Legal Stage List

[Juushichi]

I think MC is mostly fine and is generally legal at my events in singles.

Ban logistics is what is getting me mainly.

 

[Burning Boom]

I'm going to open the sh*t can here and say that I think Halberd is absolutely fine. Yes there is a stage, but you know what? It's so telegraphed, slow, and easy to avoid that if you got hit by it you probably deserve to be. Personally, I think the cannon adds a nice layer to stage control, but that's just me. Besides, if the problem is simply "It can kill you", guess what? So can the ballons on Smashville. Seriously, I don't know about other recoveries, but Luigi's Green Missle at least is stopped dead in its tracks if he makes contact with a ballon, and it can stop projectiles. We can turn anything into a problem if we put our mind to it.

 

[MonkUnit]

I think Halberd would be better if it skipped the beginning rising portion of the stage and just started out in the air. That way you wouldn't have less than 10 seconds of gameplay before it gets interrupted.

 

[lordvaati]

I really don't see why people don't like Metal Cavern, it has potential to be a strong counterpick and allow some characters to compete. I think the idea should at least be entertained

Yeah I'd be cool with MC too, I think people are just freaked out over the immense blast zones.

Speaking of stage sizes, either they messed up on the official website or you misread the size, but RF is classified as a Medium sized stage( same as BF, and smaller then FD and DL) and has reasonable blastzones,so that " very large stage" argument is kinda null.

 

[XXXX1000]

I think the idea with RF is that some characters would be able to get a stock lead and then use the platforms to run away indefinitely (someone also said this about Skyloft due to how the platforms are high enough that most characters need two jumps to reach them, or something, I dunno I don't play it).

And the Halberd opening portion is dumb for competitive. Everyone knows what's happening on Rainbow Cruise, so why not allow that? It literally forces the players to be in the air at a certain time, how is that not dumb? At least that one also doesn't have a damn cannon trying to kill you. "a nice layer to stage control"? Players can't control it, it's not something someone can plausibly take advantage of. Commentators will be talking about how well Link is zoning with his bombs, and then they'll talk about how the cannon is locked on DK so DK needs to approach, but that sucks because Link hit him back into the cannon, sucks to be DK, guess he should've banned Halberd if he didn't want to fight a 2v1. Comparing the Halberd cannon to SV balloon is silly and you know it.

 

[Terotrous]

I think the idea with RF is that some characters would be able to get a stock lead and then use the platforms to run away indefinitely (someone also said this about Skyloft due to how the platforms are high enough that most characters need two jumps to reach them, or something, I dunno I don't play it).

That's certainly the theory but I'm not sure if I buy it. It's huge, but you can move and attack between the three layers pretty easily, so I've never had too much trouble chasing people down. Maybe in some specifically awful matchups, but I think they'd be equally awful on some smaller (and currently legal) stages too.

I certainly think it should be tested at least. If it is indeed super broke it should become obvious pretty quick. This is the kind of things the weeklies should be testing out, because really, if someone wins a weekly because of some jank stage it's not a big deal in the long run.

Also, yes, some stages give certain characters an edge, like Metal Cavern is good for big guys, but that's the whole point of a counterpick stage.

 

[MagnesD3]

The only map in the game that could actually have timeout problems is temple and its not competitive. The med - large stages are fine for counterpicks such as Drac Castle, and Distant planet in singles, certain characters could take great advantage of them.

 

[The_NZA]

Maybe with the option of stage bans, we can also allow some stages which can lead to some really hard matchups. For instance, a bowser player should be smart enough to use one of his bans on RF if it was legal at a tourney.

 

[Burning Boom]

And the Halberd opening portion is dumb for competitive. Everyone knows what's happening on Rainbow Cruise, so why not allow that? It literally forces the players to be in the air at a certain time, how is that not dumb? At least that one also doesn't have a damn cannon trying to kill you. "a nice layer to stage control"? Players can't control it, it's not something someone can plausibly take advantage of. Commentators will be talking about how well Link is zoning with his bombs, and then they'll talk about how the cannon is locked on DK so DK needs to approach, but that sucks because Link hit him back into the cannon, sucks to be DK, guess he should've banned Halberd if he didn't want to fight a 2v1. Comparing the Halberd cannon to SV balloon is silly and you know it.

