Hyrule should be counterpick only

[ballin4life]

@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.

but they also can't dashdance left ...

 

[Pink_Kirby]

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?

I agree with clubbadubba that it would be very useful if someone could sum up the stage ban criteria, since I have never seen them posted anywhere.

Also, If it is debatable whether a stage meets the criteria, then the criteria probably aren't objectively well defined enough.

From my observation of the debates present and past, it seems the existence of "stronghold-type" safe areas that are trivially easy to defend is a good reason for a ban. As an example, most characters can pitch a metaphorical tent on the Yoshi clouds forever since they can easily dodge projectiles there and it is fairly easy to deny any sort of approach. Existence of random elements seems to be another one but with an exception for Hyrule. When you have specific definitions like that it's much easier to decide whether a stage meets the criteria.

@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.

Approaching from directly above is generally harder for the attacker. Since horizontal air speed is, in most cases, slower than grounded dashing speed, the grounded character has a greater range of movement. On top of that the grounded character generally has more options (e.g. dash dance grab, dash pivot + attack, step out of the way, shield grab, or stand ground with some upwards attack) than the aerial character (fall with 1 or 2 viable aerial choices, same thing but with fast fall, or double jump and back off). This adds up to the aerial character being slightly easier to predict than the grounded one. Applying this to Hyrule, both left roof and right tent area are narrow enough that the grounded character can almost always get under the aerial character and force the approach to come from above. Low approaches towards the left are also dangerous because the small drop favors the lower character. These are just some of my observations which may or may not be correct, so please add your comments, especially all you pro-level experienced players out there.

 

[Olikus]

To be more specific to the gerson vs isai matches, since many tell battlecows theyr not a valid argument. Several times gerson had less lifes/more prosent than isai and waited in the tent/left plattform without moving. By the rules definition that is stalling. And it impossible to do that on DL. Yes you could run away like boom in GF, but thats camping not stalling. Hyrule is probably the only legal stage where you can stall very easily without taking a big risk on getting hit. And that is a big problem.

 

[clubbadubba]

To be more specific to the gerson vs isai matches, since many tell battlecows theyr not a valid argument. Several times gerson had less lifes/more prosent than isai and waited in the tent/left plattform without moving. By the rules definition that is stalling. And it impossible to do that on DL. Yes you could run away like boom in GF, but thats camping not stalling. Hyrule is probably the only legal stage where you can stall very easily without taking a big risk on getting hit. And that is a big problem.

Doesn't stalling only become a problem if the staller is winning? After all there is a 10 minute time limit proposed in the Backroom ruleset.

 

[Olikus]

Doesn't stalling only become a problem if the staller is winning? After all there is a 10 minute time limit proposed in the Backroom ruleset.

I would agree its a bigger problem but its still a problem with stalling in a match, the way I see it. And I wasnt aware of the time limit. I still think it should be 8 instead of 10 though.

 

[t!MmY]

I've seen this with Melee years ago and I've been working with it in Brawl for years too. When people try to figure out stages the pitfall they all slide into is in saying 'this stage' should be banned (etc.) but not 'that stage' without ever stopping and coming up with foundational reasons as to why.

Start with what you feel is most 'competitive' and what stage elements are for competitive play and which disrupt competitive play. Look at what stages are always 'acceptably banned' and the reasons why those stages are banned. From there, categorize the stages based on the criteria.

For example:
All stages with Walk-Offs, Walls (Ceilings) and Stage Hazards should be banned. Other elements that affect player-vs-player interaction should be judged based on magnitude of disruption.

You should get something like this:

Most Competitive:*
Final Destination (Master Hand Stage)
Meta Crystal (Metal Mario Stage)
Battlefield (Polygon Fighter Stage)

Competitive:
Dreamland
Kongo Jungle

Borderline:**
Peach's Castle
Saffron City
Yoshi's Island

Banned:
Hyrule Castle
Planet Zebus
Mushroom Kingdom
Sector Z

*These stages are not available without altering the game code.
**Borderline stages would not be used by default in competitive play. They would have to be voted in by attendees to be used, possibly as 'Counterpick' stages.

