GF's on it, but that was... nerves, mostly. A lot of spacing battles, little actual camping per se.

In all seriousness, by the way, my main personal problem with congo--and I don't think that this is what makes it non-competitive, by the way--is that you can't use the Black Douglas on it.

 

[Zack353]

Also, this is just a side note and I don't know for sure, but isn't the barrel spinning random? I just tried it out in training mode and it seems to be at least.

 

[Pink_Kirby]

Replying to at least 3 people:

Sorry, Pink Kirby, but I don't really understand why you wrote that long post at all.

-I don't think anybody claimed stages can make terrible match-ups even.

Perhaps no one has stated that explicitly, but the fact that people are arguing about whether DL or Congo is more "neutral" and the very existence of the notion of "counter-pick" stages both strongly suggest people do indeed believe that stages can have some impact on character balance.

-I don't think anybody claimed that a perfect stage exists in this game, or that they are searching for one.

If that is true why are people still trying to ban stages? Put 2 and 2 together, the logical result of "ban stages that suck" and "all stages are flawed in some way" is that you end up with no stages. But no, you say, that is reductio ad absurdum, we wouldn't do that. Where do you draw the line? What is the definition of the line? Not much progress can be made unless one side out-shouts the other OR some definitions are established that everyone agrees upon regarding what exactly constitutes "bannable" stage qualities. For example, people can't even agree if easy gimping or easy z2d combos should be a bannable quality (I for one do not think so.

Spoiler

There actually does exist a smash game out there where gimping is hard, easy combos are near non-existent, so the metagame is predominantly centered on spacing

). I think it would work better and be easier to simply to design a stage-striking system so individual players can decide what stage they use instead of having some committee on high prescribe a global ban list that leaves everybody unhappy.

-Stage striking only allows somebody to avoid their hated (but legal) stage for the first game, unless you are suggesting the entire set is played on the first stage chosen. You know how the counter-pick system works, right?

I believe I suggested at one point in my original post that it would be much more productive to debate a change in the stage-striking system to remedy this than it would be to argue endlessly about whether stages should be globally banned or not.

And I really didn't like the general mindset you presented in that post. There is no perfect stage, so we should just "deal with it"? I see no reason why we shouldn't try to create the fairest stage list possible. It may never be perfect, but it can certainly be better. Same goes for character balance - no, nobody believes achieving perfect character balance with a stage is possible, but some stages can be more balanced than others.

You've missed the point of the post, which was in part a challenge to everyone to define what it actually means for a stage to be "balanced" or "fair". As I've already said above, most of the posts I've seen have been more statements personal opinion than objective arguments, which admittedly is the only thing you can do when there isn't even a definition of what is a bannable trait in a stage. However, there simply isn't enough smash theory to determine how balanced or fair a stage is across all possible match-ups and strategies, and no matter what stage list any committee comes up with, people will still be unhappy with it. In contrast, there is much more established game theory about how to design fair ways for 2 people to agree on things in zero-sum games. That's what I was trying to get at with suggesting the emphasis be placed on the stage-striking system as opposed to the stages themselves, although I don't actually know enough game theory to provide any suggestions.

Oh, and how do you plan on enforcing a ban on camping? And why would you ban a playstyle in the first place? There's nothing inherently wrong with camping being present - only with camping being too powerful.

If that was to me, I never suggested a ban on camping, merely that one could be discussed IF it broke the game which it theoretically could but no one has tried that hard yet. The specifics of how to ban camping is for another debate but I don't believe you are actually suggesting that it can't be done. I'm sure with a bit of the honor system all you intelligent people could come up with a way should the need arise.

Sorry for being a bit late.

P.S. Randall is a lot easier to keep track of because of the in-game timer. I really don't see the relevance anyways.

That part of the discussion got sidetracked a bit. Mostly my point was to hammer in the fact that the barrel is NOT random so people can stop claiming that.