I've never seen the problem with the opening part of Halberd tbh. You just keep playing on the part of the stage you play all match (and try to knock your opponent off of it, AKA, the usual). Also, in your situation with DK and Link, it's obviously the DK's responsibility to approach without being hit, and if he can't do that he's not winning the exchange regardless. Also, yes, you can take advantage of having the cannon on you because it's locked to you, and then gives you about 3-5 seconds to get out of the way, which means YOU control where it fires, how can controlling a giant laser not be advantageous in any way? Also, either player can knock the other into it. Finally, of course the SV balloon is much tamer than the Halberd cannon, and if you'd read my last sentence (which you either glazed over or did not understand it would seem) that was the point of making the comparison! Since everyone agrees that SV is fine, criticizing it's "stage hazard" (if it can be called that) is a great way to illustrate my point that we can complain about ANYTHING if we work hard enough at it, but at some point it gets ridiculous.

To summarize: The cannon is not threatening, and offers enough balance between players, to not be a good reason to ban an otherwise extraordinarily balanced stage, and the opening section is just about irrelevant to play, unless your method of thought goes along the lines of "herp derp, I want to walk on the floor that I know is going to be left in the lower blast zone soon for about 10 seconds."

 

[MagnesD3]

I've never seen the problem with the opening part of Halberd tbh. You just keep playing on the part of the stage you play all match (and try to knock your opponent off of it, AKA, the usual). Also, in your situation with DK and Link, it's obviously the DK's responsibility to approach without being hit, and if he can't do that he's not winning the exchange regardless. Also, yes, you can take advantage of having the cannon on you because it's locked to you, and then gives you about 3-5 seconds to get out of the way, which means YOU control where it fires, how can controlling a giant laser not be advantageous in any way? Also, either player can knock the other into it. Finally, of course the SV balloon is much tamer than the Halberd cannon, and if you'd read my last sentence (which you either glazed over or did not understand it would seem) that was the point of making the comparison! Since everyone agrees that SV is fine, criticizing it's "stage hazard" (if it can be called that) is a great way to illustrate my point that we can complain about ANYTHING if we work hard enough at it, but at some point it gets ridiculous.

To summarize: The cannon is not threatening, and offers enough balance between players, to not be a good reason to ban an otherwise extraordinarily balanced stage, and the opening section is just about irrelevant to play, unless your method of thought goes along the lines of "herp derp, I want to walk on the floor that I know is going to be left in the lower blast zone soon for about 10 seconds."

The laser and cannon are both slow enough and malleable to be considered neutral advantage wise (so it can be good or bad whether or not you are locked on too, its just another dynamic of the game at hand without being unfair.)

 

[XXXX1000]

no, i understand the bit about the balloon, i think the fact that the bottom piece of the Halberd in the first 10 seconds as well as the cannon can actively kill people is a much different scenario than the balloon. Furthermore, you're banking on me liking the balloon (which, if I had creative control, I would take out, along with Shy Guys and Randall on YS and Shy Guys on YI, but I'm not going to waste my time arguing it). You also ignored my comparison to Rainbow Cruise, which is a stage that everyone can know the transformations of. hell, Frigate Orpehon - you should know that the flip is coming, and it's slow and malleable, right?

The stage should not actively and arbitrarily determine players' actions. Forcing players to jump or be killed is ridiculous, as is forcing them to avoid a certain part of a stage for a short amount of time or risk taking huge damage. Just because it's neutral doesn't mean it's fine. The DK/Link example I used was meant to illustrate how it could have an effect on a match, but the fact that it could happen in any match is still unacceptable. IMO, Moving fall-through platforms are the only acceptable moving part in a competitive stage.

