Meta It's Time To Abandon 3 Starter Lists

[Budget Player Cadet_]

Lylat has been fixed. We no longer have glitches that interrupt moves or put characters airborne, and the ledges were changed to make the tilting far less extreme. With that, we have a really solid 5th "starter" stage, next to the obvious FD/BF/SV/T&C. So let's go through this one more time.

Three starter lists are bad. Really, really bad. Why?

1. The player who strikes second has a huge advantage. The player striking first has to gamble on what stage his opponent dislikes. This becomes doubly bad if, as I have seen far too many tournaments doing, characters are kept blind until after striking. With 1-2-1 striking and 5 stages, this is considerably more balanced - the player with the weakest strike also ends up getting the strongest strike.
   
2. It almost always ends up on Smashville, regardless of how neutral it is. In almost every matchup, Smashville acts as a "go-between" between FD and BF. Regardless of how fair this is - in many matchups, Smashville is a counterpick for one of the characters. Shiek and Pikachu immediately come to mind. And in most of those matchups, one character favors both SV and FD. Even just the ability to strike those two makes a lot of matchups a lot more doable.

With Lylat fixed, we can move to the far more equitable and considerably more balanced 5-starter* system.










*(Please note that this is contingent upon you accepting the very silly notion that somehow, certain stages are competitively non-viable game one but are perfectly fine games 2 and 3, and that these stages are explicitly non-moving flat+plat stages. If you don't accept that, then ignore this thread, because you should probably already be using Full List Stage Striking. That said, I'll take "better" over "worse" any day of the week, even if it's for the wrong reasons.)

 

[mega4000]

Lylat has been fixed. We no longer have glitches that interrupt moves or put characters airborne, and the ledges were changed to make the tilting far less extreme. With that, we have a really solid 5th "starter" stage, next to the obvious FD/BF/SV/T&C. So let's go through this one more time.

Three starter lists are bad. Really, really bad. Why?

1. The player who strikes second has a huge advantage. The player striking first has to gamble on what stage his opponent dislikes. This becomes doubly bad if, as I have seen far too many tournaments doing, characters are kept blind until after striking. With 1-2-1 striking and 5 stages, this is considerably more balanced - the player with the weakest strike also ends up getting the strongest strike.
   
2. It almost always ends up on Smashville, regardless of how neutral it is. In almost every matchup, Smashville acts as a "go-between" between FD and BF. Regardless of how fair this is - in many matchups, Smashville is a counterpick for one of the characters. Shiek and Pikachu immediately come to mind. And in most of those matchups, one character favors both SV and FD. Even just the ability to strike those two makes a lot of matchups a lot more doable.

With Lylat fixed, we can move to the far more equitable and considerably more balanced 5-starter* system.










*(Please note that this is contingent upon you accepting the very silly notion that somehow, certain stages are competitively non-viable game one but are perfectly fine games 2 and 3. If you don't accept that, then ignore this thread, because you should probably already be using Full List Stage Striking. That said, I'll take "better" over "worse" any day of the week, even if it's for the wrong reasons.)

I support this guy 100% sierously, the rulesshould be like this:

first round:
port 1 choose character
port 2 choose character
Banning Stages from 5 starte list (port 1 ban first)
port 1 choose customs
port 2 choose customs

second round and from now on:
winner bans 2 stages
loser choose stage
winner choose character
loser choose character
winner picks customs
loser picks customs

5 starters is the only way to make this fair, unless you want to keep playing smash ville your whole life.

 

[S_B]

So glad they fixed Lylat.

It's actually a really good stage for Bowser due to the platforms, but the engines cancelling moves weren't good for anyone...

 

[Charey]

I am still confused by the idea that a stage can be "good" for competitive play yet "bad" for being the first stage of a match.

The only reason I could see for having counter pick stages is if the is an even number of legal stages so you have to put one to CP to make stage striking work.

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

I am still confused by the idea that a stage can be "good" for competitive play yet "bad" for being the first stage of a match.

You and me both, buddy.