@ pink kirby-- I'm gonna have to go with SK (gasp) and also add that the main "problem" people have with DL (and note that few people have so far suggested that it not be a neutral--only that it not be the sole neutral) is gimping, not wind. Wind is irrelevant to most people just as it is in melee--it can **** you up once in a very great while, but it has no effect whatsoever on the VAST majority of games.

I think I only brought up DL as an example in the discussion about what random stage elements mean. As in tornadoes are random, but the wind and barrel are not. As for gimping, I see it as a gameplay element and not really a relevant stage factor since it is possible to gimp on every stage with a blast line reachable at low percents. The stages that are harder to gimp on are only so because people who don't want to get gimped stay away from the edges and their opponents follow them there and don't try that hard to gimp. Hyrule gimps can be very common depending on who is playing.

Spoiler

I think there were quite a lot of those in Gerson rat v Isai fox matches

.

To reiterate what SK said--I see your point about not having a "perfect" stage (I guess) but how does this lead to hyrule->legal? If hyrule camping breaks the game, and I'm confident that it does, it should be banned.

I'm with you - broken things are probably best banned. It's just that as with gimping, I see camping as more of a gameplay thing that you could do on all about the tiniest of stages (like metal mario stage small). I think banning hyrule to solve the camping problem is like putting a bandaid on a broken bone - it doesn't address the fundamental issue of camping being an actually viable strategy almost everywhere, and unless you restrict everyone to playing only on lolsmall stages people can just adapt their camping and do it on whatever stage you allow. This gets back to my point that stages don't really fix any gameplay imbalances, even though people seem to be trying very hard to make it so.

Also, circle camping isn't practical or even really possible on DL. We did see one long-*** match in G2 GF's on it, but that was... nerves, mostly. A lot of spacing battles, little actual camping per se.

I still think if you tried hard enough, you could do some pretty annoying camping on DL, although granted it would take much more spacing and ingenuity to do than Hyrule where the basic camping formula is run around in circles. Perhaps that's what you were going for and I am fine. I still think it's better to let the stage-striking system strike-out Hyrule than to be overly ban-hammer-happy.

In all seriousness, by the way, my main personal problem with congo--and I don't think that this is what makes it non-competitive, by the way--is that you can't use the Black Douglas on it.

I really don't think this was necessary. The gentleman's (gentlewoman's?) rule works just fine without the ban: if a player's opponent can't see black falcon and requests a color change, the player should just be a good sport and change his/her color. Then again maybe there are people out there who are willing to make themselves "that guy" just to gain a slight edge in a smash tournament.

Also, this is just a side note and I don't know for sure, but isn't the barrel spinning random? I just tried it out in training mode and it seems to be at least.

See:

b) The spin of the barrel is not random either, its just on a different interval of time then the barrel's moving. I don't have a visual trick for this one, but once you get down the rhythm of the song, its pretty easy.

 

[Battlecow]

There is no way to regulate camping

By your logic we'd legalize Mushroom Kingdom

The honor system has no place in competitive play

Stop spoiler'ing random stuff

 

[Pink_Kirby]

There is no way to regulate camping

I've seen this stated as if it were true so many times yet I've seen not a single attempt (post a quote if I'm wrong) to justify why it is not possible (EDIT: one reason it is not possible: see below about playing dirty). I think it's more an issue of nobody has bothered thinking about it and I can understand why that is - I don't think I'd spend any time thinking about it until camping actually started being a real problem.

By your logic we'd legalize Mushroom Kingdom

If that was to me I really don't follow. Care to explain?

The honor system has no place in competitive play

I disagree. Sportsmanship and general "not being an a**hole" is essential to good tournaments. All may be fair in love and war but smash tournaments are neither.

Think about it: "Oh so you want to play dirty, eh ... everyone can play at that game" Any rule can be followed to the letter while completely violating the spirit of its original intention. Any rule you make up will need extra language to cover the inevitable exceptions and loopholes, until the ruleset becomes about as long as my past few posts. When does it stop? For example, what would you do if people started excessively planking on DL to the point of breaking the game? Ban DL or any stage with a grabbable ledge and flee to Peach? Probably not. Ban planking? And how would that be done? Ledge grabs aren't automatically counted in this game.