 

[Terotrous]

Forcing players to jump or be killed is ridiculous,

Ban Dreamland? If you stand totally still, Whispy will push you off the stage.

 

[MagnesD3]

no, i understand the bit about the balloon, i think the fact that the bottom piece of the Halberd in the first 10 seconds as well as the cannon can actively kill people is a much different scenario than the balloon. Furthermore, you're banking on me liking the balloon (which, if I had creative control, I would take out, along with Shy Guys and Randall on YS and Shy Guys on YI, but I'm not going to waste my time arguing it). You also ignored my comparison to Rainbow Cruise, which is a stage that everyone can know the transformations of. hell, Frigate Orpehon - you should know that the flip is coming, and it's slow and malleable, right?

The stage should not actively and arbitrarily determine players' actions. Forcing players to jump or be killed is ridiculous, as is forcing them to avoid a certain part of a stage for a short amount of time or risk taking huge damage. Just because it's neutral doesn't mean it's fine. The DK/Link example I used was meant to illustrate how it could have an effect on a match, but the fact that it could happen in any match is still unacceptable. IMO, Moving fall-through platforms are the only acceptable moving part in a competitive stage.

The flip is in no way slow and malleable, you are given a hint its coming then it is lightning fast.... and how in the hell is it malleable when it affects both players instantly...

 

[Burning Boom]

no, i understand the bit about the balloon, i think the fact that the bottom piece of the Halberd in the first 10 seconds as well as the cannon can actively kill people is a much different scenario than the balloon. Furthermore, you're banking on me liking the balloon (which, if I had creative control, I would take out, along with Shy Guys and Randall on YS and Shy Guys on YI, but I'm not going to waste my time arguing it). You also ignored my comparison to Rainbow Cruise, which is a stage that everyone can know the transformations of. hell, Frigate Orpehon - you should know that the flip is coming, and it's slow and malleable, right?

The stage should not actively and arbitrarily determine players' actions. Forcing players to jump or be killed is ridiculous, as is forcing them to avoid a certain part of a stage for a short amount of time or risk taking huge damage. Just because it's neutral doesn't mean it's fine. The DK/Link example I used was meant to illustrate how it could have an effect on a match, but the fact that it could happen in any match is still unacceptable. IMO, Moving fall-through platforms are the only acceptable moving part in a competitive stage.

First of all, I'm not banking on you liking the balloon, I'm banking on you being able to tolerate it, there's a very distinct difference. And you're right, I ignored the comparison to Rainbow Cruise, because it's rather silly. Rainbow Cruise is constantly changing, and never really gives the players a time to fight as normal except for on the boat which I'm fairly certain is less than half the stage, while on Halberd one will spend probably about 4/5 of the match unaffected by any sort of hazard, meaning it doesn't control the pace of the entire match, just forces you into some unique situations. Again, you won't be killed by the opening section, the worst that will happen is you'll be popped up slightly (only found this out my most recent time playing the stage, shows you how often it proves relevant). MagnesD3 explained the Frigate Orpheon comparison.

Also EVERY STAGE arbitrarily controls the players actions. It controls where you recover, what kind of space you have for maneuvering, what combos work, etc. You know what makes this not a problem? It affects both players in a somewhat neutral way (not completely obviously, or else counterpicking wouldn't exist), just like the hazards on halberd, as proven in previous posts.

My problem with a lot of legal stage discussion, mostly for Project M, is that most of these stages are relativley fine for competitive play. If this was Melee or Brawl, any and all of them would be welcomed openly, but the PM community is a bit spoiled by our large stage selection, so we get very picky. I'm going to pose this question: At what point does it stop being about what stages can host a competitive match, and at what point is it about not wanting to learn new things and johnning?

 

[XXXX1000]

fun fact: I don't like the wind blowing in dream land either! I'm just not arguing against everything I don't like because I know it's gonna stay. I'm picking and choosing my battles here. Y'all should stop trying to predict what I find acceptable because it isn't working very well.