 

[Epok]

Why not random game 1? Random doesn't discriminate aganst a player or match up.

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

Why not random game 1? Random doesn't discriminate aganst a player or match up.

Because it matters quite a lot, for example, whether you get BF or FD round one in the Kirby/ZSS matchup, and leaving that up to chance is a bad idea.

 

[Octagon]

I support this guy 100% sierously, the rulesshould be like this:

first round:
port 1 choose character
port 2 choose character
Banning Stages from 5 starte list (port 1 ban first)
port 1 choose customs
port 2 choose customs

second round and from now on:
winner bans 2 stages
loser choose stage
winner choose character
loser choose character
winner picks customs
loser picks customs

5 starters is the only way to make this fair, unless you want to keep playing smash ville your whole life.

This is honestly the perfect system for tournaments

 

[Xermo]

I support this guy 100% sierously, the rulesshould be like this:

first round:
port 1 choose character
port 2 choose character
Banning Stages from 5 starte list (port 1 ban first)
port 1 choose customs
port 2 choose customs

second round and from now on:
winner bans 2 stages
loser choose stage
winner choose character
loser choose character
winner picks customs
loser picks customs

5 starters is the only way to make this fair, unless you want to keep playing smash ville your whole life.

>port priority stage striking
Disgusting

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

>port priority stage striking
Disgusting

>less than full list stage striking
Disgusting

 

[Raijinken]

<insert repeated statement of yes here>

 

[ParanoidDrone]

Glossing over the 3-starter/5-starter/FLSS debate entirely, I think the big thing to focus on is that Lylat Cruise is basically fixed. Period. The underside lets you recover without bashing your head and the glitch where some moves would make you go airborne seems to be gone. That leaves only the tilting as a possible reason to not allow the stage and I don't think anyone actually cared about the tilting per se but rather how it made it difficult to sweetspot the ledge (moot now that you can ride the underside) and could put you in the air after certain grounded moves (fixed).

So...yeah. Is there anything bad about this stage now?

EDIT: BPC check your PMs?

 

[Minty_]

Yes, please! I'd go a step further and say that all legal stages should be counter-pick, but 5 starters is definitely a step in the right direction.

 

[mega4000]

Yes, please! I'd go a step further and say that all legal stages should be counter-pick, but 5 starters is definitely a step in the right direction.

the problem with having a full list of starters is people get confused and don't remember what they banned and so on. We run a tournament with every stage as starter and everyone before the match talked to his player and say, "let's go to smash ville!". With 5 stages is easy to remember what you banned.

 

[Jaxas]

the problem with having a full list of starters is people get confused and don't remember what they banned and so on. We run a tournament with every stage as starter and everyone before the match talked to his player and say, "let's go to smash ville!". With 5 stages is easy to remember what you banned.

Use the Random Stage Select screen; start with all the stages turned on and strike them off. You can even use the Omega's Random Stage Select screen as a reference to set it back up if people forget.

That's what we do here, with 13(!) stages, and it works great.

 

[T0MMY]

I agree, we need to get rid of this 3-stage starter nonsense and bring about the future of Smash...
1-stage starter: Final Destination only!

Spoiler

 

[LunarWingCloud]

Wait.

You mean we weren't running 5 starter lists already? Smash 4 WiiU has such a strong set of stages to use competitively and can easily fit 5 starters. Hell 6 if Lylat is being added (FD, Battlefield, Smashville, Town and City, Duck Hunt, Lylat). Why are we not already doing this?

 

[mega4000]

Use the Random Stage Select screen; start with all the stages turned on and strike them off. You can even use the Omega's Random Stage Select screen as a reference to set it back up if people forget.

That's what we do here, with 13(!) stages, and it works great.

yeah, force every tournament player to do that an see what happens. They still say nah too boring! better smash ville!

 

[Balgorxz]

I'd like to have 8 (6 is fine too) to choose from, seems solid for competitive purposes and loser gets a permanent stage ban, playing on a stage should count as a permanent ban too.
I mean we have custom stages, lylat was fixed and maybe people will try to use skyloft (one of the best competitive stages IMO).

delusions aside we are going to have smashville only for full year until people get bored and understand smash is more than learning how to play in one stage and adapting to the enviroment its indeed another way to measure a players skill as long as RNG and bad designs don't interfere.