 

[Glöwworm]

^ Is that list of categorized stages random? If not,

 

[rawrimamonster]

^ Is that list of categorized stages random? If not,

I feel that would be best case scenario, except i wouldnt ban Hyrule outright. Sadly not everyone has a gameshark and even more are against GS stages for mostly baww reasons....


damn this thread almost makes me wanna play again just to dominate the drama queens again and have them john/lie about losin to me after a year of no practice.

 

[Glöwworm]

Idamn this thread almost makes me wanna play again just to dominate the drama queens again and have them john/lie about losin to me after a year of no practice.

$50 MM?

 

[King Omega]

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.

So is it cheap for Fox to circle camp Hyrule?

Because the way you're going on about how broken Fox's circle camping is and how you can just fire lasers for percent advantage and it's totally undefeatable, it definitely sounds like you consider it cheap.

If not, what are your grounds for banning Hyrule? Nothing any character can do on the stage is cheap. It's all completely acceptable no matter how long it makes matches take because it is playing to win.

All stages with Walk-Offs, Walls (Ceilings) and Stage Hazards should be banned.

Walls? Really? This isn't Brawl's Shadow Moses Island where walls allow you to survive killing blows at hundreds of percent. Hyrule's walls have only one argument against them: combos.

If combos, 0-to-death or otherwise, EVER become a reason for banning something, it's time to ban Jigglypuff. Who cares if she has crappy airspeed and no range or approaches? She can zero to death. Totally unfair. And Falcon's uairs? Those hit too many times for my liking.

I hope your wall-ban argument was specifically for 64, though, and not Melee or Brawl...

Oh, and DL wind is clearly a stage hazard and therefore apparently bannable. I've quite honestly had it kill me by shortening my recovery distance by the extra smidgen I needed.

 

[Dingus]

If not, what are your grounds for banning Hyrule? Nothing any character can do on the stage is cheap. It's all completely acceptable no matter how long it makes matches take because it is playing to win.

I think thats the point. As long as its legal, players can / should do it. No one is advocating a ban because they think camping hyrule is cheap / unbeatable, but because it makes the game less fun. Defensive play can be beat with counter defensive play, but some people prefer a faster paced game.

The real problem is that "less fun" is completely subjective.

 

[Zack353]

Man, I would seriously love it if Battlefield was the only stage ever played. Ever.

Stupid Nintendo.

 

[King Omega]

I think thats the point. As long as its legal, players can / should do it. No one is advocating a ban because they think camping hyrule is cheap / unbeatable, but because it makes the game less fun. Defensive play can be beat with counter defensive play, but some people prefer a faster paced game.

The real problem is that "less fun" is completely subjective.

It's not the job of a ruleset to make the game more fun. It's the job of a ruleset to make the game more 'fair' or 'competitive.'

If a TO wants to ban Hyrule because he thinks it inevitably leads to 15-minute stall-fests, he can do that.

If battlecow wants Hyrule banned from all tourneys autmatically, he can't do that.

Man, I would seriously love it if Battlefield was the only stage ever played. Ever.

Battlefield's ledges are stupid. FD is better (but a bit small?).

 

[Zack353]

Too small. Battlefield is basically a bigger dreamland with no wind. It's perfect.

 

[clubbadubba]

Oh, and DL wind is clearly a stage hazard and therefore apparently bannable. I've quite honestly had it kill me by shortening my recovery distance by the extra smidgen I needed.

As much as I agree that DL wind is a ***** and kills me all too often (mostly because I press A to dtilt or jab as it pushes me off the edgeand end up falling to my death), its not quite the same thing as other stage hazards because its not random. Its similar to peaches castle or kongo with moving parts, the wind makes that side of the stage effectively shorter. I think wind is worse than the moving parts obvi, but a bannable stage hazard I'm not so sure.

Final Destination + Battlefield = win. Seriously why not include those in the game Nintendo? Or at least a stage hazard switch.