You guys keep harping on stages being neutral and affecting both players equally, but if your definition of equal is "it affects both players in a neutral way" then that applies to just about every other stage, because your definition of neutral seems to be "both players can take advantage of it". Well, PS1 seems to affect both players in a neutral way, then, and we've all seen the dislike for that stage. Under your definition, Aero Dive affects both players in a neutral way, since both people can use the cars to their advantage. Hyrule affects both players in a neutral way since they can both use the castle to their advantage. Hell, the old WarioWare affected both players in a neutral way, under that definition.

When I say arbitrary I mean that it cannot be predicted. Smashville's platform is not arbitrary, it moves exactly the same for the whole match, and is a fall-through platform. The cannon's location cannot be predicted. You can predict it will come, but from stage select you cannot predict where it will go. You turn off items because even though you can predict that they WILL come, you can't predict where they will go. Would you allow one bob-omb to be dropped every few minutes on a stage, even if it gave you an indicator where it would drop? I mean, that affects both players neutrally.

Halberd has:
-For the beginning of the stage, two walk-off blast zones
-in the first ~5 seconds of the stage, a rising platform that automatically causes grab release, as well as on some command grabs like Flame Choke
-a stage transformation that kills anyone standing on the ground
-appearing and disappearing ledges
-a cannon that, while showing a targeting marker before it fires, fires a laser dealing damage and knockback to anyone in the marker

why do you want this stage. For casual it's fine, I love playing on Halberd, but it has no place in a tournament

 

[Terotrous]

The thing is, one of the main things that sets Smash apart from other fighting games is that the stage is a factor. Fighting on Battlefield is very different than fighting on Final Destination, even if the characters are the same. For that reason, arguing that a stage is bad simply because "at some point, you might have to press a direction on the stick / jump because of the stage" doesn't really hold a lot of water.

The way I see it, we basically want 2 things out of a stage for it to be considered viable.

- The stage does not give any character such a drastic advantage as to decide the match before it even begins
- The stage hazards are not so significant that the strategy shifts to "surviving the stage" rather than "battling the opponent".


The second issue is the one that resulted in stages like Summit, Port Town, Big Blue, (old) Rumble Falls, and so on being banned. For those levels, fighting takes a backseat to avoiding the stage hazards. This is not really the case for levels that have very minor hazards like Dreamland. Whispy is a tiny factor but he doesn't totally change the gameplay.

Whether or not this is also true for Halberd is debatable. That's why I think it needs to be tested for viability.

 

[lordvaati]

Yeah , that's kind of my drift. Because once we reached the point that stages became CPs because the platforms move I feel we've taken the guidelines for a legal stage a few steps too far.

 

[krazyzyko]

The way I see it, we basically want 2 things out of a stage for it to be considered viable.

- The stage does not give any character such a drastic advantage as to decide the match before it even begins
- The stage hazards are not so significant that the strategy shifts to "surviving the stage" rather than "battling the opponent".

This should be set on stone as an official list from th PM:BR.
I'd like to add 3 more though:
1. No permanent corners
2. Temporary corners are allowed for cp only.
3. Stages that are big enough to make Sonic unreachable aren't allowed for singles.

Screw it, I'm making a thread.

 

[Burning Boom]

fun fact: I don't like the wind blowing in dream land either! I'm just not arguing against everything I don't like because I know it's gonna stay. I'm picking and choosing my battles here. Y'all should stop trying to predict what I find acceptable because it isn't working very well.

You guys keep harping on stages being neutral and affecting both players equally, but if your definition of equal is "it affects both players in a neutral way" then that applies to just about every other stage, because your definition of neutral seems to be "both players can take advantage of it". Well, PS1 seems to affect both players in a neutral way, then, and we've all seen the dislike for that stage. Under your definition, Aero Dive affects both players in a neutral way, since both people can use the cars to their advantage. Hyrule affects both players in a neutral way since they can both use the castle to their advantage. Hell, the old WarioWare affected both players in a neutral way, under that definition.