 

[Jaxas]

yeah, force every tournament player to do that an see what happens. They still say nah too boring! better smash ville!

Except that's not what happens here. It did, until people started realizing that Sheik/Diddy are really good on Smashville, and then that stopped.

It took about 2 weeks, and since then the only people who don't strike are those who are either from out of town, or those who have played each other a bunch and have figured out where they strike to, so they just gentleman's to it.

I'd like to have 8 (6 is fine too) to choose from, seems solid for competitive purposes and loser gets a permanent stage ban, playing on a stage should count as a permanent ban too.
I mean we have custom stages, lylat was fixed and maybe people will try to use skyloft (one of the best competitive stages IMO).

delusions aside we are going to have smashville only for full year until people get bored and understand smash is more than learning how to play in one stage and adapting to the enviroment its indeed another way to measure a players skill as long as RNG and bad designs don't interfere.

You need 5/9/13 (4x+1) to make sure striking doesn't favor one player, but otherwise I agree with what you're saying.

 

[Balgorxz]

Except that's not what happens here. It did, until people started realizing that Sheik/Diddy are really good on Smashville, and then that stopped.

It took about 2 weeks, and since then the only people who don't strike are those who are either from out of town, or those who have played each other a bunch and have figured out where they strike to, so they just gentleman's to it.


You need 5/9/13 (4x+1) to make sure striking doesn't favor one player, but otherwise I agree with what you're saying.

my bad, I'm sorry sir.

 

[RedBeefBaron]

I knew about the underside fixes but Lylat's floor doesn't randomly break grabs and other moves anymore? Well that's good news.

I can support Lylat being a starter to give us five now but duck hunt is good as a counterpick. The extreme blast zones are going to benefit some more than others by just enough.

 

[Tempus]

The idea behind counterpicks is simple and not strange or silly at all. Some stages are more advantageous to some characters than others. Those stages where the stage is relatively balanced are neutral. Those who have some significant benefit to some characters over others are used as counterpicks. The idea is to not unbalance the first match unduly, but to give the ability for the loser to choose a stage more advantageous to the matchup. It doesn't always work out that way, of course.

As a player, full stage striking is probably better. But frankly, as a viewer AND a player, I am damned tired of smashville. I'd go as far as to say that first match should always be Omega random, just so there's some background and music variation. I am so damn tired of the low hype smashville songs and visuals.

 

[RedBeefBaron]

As a player, full stage striking is probably better. But frankly, as a viewer AND a player, I am damned tired of smashville. I'd go as far as to say that first match should always be Omega random, just so there's some background and music variation. I am so damn tired of the low hype smashville songs and visuals.

Game one goes to smashville a lot because its the most neutral stage though. I'd rather try to make the first game as fair as possible than adjust the rules for the sake of spectators honestly. And for some reason I've never gotten tired of that stage like a lot of people do. I still think its the best stage.

 

[cot(θ)]

yeah, force every tournament player to do that an see what happens. They still say nah too boring! better smash ville!

This is literally the only reason I don't use FLSS in my ruleset. I have about 25 legal stages, and FLSSing would be intolerable for most players.

Instead though, I have a list of 5 starters that better represent the whole stage list:

FD
Battlefield
Delfino
PS2
Wii Fit Studio

 

[Arturito_Burrito]

why isn't dk 64 a starter? sometimes it's banned from singles, is there circle camping or something?

 

[chaosmasterro]

We need to legalize more stages. Skyloft, Wuhu, DK64, and PS2 needs to be on the list. Regardless if they are banned at national tournaments they should still be played on.
I played in this one tournament and lost in a game 5 match because there was only 7 stages to choose from BF, FD, Smashville, Town and City, Lylat, Delfino and Duck Hunt. My opponent banned two, I won on two so I couldn't choose them again, and I was left with 2 stages my opponent was good on, and one that was even us. So I was forced to keep playing on the same stage.