 

[clubbadubba]

Pink Kirby, I like the way you debate, its a lot more civilized than the rest of us lol. As far as the honor system goes though, it really doesn't have a place in competitive play. As long as there is a loophole, someone will always try to use it eventually. Ever seen a professional sports league rulebook? They are hundreds of pages long for just that reason. Can you come up with a competitive sport/game that uses an honor system successfully? Hell even gentlemen's games like golf or chess have officials. Some people will do anything to win, including break a non-enforceable honor code. The only anti-camping rule I can think of would involve some sort of TO discretion, which I don't think anyone would be fond of.

However, I also think (and I think you did too?) that getting rid of Hyrule does not change the fact that defense > offense (at least that is what its starting to look like) in SSB. This metagame evolution eventually leads to camping because one or both players insist on playing defense. So either defense really is better than offense and that's where the game is going, or the offensive metagame hasn't caught up to the defensive metagame. Either way, I don't think banning a stage will fix this.

 

[SSBPete]

The honor system has no place in competitive play

i agree, its like diving in soccer [football]

just out of curiosity, is dk's infinite grab competitevely legal?

 

[Pink_Kirby]

Pink Kirby, I like the way you debate, its a lot more civilized than the rest of us lol.

Heh, thanks. I try to be reasonable.

As far as the honor system goes though, it really doesn't have a place in competitive play. As long as there is a loophole, someone will always try to use it eventually. Ever seen a professional sports league rulebook? They are hundreds of pages long for just that reason. Can you come up with a competitive sport/game that uses an honor system successfully? Hell even gentlemen's games like golf or chess have officials. Some people will do anything to win, including break a non-enforceable honor code. The only anti-camping rule I can think of would involve some sort of TO discretion, which I don't think anyone would be fond of.

Ok, I concede your (and everyone else's) point, honor codes don't really work in competition because there will always be ... those people (for lack of a better word). It's probably why I don't do much competitive events. At some point it becomes less about having fun or even about playing the game itself and more about gaming the rules to win a prize. Friendlies ftw.

However, I also think (and I think you did too?) that getting rid of Hyrule does not change the fact that defense > offense (at least that is what its starting to look like) in SSB. This metagame evolution eventually leads to camping because one or both players insist on playing defense. So either defense really is better than offense and that's where the game is going, or the offensive metagame hasn't caught up to the defensive metagame. Either way, I don't think banning a stage will fix this.

I couldn't have put it better.

 

[asianaussie]

depends on the TO

i personally restrict to two regrabs (so you can turn around, regrab and B-Throw)

honour codes work when you're australian, and that's only because we spell it right

 

[Battlecow]

Pink kirby, you seem smart but your main problem is that you're a scrub (no offense, insert "noob" if you're definition happy like SK)

The fundamental assumption on which competitive play is built is: Play to win. The article linked does a pretty good job of explaining it. There's no such thing as "cheap," and it's the player's job to abuse any legal tactic that will give him an advantage.

You're also wrong about DL and Hyrule. You just are. I don't really know how to explain it better than I've already done in this thread, but believe me; Hyrule is the problem, not SSB. You say "I think that if you tried hard enough you could do some pretty annoying camping on DL" but offense is actually pretty advantageous in most situations on that stage.

 

[Pink_Kirby]

Pink kirby, you seem smart but your main problem is that you're a scrub (no offense, insert "noob" if you're definition happy like SK)

The fundamental assumption on which competitive play is built is: Play to win. The article linked does a pretty good job of explaining it. There's no such thing as "cheap," and it's the player's job to abuse any legal tactic that will give him an advantage.

It's funny that you bring up Play to Win. I've read it in its entirety a while back, and while I don't remember all of it, it is contradictory that you seem to both support PtW and yet are so eager to ban Hyrule at the same time. Camping and being defensive are legitimate smash strategies, so why so ban-hammer happy?