When I say arbitrary I mean that it cannot be predicted. Smashville's platform is not arbitrary, it moves exactly the same for the whole match, and is a fall-through platform. The cannon's location cannot be predicted. You can predict it will come, but from stage select you cannot predict where it will go. You turn off items because even though you can predict that they WILL come, you can't predict where they will go. Would you allow one bob-omb to be dropped every few minutes on a stage, even if it gave you an indicator where it would drop? I mean, that affects both players neutrally.

Halberd has:
-For the beginning of the stage, two walk-off blast zones
-in the first ~5 seconds of the stage, a rising platform that automatically causes grab release, as well as on some command grabs like Flame Choke
-a stage transformation that kills anyone standing on the ground
-appearing and disappearing ledges
-a cannon that, while showing a targeting marker before it fires, fires a laser dealing damage and knockback to anyone in the marker

why do you want this stage. For casual it's fine, I love playing on Halberd, but it has no place in a tournament

The fact that you're not arguing it means you find it acceptable, because you are ACCEPTING it. That is the definition of acceptable, something one can accept, so you're contradicting yourself.

And yes that is my definition of neutral, because neutral by definition means, "not helping or supporting either side in a conflict, disagreement, etc.; impartial." Your defenition of neutral seems to be made up out of thin air. Since you are correct, and that the definition of neutral would make all of the stages you listed legal, neutrality is not an optimal way of determining the value of a stage in a competitive atmosphere, I prefer to think of it as "effect on the match" which is in the end what we're talking about regardless. I personally don't mind PS1, but it does promote some boring play with its easy camping spots that make COD maps look well designed. Aero Dive causes the principle problem throughout large portion of the stage to be "can I avoid the cars?" It hijack most of the actual match, while Halberd only affects a small portion. Not only that, but Halberd gives you so much warning, and is so predictable, that it should be very easy to plan around it. Hyrule has the same problem as PS1. The old WarioWare was much more random, and its hazards would encompass almost the entirety of the stage, again completely changing the focus of the match, rather than simply adding a new element to the mix.

No, I would not want the bob-omb thing, because it means someone can pick them up, or if it's too late in the timer, it could only screw over the player in range, so either way it gives a huge luck-based advantage to one player, unlike the cannon which as I have proven, gives equal advantage and disadvantage to both participants.

Your Halberd complaints:

• Two walk off blast zones that you have no business going past. Seriously, if you've ever been seriously KO'd by these you deserve for being an incompetent moron. There is only about 5-10 seconds for you to go past them, how is that supposed to happen.
• A predictable issue that you know is coming, and at the very worst should either set the game to neutral again, or cause the player with a brain to have an advantage.
• Again, you have no business being KO'd because of this, and if you do end up getting killed by this, you simply outplayed. DEAL WITH IT.
• The only time those ledges don't exist to my knowledge, is when you would have enough space to jump off of a lower floor to the main stage (the floating section).
• I've adressed this plenty of times. You shouldn't be hit by this thing unless your opponent knocks you into it, in which case you probably shouldn't have let that happen.

Why do I want Halberd? Well, it would spice up stage variety, because it's layout is interesting and unique, plus the main platform is fall-through. Also, allowing a stage like Hablerd would show that the Smash community is open to new things, and willing to change, which unfortunately is not a feeling I get much around here.

 

[shairn]

>Stage that forces a single player, at random, to approach or run away
>Neutral

Let's just turn items back on.

 

[Terotrous]

>Stage that forces a single player, at random, to approach or run away
>Neutral

Let's just turn items back on.

If you could make it so only one item spawned every 2 minutes, only lasted a few seconds, and didn't have a massive impact on the game, maybe we could turn them back on.

 

[Burning Boom]

>Stage that forces a single player, at random, to approach or run away
>Neutral

Let's just turn items back on.

I don't see the relation. Also, yes the Halberd canon is by definition "neutral", by posting exactly what the term means, as most people around here seem to use it however they please with no regard for the meaning of the word.

 

[MagnesD3]

>Stage that forces a single player, at random, to approach or run away
>Neutral

Let's just turn items back on.