 

[Tinkerer]

The idea behind counterpicks is simple and not strange or silly at all. Some stages are more advantageous to some characters than others. Those stages where the stage is relatively balanced are neutral. Those who have some significant benefit to some characters over others are used as counterpicks. The idea is to not unbalance the first match unduly, but to give the ability for the loser to choose a stage more advantageous to the matchup. It doesn't always work out that way, of course.

That doesn't really make much sense. Why exactly are the starter stages more balanced than others? Some matchups will have the most "even" matchup on something like Delfino, you can't predict that beforehand. Hell, Final Destination, a stage that is an incredibly strong choice for a pretty specific subset of characters and a massive detriment to others, is generally a starter stage.

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

Game one goes to smashville a lot because its the most neutral stage though. I'd rather try to make the first game as fair as possible than adjust the rules for the sake of spectators honestly. And for some reason I've never gotten tired of that stage like a lot of people do. I still think its the best stage.

Smashville is the most neutral stage? But in FLSS, I strike it most of the time in most of my matchups as ZSS or Mac. As Pikachu, I hope nobody strikes it, because I know it's really awesome for me. I know that it's also a go-to counterpick for Shiek. How is this "the most neutral stage"? If I'm playing in a matchup where my worst stages are FD, SV, and Duck Hunt, I could care less if "FD, BF, and SV" are the most fair and neutral in most matchups, this matchup is getting wrecked.

Yeah, see how this falls apart? Which is why this:

The idea behind counterpicks is simple and not strange or silly at all. Some stages are more advantageous to some characters than others. Those stages where the stage is relatively balanced are neutral. Those who have some significant benefit to some characters over others are used as counterpicks. The idea is to not unbalance the first match unduly, but to give the ability for the loser to choose a stage more advantageous to the matchup. It doesn't always work out that way, of course.

...Is kinda baloney. I mean, you say below that FLSS is probably better, so I'm not sure what point you're trying to make. As I've explained countless times, with 3 starters it's possible someone gets their 2nd-best stage in a match. With 5 starters, 3rd-best. With 13, 7th-best. Or, in other words, the more starters you have, the more neutral it gets. I think you get this, as you say later that FLSS is best, but I just feel the need to hammer this in. The "most neutral stage" for all matchups is not an easy question, but we have an easy method of determining it for any specific matchup.

 

[RedBeefBaron]

Smashville is the most neutral stage? But in FLSS, I strike it most of the time in most of my matchups as ZSS or Mac. As Pikachu, I hope nobody strikes it, because I know it's really awesome for me. I know that it's also a go-to counterpick for Shiek. How is this "the most neutral stage"? If I'm playing in a matchup where my worst stages are FD, SV, and Duck Hunt, I could care less if "FD, BF, and SV" are the most fair and neutral in most matchups, this matchup is getting wrecked.

Obviously it's not gonna be preferred by all characters and some will do well on it, but if i had a gun to my head and was told to say what the most neutral stage in Smash was it would be SV. What other stage would be more balanced overall for more character matchups? Not BF or FD, imo. Seems like most people feel that way in the most situations, enough that game one goes to Smashville a lot.

Why do Sheik and Pikachu like Smashville? Actual question that I don't know the answer to, not sarcasm.

 

[ParanoidDrone]

Obviously it's not gonna be preferred by all characters and some will do well on it, but if i had a gun to my head and was told to say what the most neutral stage in Smash was it would be SV. What other stage would be more balanced overall for more character matchups? Not BF or FD, imo. Seems like most people feel that way in the most situations, enough that game one goes to Smashville a lot.

Why do Sheik and Pikachu like Smashville? Actual question that I don't know the answer to, not sarcasm.

I'd say Town & City trumps Smashville actually, since although its platforms may be oddly high they go away every 30 seconds and force an FD layout as it moves.