 

[SuPeRbOoM]

Oh, and DL wind is clearly a stage hazard and therefore apparently bannable. I've quite honestly had it kill me by shortening my recovery distance by the extra smidgen I needed.

Dreamland wind only affects people on the ground, not in the air.

Battlefield would be pretty good if those ledges of doooom wouldn't kill you when you DI, otherwise it's a fairly decent DREAMLAND wut.

 

[Pink_Kirby]

I think Stage Hazards is too broad of a term. Rather, it's more reasonable to say random stage hazards should be bannable due to the luck factor. Perfectly predictable stage hazards should be left in, and people can express their personal preferences about them via the stage striking system.

Introducing BF and FD implies introducing Gameharks into the tournament, and once you do that there's also so many more things you can do, like no-wind DL, or even perhaps stage-editor stages. Just wanted to point that out since I rarely ever see BF and no wind DL mentioned in the same post even though it seems most people would prefer no-wind DL.

 

[Battlecow]

So is it cheap for Fox to circle camp Hyrule?

Because the way you're going on about how broken Fox's circle camping is and how you can just fire lasers for percent advantage and it's totally undefeatable, it definitely sounds like you consider it cheap.

If not, what are your grounds for banning Hyrule? Nothing any character can do on the stage is cheap. It's all completely acceptable no matter how long it makes matches take because it is playing to win.

The question isn't about cheap or not, bro, and honestly, the fact that I'm still having to explain myself after all these pages is a little bit annoying. Read the words I type:

Hyrule, in my opinion, is BROKEN, competitively. Theoretical top-level play-to-win hyrule matches would never end. This breaks the game. Why the **** do you think we banned Yoshi's Island? Because people thought it was cheap? No, ****nuts, it was because you can camp the clouds unbeatably, leading to a stalling situation exactly like the one we encounter on hyrule.

Jesus, sometimes...

If combos, 0-to-death or otherwise, EVER become a reason for banning something, it's time to ban Jigglypuff. Who cares if she has crappy airspeed and no range or approaches? She can zero to death. Totally unfair. And Falcon's uairs? Those hit too many times for my liking.

I hope your wall-ban argument was specifically for 64, though, and not Melee or Brawl...

Oh, and DL wind is clearly a stage hazard and therefore apparently bannable. I've quite honestly had it kill me by shortening my recovery distance by the extra smidgen I needed.

No one is saying we should ban hyrule because of tent combos. I wish you people would cool it with that. Also, DL wind has no effect on airborne characters, so yeah, you have no idea what you're talking about.

It's not the job of a ruleset to make the game more fun. It's the job of a ruleset to make the game more 'fair' or 'competitive.'

If a TO wants to ban Hyrule because he thinks it inevitably leads to 15-minute stall-fests, he can do that.

If battlecow wants Hyrule banned from all tourneys autmatically, he can't do that.

I want the "official" BR ruleset for 64 to list hyrule as a banned stage; presumably that would lead to its being banned at all or most competitive 64 tournaments in North America and Europe. Don't worry, no one is going to come to your house and force you to stop playing it with your little brother.

 

[King Omega]

I don't think DL should be banned, least of all because of wind. I just think t!MmY's generalizations are off, and citing DL as having a stage hazard is just argumentative.

I didn't know that about the wind. Now I have one less wind john.

The question isn't about cheap or not, bro, and honestly, the fact that I'm still having to explain myself after all these pages is a little bit annoying. Read the words I type:

Hyrule, in my opinion, is BROKEN, competitively. Theoretical top-level play-to-win hyrule matches would never end. This breaks the game. Why the **** do you think we banned Yoshi's Island? Because people thought it was cheap? No, ****nuts, it was because you can camp the clouds unbeatably, leading to a stalling situation exactly like the one we encounter on hyrule.

Jesus, sometimes...