The thing is it isnt that simple it becomes a neutral tool for the player at that moment, when coming to that stage you are supposed to be aware of this tool when it becomes available. The only non skill factor is the random selection of the player but it gives that player a slow tool with equal advantages and disadvantages that are up to the skill of that player to use, while on the other hand the other player has the chance to adapt to your new given tool to try to push it towards its negative properties while you try to push the tool towards its positive properties. If you ultimately dont know how to use it to your advantage just use one of your stage bans on it.

Also this can be a counterpick strategy against an opponent if you know how to take advantage of the laser/cannons properties better than him, making it a great counterpick option.

 

[shairn]

How does the cannon not have a massive impact when it gives a random player a distinct advantage over the other?

I don't see the relation. Also, yes the Halberd canon is by definition "neutral", by posting exactly what the term means, as most people around here seem to use it however they please with no regard for the meaning of the word.

While it is, indeed, impartial, it adds a random element to the match, which is also why items, and a lot of other stages are banned. Should the canon aim for you while you're already in a disadvantageous position, such as on the ledge, you end up having to choose between jumping into your opponent's waiting charged smash or let the cannon put you out of your misery. Even if you were to be at an advantageous position, you probably will have to abandon that position just to get it off you. It limits characters' options and ruins the neutral game at complete random, so I don't think there's any reason to allow it as a legal stage.

The thing is it isnt that simple it becomes a neutral tool for the player at that moment, when coming to that stage you are supposed to be aware of this tool when it becomes available. The only non skill factor is the random selection of the player but it gives that player a slow tool with equal advantages and disadvantages that are up to the skill of that player to use, while on the other hand the other player has the chance to adapt to your new given tool to try to push it towards its negative properties while you try to push the tool towards its positive properties. If you ultimately dont know how to use it to your advantage just use one of your stage bans on it.

There's no equal advantage and disadvantage, the player who is not being targeted will always have the advantage over the person being targeted, simply because it forces that player to approach/run while the "safe' player can always outrun the cannon or zone out the other player very easily. To force a player to use up one of three bans from an already long list of neutral stages and counterpicks just s othey don,t have to deal with a random laser blasting them off the stage is pretty ridiculous, considering much less harmful "random" elements are banned from the get-go, such as PS1.

 

[Burning Boom]

How does the cannon not have a massive impact when it gives a random player a distinct advantage over the other?

While it is, indeed, impartial, it adds a random element to the match, which is also why items, and a lot of other stages are banned. Should the canon aim for you while you're already in a disadvantageous position, such as on the ledge, you end up having to choose between jumping into your opponent's waiting charged smash or let the cannon put you out of your misery. Even if you were to be at an advantageous position, you probably will have to abandon that position just to get it off you. It limits characters' options and ruins the neutral game at complete random, so I don't think there's any reason to allow it as a legal stage.

Did you read my previous posts or not? I don't want to re-type my explanation of why the canon is perfectly fine, so please go read those, then come back to me on how big a random disadvantage having the canon locked onto you is.

 

[MagnesD3]

Did you read my previous posts or not? I don't want to re-type my explanation of why the canon is perfectly fine, so please go read those, then come back to me on how big a random disadvantage having the canon locked onto you is.

Dont fret I typed one. Trying to explain (probably did it poorly tho lol).

 

[shairn]

Did you read my previous posts or not? I don't want to re-type my explanation of why the canon is perfectly fine, so please go read those, then come back to me on how big a random disadvantage having the canon locked onto you is.

That is exactly what I did.

 

[Burning Boom]

Fine, let me try to explain the possible advantage of having the cannon locked onto you in a different way.

Think of Snake's land mines for a moment (specifically the ones set with D-Smash). Yes, he can be hurt by them as well, but setting them is obviously to his advantage, because he chooses where they are placed, giving him a tool for stage control. That is what the cannon can be like for the targeted player if used correctly, except they are required to act. They have a great tool to use however they please, but they must be very careful. It's a double-edged sword, rather than having a blade at your throat as it's often made out to be.