Sheik likes Smashville because the platform enhances her aerial strings. If it's near the edge she can use it to carry someone cleanly offscreen for a kill. IDK about Pikachu, maybe Quick Attack shenanigans with the platform?.

 

[RedBeefBaron]

I'd say Town & City trumps Smashville actually, since although its platforms may be oddly high they go away every 30 seconds and force an FD layout as it moves.

Sheik likes Smashville because the platform enhances her aerial strings. If it's near the edge she can use it to carry someone cleanly offscreen for a kill. IDK about Pikachu, maybe Quick Attack shenanigans with the platform?.

That makes sense for shiek, now that i think about it I've actually done that to people.

I feel that Pikachu's landing options out of QA would be better on Lylat due to how there will be more places to mix up landings and reset to neutral differently due to more platforms. Approaching Pika through thunderjolt spam is also probably more difficult on Lylat due to Lylat's platforms. I think I'll still take people there as Pika even if Lylats underside and ledges no longer clearly favor chars with versatile recoveries.

Although OP's point still stands; in more uncommon situations where SV favors one person in the matchup too heavily there will be less of a chance for game 1 to go there with the stage list he's proposing.

Edit: Maybe i just suck but T&C's ledges seem pretty harsh. I get knocked out of my recovery by the corners as Diddy and even Greninja much more often than anywhere else.

 

[CyberHyperPhoenix]

The only thing that people probably still have against Lylat (despite being fixed) is that when the stage slopes, it doesn't work like how it was fixed.

 

[TheReflexWonder]

I know that people generally see this as a joke, but we're just going to strike to Smashville anyway. We don't need to spend that extra 10-30 seconds every set striking stages that will almost never be played.

I also don't agree with Town and City being a starter because its platforms can kill you at ridiculously low percents. Say you get footstooled and therefore can't tech. Just get good and avoid that situation, you say? That shouldn't be an acceptable possibility for a starter stage without going through an explicit use of the Gentleman's Clause, IMO.

 

[Raijinken]

An easy way to force players to consider their options and strike is to remove the Gentleman's Clause entirely. You may end up wasting a few moments having to verbally ban everything but Smashville for Sheik dittos, but especially for less-experienced players, it helps reinforce that stage picking is a strategic process, not something you default to Smashville on because you're comfortable there no matter how much it sucks for your character.

I'm organizing a smallish tournament at the request of some friends now, and especially since it's the first tournament ruleset 90% of them are playing in, I had to think hard whether or not to include the clause. I figured I'm leaving it in specifically because most of them probably won't use it.

And we're also running 13-stage FLSS.

 

[TheReflexWonder]

An easy way to force players to consider their options and strike is to remove the Gentleman's Clause entirely. You may end up wasting a few moments having to verbally ban everything but Smashville for Sheik dittos, but especially for less-experienced players, it helps reinforce that stage picking is a strategic process, not something you default to Smashville on because you're comfortable there no matter how much it sucks for your character.

The Gentleman's Clause is primarily used for stage that would otherwise not be usable at that point in the set, whether it's going to Castle Siege Game 1 or Palutena's Temple Game 2. You can't really force players to strike if that's not what they want to do.

I thought this discussion was about balance/efficiency, rather than helping players get better.

 

[Raijinken]

The Gentleman's Clause is primarily used for stage that would otherwise not be usable at that point in the set, whether it's going to Castle Siege Game 1 or Palutena's Temple Game 2. You can't really force players to strike if that's not what they want to do.

I thought this discussion was about balance/efficiency, rather than helping players get better.

True enough. On that subject, I agree fully with BPC (as I suppose I stated a day or so ago whenever I first posted in this thread). I don't have much more to add onto that.

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

I know that people generally see this as a joke, but we're just going to strike to Smashville anyway. We don't need to spend that extra 10-30 seconds every set striking stages that will almost never be played.

Are you speaking for your region? Your whole region? Do you think that's a good thing? I will strike Smashville as long as there's more than one strike or I don't have to waste that one strike on Final Destination. I know quite a few people who feel the same way. I know quite a few matchups where you want to avoid Smashville as well (it's a really good stage for Pikachu and Shiek). Additionally, more stage variance in round one is a good thing. If people start to realize, "hang on, I don't have to give this guy a free counterpick," they can be considerably less disadvantaged round one.