I have not seen any video evidence so far of camping being utterly game-breaking. If you have please share with everyone else. Genesis GF Isai vs Boom is NOT evidence of camping being game-breaking. Isai wasn't "playing to win" by Sirlin's standards since he went only low tiers. In the Gerson v Isai campfests where Isai did use high tiers, he still came out ahead. Gerson plays a good pikachu, he knows his spacing quite well against foxes and other pika's and he certainly has the gimp game down, but his camping didn't break the game. Then again, Isai camped almost as much as Gerson if you go back and watch the matches. The matches still ended in some reasonable amount of time.

You're also wrong about DL and Hyrule. You just are. I don't really know how to explain it better than I've already done in this thread, but believe me; Hyrule is the problem, not SSB. You say "I think that if you tried hard enough you could do some pretty annoying camping on DL" but offense is actually pretty advantageous in most situations on that stage.

You should explain yourself better or at least quote your own posts that best explain what you are trying to say. One of your biggest arguments against Hyrule was that matches take too long. The longest Hyrule matches rarely go above 10 minutes. While that may be much more than the average, especially compared to 2006 videos, perhaps the metagame is evolving towards longer deeper games. If you lack the patience to last a whole 10 minutes, then you probably don't have what it takes to win tourney-serious matches.

The other thing I think you are trying to say is that camping is harder on DL than it is on Hyrule. That is a valid point, but several people don't agree that it is grounds for an outright ban. It's why I've been advocating some tweak to the stage-striking system so you don't have to play on Hyrule (often) if you don't want to, others can play on Hyrule if they agree to, and everybody walks away happy instead of being in this never-ending quest for the holy optimal stage list.

 

[cheeseball341]

Sirlin is a really bad example to use for smash bannings.

If we followed his ideas, we'd be playing with some of the less broken items on and all stages except mushroom kingdom.

 

[Fish641]

Sirlin is a really bad example to use for smash bannings.

If we followed his ideas, we'd be playing with some of the less broken items on and all stages except mushroom kingdom.

Uhh, no we wouldn't? All of the items detract from competitiveness by adding in luck. And I couldn't go down every stage from memory, but I know that Yoshi's Island was probably banned because the clouds can be camped hard-core by, say, Fox. And wasn't Saffron banned due to Kirby's utilt being unapproachable from the helipad?

 

[cheeseball341]

Uhh, no we wouldn't? All of the items detract from competitiveness by adding in luck. And I couldn't go down every stage from memory, but I know that Yoshi's Island was probably banned because the clouds can be camped hard-core by, say, Fox. And wasn't Saffron banned due to Kirby's utilt being unapproachable from the helipad?

Anything stage banned for "camping" just isnt going to work under rules defined by a traditional fighting game player because they don't have to worry about it. His definition of banning is complete overcentralisation of the metagame. The only way a stage can be banned under that is if say dk camping on mushroom kingdom became the only match that was played. However, that wouldnt happen, so its likely all rules would stay.

And with regards to items. The only thing random is the spawn points, and even then there are only certain positions they come down. Sirlin would probs argue that you're a scrub unless you are camping the top platform of hyrule waiting for a good item.


Basically, if you are going to make even more bans in a game already lacking diversity, you need to have a clear definition of what constitutes a ban in SMASH.

 

[The Star King]

@Pink Kirby

-Of course people believe stages have an impact on character balance - because they obviously do. That doesn't mean they believe a stage can achieve perfect character balance. A stage can improve character balance, even if a stage can't make it perfect.
-No idea why you asked why people try to ban stages if no perfect stages exist then defeated yourself immediately after. Anyways, you're actually right that there is no good way to draw a definite line for stages, but we have to draw it somewhere. Let's ban the obviously unfair stages, and let's keep the reasonably fair stages.
-Lol, there simply is no good way to ban camping. How do you draw a line that determines whether someone is camping or not? And even if there was, banning stages where camping is overpowered is a much more reasonable course of action because once again, there is nothing wrong with camping alone.