 

[MagnesD3]

How does the cannon not have a massive impact when it gives a random player a distinct advantage over the other?

While it is, indeed, impartial, it adds a random element to the match, which is also why items, and a lot of other stages are banned. Should the canon aim for you while you're already in a disadvantageous position, such as on the ledge, you end up having to choose between jumping into your opponent's waiting charged smash or let the cannon put you out of your misery. Even if you were to be at an advantageous position, you probably will have to abandon that position just to get it off you. It limits characters' options and ruins the neutral game at complete random, so I don't think there's any reason to allow it as a legal stage.

There's no equal advantage and disadvantage, the player who is not being targeted will always have the advantage over the person being targeted, simply because it forces that player to approach/run while the "safe' player can always outrun the cannon or zone out the other player very easily. To force a player to use up one of three bans from an already long list of neutral stages and counterpicks just s othey don,t have to deal with a random laser blasting them off the stage is pretty ridiculous, considering much less harmful "random" elements are banned from the get-go, such as PS1.

So you basically just dont agree with us that it is a neutral tool. I tried explaining why it is neutral but if your still not convinced then you have the right to you're opinion. But I still fight for all stages on page 1 to be available as counterpicks, I find it incredibly disheartening how nonopen tournaments have been with all these great varied stages allowing for more strategy.


Also here are my stage rules.


Neutral Stages: 1-2-2-1 format
Battlefield
Smashville
Pokemon Stadium 2
Yoshi Story
Fountain of Dreams
Yoshi Island
Final Destination

Counterpick only stages: 7 stage bans
Halberd
Dreamland
Norfair
Draculas Castle
Castle Siege
Skyloft
Skyworld
Pokemon Stadium 1
Distant Planet
Rumble Falls
Green Hill Zone
Wario Ware
Metal Cavern
Lylat Cruise


Stages cant be used twice unless agreed on by both players
If both players agree to a stage no stage banning is required.
If both players agree random select can be used before and after stage bans if they desire.

 

[XXXX1000]

The community is plenty open to change, it's just that some people aren't open to some types of change such as stages with lots of features that are not desirable for competitive. We're in this topic discussing how old stages should possibly be banned or turned to counters (PS1 and some people saying FoD), some people are talking about Metal Cavern which is a stage that was never playable, stages like Wario and GHZ that have walls all the way down which aren't allowed in Melee. There's plenty of people that have already accepted change.

Bout of you, your argument for a lot of Halberd is "you shouldn't lose to that, if you do you're bad, don't get hit". Or "you just need how to use it to your advantage". You have both latched on to some strange idea that "well, it doesn't interfere TOO MUCH with the battle". How much would it be until it's too much? What if the cannon fired twice as often? Three times as often? Constantly? You have chosen an arbitrary amount of interference that you deem as good. Makes much more sense to say that it should be banned outright.

 

[Burning Boom]

The community is plenty open to change, it's just that some people aren't open to some types of change such as stages with lots of features that are not desirable for competitive. We're in this topic discussing how old stages should possibly be banned or turned to counters (PS1 and some people saying FoD), some people are talking about Metal Cavern which is a stage that was never playable, stages like Wario and GHZ that have walls all the way down which aren't allowed in Melee. There's plenty of people that have already accepted change.

Bout of you, your argument for a lot of Halberd is "you shouldn't lose to that, if you do you're bad, don't get hit". Or "you just need how to use it to your advantage". You have both latched on to some strange idea that "well, it doesn't interfere TOO MUCH with the battle". How much would it be until it's too much? What if the cannon fired twice as often? Three times as often? Constantly? You have chosen an arbitrary amount of interference that you deem as good. Makes much more sense to say that it should be banned outright.

Do we need to bring up Smashville and Dreamland again? The community obviously doesn't mind a hazard being there as long as it's not that intrusive, so don't give me the arbitrary crap.
Also, I have stated reasons why Halberd would be a good stage to have as a counterpick, as it's pure layout is rather unique, and we should always try to welcome more stage variety when possible.