Is broken the advanced form of cheap? I don't see the fundamental difference between "it's cheap to camp on Hyrule" and "Hyrule is broken because of camping." Broken suggests it makes the game unplayable, but in reality it only makes the game unplayable for the person BEING camped. There's no difference between that and the unplayability experienced by someone getting 0-to-deathed by Falcon uairs on DL.

As far as stalling goes, if you're differentiating--surprise, both players sitting in one place makes the game unplayable. You think you need to post "read the words I type" and act snarky so I'll realize that?

Clearly, your problem is with STALLING and if your only problem with Hyrule is STALLING and not camping, the solution is to ban STALLING.

Example: People didn't like Meta Knight planking in Brawl. You can plank on any stage with ledges.

Wrong solution: Ban all stages with ledges, ban characters that can grab ledges

Right solution: Ban planking (or limit it)

I want the "official" BR ruleset for 64 to list hyrule as a banned stage; presumably that would lead to its being banned at all or most competitive 64 tournaments in North America and Europe. Don't worry, no one is going to come to your house and force you to stop playing it with your little brother.

How is that at all a response to what I said? Where do you get the idea I'm worried I won't be able to play Hyrule anymore? I was talking about the role of a ruleset, not the repercussions of Hyrule being banned.

Before you respond, look over your post and decide if you really really need to be an ******* in your response.

 

[ballin4life]

Hyrule, in my opinion, is BROKEN, competitively. Theoretical top-level play-to-win hyrule matches would never end. This breaks the game. Why the **** do you think we banned Yoshi's Island? Because people thought it was cheap? No, ****nuts, it was because you can camp the clouds unbeatably, leading to a stalling situation exactly like the one we encounter on hyrule.

I actually don't think cloud camping on Yoshi's is unbeatable at all. It's definitely not on par with helipad camping on Saffron IMO. Cloud camping maybe could make the game kinda suck though.

 

[Battlecow]

Is broken the advanced form of cheap? I don't see the fundamental difference between "it's cheap to camp on Hyrule" and "Hyrule is broken because of camping." Broken suggests it makes the game unplayable, but in reality it only makes the game unplayable for the person BEING camped. There's no difference between that and the unplayability experienced by someone getting 0-to-deathed by Falcon uairs on DL.

As far as stalling goes, if you're differentiating--surprise, both players sitting in one place makes the game unplayable. You think you need to post "read the words I type" and act snarky so I'll realize that?

Clearly, your problem is with STALLING and if your only problem with Hyrule is STALLING and not camping, the solution is to ban STALLING.

I'm snarky because you're being foolish. Come on now- I specifically used the word stalling like three posts ago to describe why hyrule was broken, and it was apparent in my argument long before that. Ban stalling? How would you enforce that? A timer? Oh, joy, every match on hyrule ends with a time-out. Hey, that would work for Yoshi's too--legalize that ****. I can't be expected to treat you politely if you can't be expected to make even a token effort at understanding the issues before spewing **** all over the thread.

How is that at all a response to what I said? Where do you get the idea I'm worried I won't be able to play Hyrule anymore? I was talking about the role of a ruleset, not the repercussions of Hyrule being banned.

You said that I wasn't allowed to ban hyrule from every tournament ever. Obviously, you didn't understand my objective, so I clarified, noting which "tournaments" would and would not likely retain hyrule. It's a perfectly legitimate response to what you said.

@ballin'- Respectful disagree, helipad camping is marginally more beatable than cloud camping IMO, although both merit bans.

 

[t!MmY]

I just think t!MmY's generalizations are off...

Please provide details as to why you feel the generalizations are 'off' and to what degree. Feel free to provide your own generalizations in the process so we may contrast the two views to gain a better understanding of Stage Classification and what should and should not be banned.

Btw, Whispy's wind in Dreamland is not technically a 'Stage Hazard' as it deals no damage. You could argue that the gust is 'knockback' or something like that, but the degree to which it moves players is pretty minimal and hardly random or surprising. Thus, if you want to call it a Stage Hazard, it would probably fit within the confines of minimally effecting player-vs-player interaction.