I think you need to take a look at your own posts and note your fallacious either-or reasoning, because you certainly seem to be a fan of including it in your thinking. Thinking such as the belief that either a stage can achieve perfect character balance, or stages don't improve character balance at all. Or that either we should find a perfect stage, or we shouldn't bother trying to improve the stage list (you said we shouldn't bother because no perfect stage exists in your original post). There are middlegrounds, bro, not just two extremes. A stage list cannot achieve perfection, but it can be improved. Character balance cannot be perfected by a stage, but it can be improved.

 

[kys]

It's comparable because if you read Zack's post, you're vulnerable exactly like Ness' up b because a) it's predictable b) can't do anything until the peak of the launch and c) slow which allows your opponent to think up of 20 hit combos lol

It's not comparable because if you read my post, you're not vulnerable like Ness' up b because a) Ness recovers from off the stage which means b) he can be hit even further off if he does upb too close to the stage or c) if he does upb from far away the lag sends him near the edge.

That is all.

Falcon can't control Congo with uairs like he can on DL, he's not as good there.

Falcon can't control DL with uairs like he can on Congo, he's not as good there.

Man that was easy.

 

[clubbadubba]

Let's ban the obviously unfair stages, and let's keep the reasonably fair stages.

I agree, and the fact their is a significant continent of players who advocate Hyrule as a fair stage indicates that it isn't obviously unfair.

Also you're way too critical of Pink Kirby sk. I actually think he has made more useful and valid points than anyone else on this thread.

 

[WOTG]

Didn't read everything but the way I see it,
- Camping/defensive playing makes the game boring, but it does take skill. You think boom or Gerson beat Isai just because they camp? Then why doesn't it consistently work for everyone else? Why does Isai even still manage to win sometimes or the majority even when they play that way?
- Some stages are arguably more fair than others. Like what stages depicts the least disadvantages.
- Doesn't matter what the stage is, the game is naturally unbalanced. Some characters will always be better than others when the correct strategy is played.

 

[Battlecow]

Also you're way too critical of Pink Kirby sk. I actually think he has made more useful and valid points than anyone else on this thread.

...No?

Didn't read everything but the way I see it,
- Camping/defensive playing makes the game boring, but it does take skill. You think boom or Gerson beat Isai just because they camp? Then why doesn't it consistently work for everyone else? Why does Isai even still manage to win sometimes or the majority even when they play that way?
- Some stages are arguably more fair than others. Like what stages depicts the least disadvantages.
- Doesn't matter what the stage is, the game is naturally unbalanced. Some characters will always be better than others when the correct strategy is played.

the argument isn't just against camping, it's against stalling. Camping is boring but OK for the most part, stalling leads to neverending matches which break the game and need to be banned.

This goes for PK's argument as well

Also I'm interested to hear what "tweaks" to stage striking he has in mind... bob-ombs on very high, perhaps?

 

[Olikus]

Falcon can't control DL with uairs like he can on Congo, he's not as good there.

Man that was easy.

if your on a platform on congo you can get away and down safely on the stage in most ocations against falcon. On DL he can pretty much ocupy the whole stage if your getting platform rpessured. YOud ont ahve the same escape possibilitys on the DL size as you have on congo.

So no your wrong.

Man that was easy.

 

[The Star King]

I agree, and the fact their is a significant continent of players who advocate Hyrule as a fair stage indicates that it isn't obviously unfair.

Also you're way too critical of Pink Kirby sk. I actually think he has made more useful and valid points than anyone else on this thread.

I don't agree. Frankly, he writes in an educated manner but he doesn't seem to be a very logical person.

Sorry, just being honest.

@Battlecow You want to ban Hyrule because of stalling now...? No.

And I can forsee that this discussion will force us to talk about the definition of stalling vs camping since Battlecow is probably misusing the term (I doubt he actually thinks stalling is an issue). Not looking forward to it.