I also don't agree with Town and City being a starter because its platforms can kill you at ridiculously low percents. Say you get footstooled and therefore can't tech. Just get good and avoid that situation, you say? That shouldn't be an acceptable possibility for a starter stage without going through an explicit use of the Gentleman's Clause, IMO.

Reflex, keeping in mind that my local biweeklies have Skyloft, Kongo, Wuhu, and Pokemon Stadium 2 legal...

I have seen more abusive bull**** on Smashville than on any stage other than Halberd.

Shiek and Pikachu using the platform to fair you straight off the edge. The Balloon getting in the way of killing blows and/or slowing down moves so they still connect. Quick Attack camping on the moving platform. People getting saved when they really should have died. There has been all kinds of crazy ****. By comparison, a one-in-a-million situation that is virtually impossible to set up and which can be avoided by not screwing around those platforms at exactly the 1-second interval every 30 seconds where it's possible (and which has, to my knowledge, literally never happened) is supposed to be unacceptable? Have you seen Shiek on Smashville? Or this? Rather than requiring a difficult setup at very specific times, this requires low percents on both characters and the platform in a configuration it hits every... 3 seconds?

Can we please stop collectively pretending that Smashville is this bastion of fair, lactose-free smash goodness? It's really not. Town and City is considerably less broken.

 

[TheReflexWonder]

Are you speaking for your region? Your whole region? Do you think that's a good thing? I will strike Smashville as long as there's more than one strike or I don't have to waste that one strike on Final Destination. I know quite a few people who feel the same way. I know quite a few matchups where you want to avoid Smashville as well (it's a really good stage for Pikachu and Shiek). Additionally, more stage variance in round one is a good thing. If people start to realize, "hang on, I don't have to give this guy a free counterpick," they can be considerably less disadvantaged round one.



Reflex, keeping in mind that my local biweeklies have Skyloft, Kongo, Wuhu, and Pokemon Stadium 2 legal...

I have seen more abusive bull**** on Smashville than on any stage other than Halberd.

Shiek and Pikachu using the platform to fair you straight off the edge. The Balloon getting in the way of killing blows and/or slowing down moves so they still connect. Quick Attack camping on the moving platform. People getting saved when they really should have died. There has been all kinds of crazy ****. By comparison, a one-in-a-million situation that is virtually impossible to set up and which can be avoided by not screwing around those platforms at exactly the 1-second interval every 30 seconds where it's possible (and which has, to my knowledge, literally never happened) is supposed to be unacceptable? Have you seen Shiek on Smashville? Or this? Rather than requiring a difficult setup at very specific times, this requires low percents on both characters and the platform in a configuration it hits every... 3 seconds?

Can we please stop collectively pretending that Smashville is this bastion of fair, lactose-free smash goodness? It's really not. Town and City is considerably less broken.

There's a local Rosalina player who sometimes likes to strike Smashville against me. I just ask him, "Do you want to go to Smashville or Final Destination?" I agree that the situation comes up where people don't want to play on it, but then isn't the next strike fairly obvious based on character choice?

The Smashville platform is quite easy to keep track of, and the platform moves toward the guy not camping half the time, so advantages seem pretty minuscule. In the event that low-percent KOs happen due to the platform, at least it feels more like the opponent did that than the stage.

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

There's a local Rosalina player who sometimes likes to strike Smashville against me. I just ask him, "Do you want to go to Smashville or Final Destination?"

My point exactly.

The Smashville platform is quite easy to keep track of, and the platform moves toward the guy not camping half the time, so advantages seem pretty minuscule. In the event that low-percent KOs happen due to the platform, at least it feels more like the opponent did that than the stage.

So, hang on - an inescapable combo starting from midscreen that runs you off the side of the stage to the blastzone is not stage cheese... But landing an almost impossibly difficult footstool setup at a very specific time is? Okay...