 

[kys]

I personally don't like hyrule because of the nados, but that's another discussion.

As far as the tent/camping issue, I'm just curious to know if anyone has ever tried to develop a strategy that breaks tent campers. What if a character were to go to the top of the tent, and from there have the option of dropping down to either side? I've honestly never thought about this much or tried to use it in play because I'm an impatient player and would rather get destroyed than wait it out.

I say this because it kinda seems like in every discussion it's always assumed some hum-dee-dum character lazily drops in, predictably, from above. When you can incorporate ff aerials and second jumps with the possibility of landing on either side (cuz you're at the top), chances of taking the tent would improve, right? The advantage would still go to the camper, but perhaps marginally so. I don't feel there's enough information on this to warrant a ban just yet.

Either way, nados suck. Big time.

 

[asianaussie]

dreamland wind can sometimes cause deaths, but nowhere near as frequently as any other stage hazard in the game

banning hyrule is still too pre-emptive at this point and i don't see what it adds to the competitive game as a whole, there's no need to do so

im still hesitantly proposing DL/kongo/zebes starter with hyrule/peach's as CP (maybe saffron too since saffron is fun, idk)

 

[King Omega]

Ban stalling? How would you enforce that? A timer? Oh, joy, every match on hyrule ends with a time-out.

If a timer is so horrible, then disqualify people who stall. Outrageous, I know.

Brawl LGL--makes people angry, or maybe just MK mains, but it mitigates the problem of planking. Easy.

But a timer isn't horrible.

I understand that you're saying small stages promote approaching whereas Hryule discourages it, so this argument is not directed at that. But your "breaks the game" point seems to come from this bull**** hypothetical situation with perfect robot players who never take any risk or do anything if they might get punished.

I don't buy your argument that the game is broken by Hyrule, on any level of competitive play (since these are humans and not robots). Unless the game is really broken, then the worst we get out of stalling is "long-*** matches," and as I already said, it is not the job of a ruleset to make the game more enjoyable or make tourneys take less time.

Once again, banning Hyrule because "matches are there are boring and/or endless because of stalling, and I want more action/skill/gimping" is a TO's decision.

I can't be expected to treat you politely if you can't be expected to make even a token effort at understanding the issues before spewing **** all over the thread.

lol

You are such a perpetually bent out of shape person. I can be as wrong as I want to be, but it's your decision to be a jerk.

 

[Zack353]

The problem with dq'ing people that stall is that it's not really possible. Not only would you need someone to supervise EVERY match, but stalling is too subjective of a term to ever establish any good guidelines for.

What if a player is at a high % and on his last stock, and he chooses to camp the left side of the stage for the gimp? If he's reasonably moving around and maybe throwing/shooting some projectiles or something, and the other player also isn't approaching, who's the one stalling? Are we going to force people to rush in at high %'s out of fear that they might be stalling the match? That doesn't sound very competitive to me.

 

[rawrimamonster]

$50 MM?

Lol if i were to MM it'd be irl, i cant stand kaillera anymore man. Thats the foremost and first reason I quit, that and I felt like I hit a wall playing online only...and no money to travel. I wish that my irl friends weren't a buncha ragequitting buzzblown crybabies cuz i do miss 64.

 

[Battlecow]

If a timer is so horrible, then disqualify people who stall. Outrageous, I know.

Brawl LGL--makes people angry, or maybe just MK mains, but it mitigates the problem of planking. Easy.

But a timer isn't horrible.

I understand that you're saying small stages promote approaching whereas Hryule discourages it, so this argument is not directed at that. But your "breaks the game" point seems to come from this bull**** hypothetical situation with perfect robot players who never take any risk or do anything if they might get punished.

I don't buy your argument that the game is broken by Hyrule, on any level of competitive play (since these are humans and not robots). Unless the game is really broken, then the worst we get out of stalling is "long-*** matches," and as I already said, it is not the job of a ruleset to make the game more enjoyable or make tourneys take less time.