P.S. Kys knows what he's talking about. People should listen to him. Although I don't really think this is the place to talk about how good Falcon is on Congo.

 

[Battlecow]

Back in the ruleset discussion ('bout a year ago), everyone agreed that stalling was when neither player approached

On hyrule, since approaching is, in many matchups, disadvantageous to both parties, stalling becomes a problem

We've seen a lot of it already, but it always gets resolved after ten minutes or so because one of the players, because of boredom or for no apparent reason, approaches (and usually gets punished for it). In a high-stakes tournament, with competitive players, I can easily see two people refusing to approach for half an hour or whatever, until one of them just says "**** it"

 

[asianaussie]

and how will banning hyrule stop that

it's not as if 'stalling' is unique to hyrule

 

[Battlecow]

IMO, hyrule's large size and "tent" create advantageous defensive positions that are not present on DL (or PC or CJ). On a smaller stage without a tent or anything, it's to the advantage of one or both players to approach, so stalling doesn't occur.

 

[ballin4life]

I've never understood how the tent makes it more advantageous to not approach. If you approach successfully on someone in the tent you get to do tent combos on them. So that's a pretty big reward.

 

[Pink_Kirby]

@Pink Kirby

-Of course people believe stages have an impact on character balance - because they obviously do. That doesn't mean they believe a stage can achieve perfect character balance. A stage can improve character balance, even if a stage can't make it perfect.

I never said stages don't affect character balance. Every stage affects character balance. What I said is that people have never bothered to actually analyze how. This aspect of the theory is rather lacking - the majority of it can be summed up by saying some characters gimp and recover really well and others survive by camping, and some stages are really easy to gimp on and others are really easy to camp on. Put those together and you get shifts in character balance. Meanwhile the stage-specific match-up analysis fizzled out and went nowhere. Given how incomplete the theory is, it's not a very strong basis for an argument on stage (un-)banning.

-Lol, there simply is no good way to ban camping. How do you draw a line that determines whether someone is camping or not? And even if there was, banning stages where camping is overpowered is a much more reasonable course of action because once again, there is nothing wrong with camping alone.

This was actually a short aside that has already been dropped, which you would know if you read the intervening posts. TL;DR summary of the outcome was I agreed that there is no good way to ban camping since nothing in the game measures it, and honor codes don't work in tournaments.

I think you need to take a look at your own posts and note your fallacious either-or reasoning, because you certainly seem to be a fan of including it in your thinking. Thinking such as the belief that either a stage can achieve perfect character balance, or stages don't improve character balance at all. Or that either we should find a perfect stage, or we shouldn't bother trying to improve the stage list (you said we shouldn't bother because no perfect stage exists in your original post). There are middlegrounds, bro, not just two extremes. A stage list cannot achieve perfection, but it can be improved. Character balance cannot be perfected by a stage, but it can be improved.

I think you've misinterpreted most of what I said, but more importantly, none of what you've said above relates to my major points. I never said that stages can't affect character balance, I just said there isn't enough well-defined stage-specific character balance theory by which such effects can be measured. Character balance needs to be considered across all 12 characters and 78 matchups, and specific statements like "Falcon is really good at gimping everyone except Pika on DL", while steps in the right direction, are not nearly enough since we need the whole entire theory. I admit I copped out here too easily - basically I assumed nobody was willing to establish the theory necessary to base stage arguments on character balance, which is probably where you got the impression that I thought it wasn't worth trying to fix character balance with stages.

What I meant about all stages being flawed and there being no perfect stage was 2 part: 1) there are some things no stage can fix[jumpto=note1]^[1][/jumpto]; 2) expressing my concern about the ban-hammer being applied too liberally to stages, since if you take the union of all the pro-ban arguments used so far and applied them consistently, there would not be any stages left. However, I never advocated reviving "obviously broken" stages like Yoshi or Mushroom. I do agree that incredibly broken stages can and do exist and should be banned, which constitutes an improvement in the stage list. I never really meant to say that people shouldn't spend time thinking about stages, just that even if no stages were banned, the stage striking system would ensure that 2 players both unwilling to play on broken stages would end up striking them anyways. In other words, the idea where players take turns striking stages already works and official bans on stages are more like a safety net to guarantee some stages never get played.