Once again, banning Hyrule because "matches are there are boring and/or endless because of stalling, and I want more action/skill/gimping" is a TO's decision.
.

Ultimately, yes, every rule is used at the TO's discretion. That doesn't mean that a ruleset shouldn't reflect the best competitive rules possible. Kind of obvious, bro.

Everything else you said could be applied with equal merit to Yoshi's Island, as I've said so many times already.

Also, and this is directed at my peeps in the 64 community, I'd like to see an argument for stage diversity; both major competitive scenes outside of our little western alliance thingy seem to gravitate towards a one-stage metagame for what I think are good reasons (I've already gone into this, but basically the most important thing is that no CP'ing equals less match-by-match variance). Personally, I think DL's the obvious best choice, but with easy Gsharking I could see FD and BF (anticipating major resistance to that, and not without reason) and I wouldn't even be appalled at Congo from a competitive standpoint (although that stage is really annoying and I'd hate playing friendlies there).

Basically, the mindset seems to be "keep it if it isn't broken," and I think we'd do better not to screw around with janky stages in-tournament at all.

 

[clubbadubba]

Smash is a unique fighting game for many reasons, not least of which is the effect stages have on the game. Unlike your typical SF or MK fighting game, the stage can dictate how effective certain play styles are. Some would argue that Dreamland benefits the aggressive, pressure heavy players, while Hyrule benefits the more patient, defensive players (please someone don't get angry and correct me, that part is an example and is so beside the point). If you change the ruleset to one stage metagame, you are giving the natural advantage to players whose play style strength matches the stage you choose. Personally, I don't think a ruleset should influence the metagame like that. In the current system, the first match is played on essentially neutral turf, and the ones that follow will be to either players strength, giving both a chance to utilize their best skill set.

If that isn't a good enough argument (and I doubt it is, I'm tired), just look at the other smash games. Both use a similar system that we currently use if I'm not mistaken. Now, obviously both of the other games have vastly superior stage selection, but I definitely don't think SSB stage selection is at the level where only one stage is playable. This is evidenced by two different communities, Peru and Japan (I know games a bit different blah blah not important here), playing on only Hyrule or only Dreamland, respectively.

Of course, if you make the system single stage then players would make their play styles match the stage as best they can. But to me their isn't a superior play style we should be supporting. And if there is one, who gets to say what it is?

And also.... nah jk I'm done writing for know. Haha I love being an engineering major, I've written more 'essays' on smashboards than I have in four years of college.

 

[Battlecow]

Yeah, but melee (I don't know anything about brawl) has essentially a bunch of Dreamlands and FD, so they can have multiple stages without changes to gameplay as drastic as hyrule-DL

 

[clubbadubba]

True, but melee also plays on rainbow cruise, which I think influence gameplay a lot more drastically than hryule vs dreamland. rainbow cruise may no longer be legal though, i don't keep up with melee. Though according to smashwiki it is and battlecow you of all people know how reliable that is

 

[t!MmY]

Melee does not generally use Rainbow Cruise anymore. As the game matured the scrubs disappeared allowing the competitive aspect of Melee to advance.
The stage list is generally:

Starter:
Battlefield
Dreamland
Final Destination
Fountain of Dreams
Yoshi's Story

Counterpick:
Pokemon Stadium
Kongo Jungle (64)

That list is from the Genesis 2 stage list - the upcoming Apex in 2012 dropped Kongo Jungle in Singles.

Brawl is seeing a similar paradigm. Practically every stage except the most obviously non-competitive stage was allowed in early 2008. Stages began to be removed over the years as the novelty of casual play receded to a more competitive style.

Currently stages like Brinstar and Rainbow Cruise are disappearing (the argument "they were in Melee" holds even less water now that Melee stopped using them). Eventually we'll see a stage list similar to Melee's (i.e. Battlefield, Final Destination, Smashville, Yoshi's Story, and Lylat Cruise with counterpicks being Pokemon Stadium and maybe Delfino Plaza\Frigate Orpheon).

I'm actually surprised that a game as old as SSB still has a community clinging onto stages like Hyrule and Saffron, especially with a game so exquisitely designed for competitive play.

 

[Olikus]

I'm actually surprised that a game as old as SSB still has a community clinging onto stages like Hyrule and Saffron, especially with a game so exquisitely designed for competitive play.

I like this guy. He knows what he is talking about.

 

[Sangoku]

Says the guy who likes peach's castle .

 

[ciaza]

64 doesn't have the luxury of having a large amount of stages to choose from like melee or brawl. even if they ban 90% of stages they still have a solid amount that are both competitive and fun to play on stopping people from getting bored.

if 64 only played on dreamland i'd be bored absolutely ****less, and since i'd know it's the only place that will be played on in tourney's, i'd only practice there too. it'd make ssb64 a lot less fun for me (and others i'm sure). as such 64 stages need to undergo serious critique to see if a stage is bannable to maximize fun and competitiveness. after all, banning one or two stages in melee or brawl is ok for them, they still have another handful to play on. we don't.

 

[Battlecow]

I don't understand why one stage is boring to you.

 

[asianaussie]

it's all good and well if you think hyrule is banworthy - hell, it might be *at the highest level of play with players adherely strictly to the 'optimal' playstyle*, but right now you're putting the cart before the cow

this change is not something that will take years to adapt: i can rattle out an entire ruleset, stagelist included, have it critiqued, and release it in less than a week, and if there really becomes enough evidence that hyrule specifically is facilitating some sort of...stalling, camping, i've forgotten what it is you think hyrule does...then we'll go ahead and do just that

even if APEX really is a bunch of pithy pika-fox campfests, it won't instantly make banning hyrule the right option - hell, if the campfests take place on DL (which they well might) then that's something else entirely to look at

 

[KnitePhox]

damn, aa's post got me thinking about how I need to get going with all the code inputs on gs for button press selecting chars for FD. Damn it's going to take a good amount of time, considering how far apex is from now, time that I have. Hopefully it's fully possible and worth it.

going to need better codes where the stocks don't stay on screen though. Anyone have good fd codes like that??? ...(emudigital time)

 

[Pink_Kirby]

My 2 cents on Stage Diversity:
I think stage diversity is desirable, but should be subordinate to competitive fairness. As clubba pointed out a few posts back, SSB's distinctive feature in the fighting game genre is the mechanic where you K.O. opponents by knocking them off the stage as opposed to damaging them until their HP drops to zero. Thus, rather than being mere scenery, stages are a huge part of the game.

On a different note, I agree with what most of t!Mmy has been saying so far, except with a slight modification on the "Stage Hazards" part. I support banning stages with random elements since the typical match count in a tournament setting is too small for the law of large numbers to apply. While there are high-stakes tournaments based on games with a significant random element (e.g. most card games), I can understand if people want to keep randomness out of ssb tournaments. With that said, I don't think Hyrule tornadoes deserve an exception and that rule if it exists should be applied consistently. However, stage hazards that are completely fair and predictable are fine competitively since both players are affected equally.

As far as camping goes, it doesn't affect stage fairness since it's a player behavior and both players can do it. I also agree with aa in that it's probably better to deal with stalling when it actually breaks the game - at the very least then we have the benefit of empirical evidence regarding which measures work to reduce camping and which do not.

Also, as an rather off-topic aside I would like to suggest that Zebes is at least as effective as an "anti-camping" stage as DL because the acid forces everyone to the top every other minute or so and the platform up there is so tiny that it's hard for both players to be up there without getting into each other's personal space. The top platform doesn't have as many of the "impossible to safely approach" issues either. Note that I'm not suggesting that Zebes game-play consists only of one platform, merely that any camping behavior will be forcibly interrupted by the stage at regular intervals of about a minute or so unless it is taking place on the top platform, which is too small for 2 players to camp simultaneously.

 

[asianaussie]

empirical evidence? lol

more like 'this is gay, i don't wanna have to play a game like this, let's ban ****'