Finally, just to make myself absolutely clear, let me take my biggest point and restate it here in nice bold letters: [size="+1"]It's really hard to have a productive debate about stage banning when people haven't even agreed on what qualities make a stage bannable.[/size] Just a very recent example: Battlecow thinks the possibility of infinite stalling on a stage makes it ban-worthy, while you disagree. Now everyone discusses, and if a consensus can be reached this debate will have made some progress. The question of "what are bannable stage qualities?" is far from settled, and until it is, I don't think this debate can get very far.

[jumpname]note1[/jumpname]
[1] footnote from above: well, technically one way to make a stage that is impossible to gimp on is one with walls on the bottom and sides, so that only the top blast line is reachable. And you could solve camping with a stage about 2/3 the size of metal mario's. But neither fictional stage exists, and their effects on character balance are unknown/unexplored.

 

[MATTS!]

*clears throat*


I got one thing to say....

Unless you will be re-engineering the game to be a new super smash bros game on the n64, nothing is banned, and nothing will ever change anybody's way how they wanna play the game.

I would never listen to bunch of idiots on a forum how to play a game. LMAO.


The Great MATTS!


<Lovage> MATTS! has spoken.

 

[Battlecow]

Ugh

He isn't saying that an overwhelming tendency to promote infinite stalling is OK in a stage. No one thinks that. He just doesn't think that there's enough evidence yet to indicate that hyrule is such a stage. Everyone is pretty clear on what qualities make a stage bannable.

 

[Pink_Kirby]

Ugh

He isn't saying that an overwhelming tendency to promote infinite stalling is OK in a stage. No one thinks that. He just doesn't think that there's enough evidence yet to indicate that hyrule is such a stage.

There's still disagreement here, even if I didn't state it properly before. You think Hyrule should be banned either because you think camping is already a problem, or because it is theoretically a problem, and SK wants to see more evidence first. aa said in an earlier post he doesn't think camping is a big enough issue at the moment to warrant immediate banning. I also think bans should only happen after camping becomes issue. It'd help if more people chimed in with their opinions.

Everyone is pretty clear on what qualities make a stage bannable.

How are you so sure of that? If there was clear agreement there wouldn't be any debate.

 

[Battlecow]

double ugh

We agree on the criteria that a banned stage should fulfil but disagree on whether hyrule fills those criteria. Therefore your point about how "It's really hard to have a productive debate about stage banning when people haven't even agreed on what qualities make a stage bannable" is invalid

capisce?

@ballin if they hit you, they get tent combos on you as well. And the way the tent works leads to the guy coming in from above and without a little alcove to dashdance into and out of being at a disadvantage. Watch Isai v. Gerson and you'll pick up on what I mean

left side is another such advantageous defensive posish.

 

[clubbadubba]

We agree on the criteria that a banned stage should fulfil but disagree on whether hyrule fills those criteria. Therefore your point about how "It's really hard to have a productive debate about stage banning when people haven't even agreed on what qualities make a stage bannable" is invalid

I think I missed the part about what the criteria for a banned stage are (seriously, not sarcastic). If we have actually reached that decision, maybe some one could sum it up explicitly for the rest of us in a well written, concise post.

 

[KnitePhox]

*clears throat*


I got one thing to say....

Unless you will be re-engineering the game to be a new super smash bros game on the n64, nothing is banned, and nothing will ever change anybody's way how they wanna play the game.

I would never listen to bunch of idiots on a forum how to play a game. LMAO.


The Great MATTS!


<Lovage> MATTS! has spoken.

100%.
Go to apex, get ssb64 hotel room.
DO.