 

[The_NZA]

Do we need to bring up Smashville and Dreamland again? The community obviously doesn't mind a hazard being there as long as it's not that intrusive, so don't give me the arbitrary crap.
Also, I have stated reasons why Halberd would be a good stage to have as a counterpick, as it's pure layout is rather unique, and we should always try to welcome more stage variety when possible.

The scariest thing about halberd are the ceilings. Those things are the tiniest in the game--right?

 

[MagnesD3]

The community is plenty open to change, it's just that some people aren't open to some types of change such as stages with lots of features that are not desirable for competitive. We're in this topic discussing how old stages should possibly be banned or turned to counters (PS1 and some people saying FoD), some people are talking about Metal Cavern which is a stage that was never playable, stages like Wario and GHZ that have walls all the way down which aren't allowed in Melee. There's plenty of people that have already accepted change.

Bout of you, your argument for a lot of Halberd is "you shouldn't lose to that, if you do you're bad, don't get hit". Or "you just need how to use it to your advantage". You have both latched on to some strange idea that "well, it doesn't interfere TOO MUCH with the battle". How much would it be until it's too much? What if the cannon fired twice as often? Three times as often? Constantly? You have chosen an arbitrary amount of interference that you deem as good. Makes much more sense to say that it should be banned outright.

These are my thoughts towards halberd's neutral stage hazards, sry if its unclear its sometimes hard for me to get my thoughts across when writing.

MagnesD3 said: ↑
The thing is it isnt that simple it becomes a neutral tool for the player at that moment, when coming to that stage you are supposed to be aware of this tool when it becomes available. The only non skill factor is the random selection of the player but it gives that player a slow tool with equal advantages and disadvantages that are up to the skill of that player to use, while on the other hand the other player has the chance to adapt to your new given tool to try to push it towards its negative properties while you try to push the tool towards its positive properties. If you ultimately dont know how to use it to your advantage just use one of your stage bans on it.

 

[Guilu]

The problem I have with Halberd is how different it is from the others. It's the only stage on the first page where you can go through the floor, as well as the only one that can kill you. You've argued that we have other stages changing the way people play, but I don't see Dreamland's wind or even Yoshi's Island fly guys having nearly as much influence on play as Halberd's cannon. You can't ignore the latter as you could the former.

 

[Terotrous]

Should the canon aim for you while you're already in a disadvantageous position, such as on the ledge, you end up having to choose between jumping into your opponent's waiting charged smash or let the cannon put you out of your misery.

The cannon doesn't fire anywhere near that fast. It takes about 6 seconds to fire, you can only hold a smash attack for 1 second. There's almost no way to be at a disadvantageous situation for 6 whole seconds, more likely you were in a neutral situation and then you lost the neutral with, say, 2 seconds left on the cannon timer, and for that you deserve to get hit.

There's no equal advantage and disadvantage, the player who is not being targeted will always have the advantage over the person being targeted, simply because it forces that player to approach/run while the "safe' player can always outrun the cannon or zone out the other player very easily.

If the opponent doesn't come after you in any way avoiding the cannon is extremely easy. You can chase them down and try to get them hit by the cannon instead, but you certainly don't have to.

As noted already, you can also use the cannon to edgeguard if it's locked onto you, among other things.

 

[XXXX1000]

For the record, I have no problem with Halberd's main floor being pass-through, I think that's a cool design thing that gives multi-jumpers and some characters like Diddy and Ike some extra recovery options (recover high, sweetspot, recover low and through the stage)

Ultimately, the disagreement mainly lies in Halberd's cannon. Does it add gameplay? Of course. Can it be used skillfully to someone's advantage? definitely. That doesn't mean that it's fine to use. I see a lot of "well, if you can't use it well then ban it!" but placing the blame on players being bad distracts from the issue. Whether it's two low-level players who can't wavedash or M2K vs Armada shouldn't matter. If Armada were to beat M2K on Halberd because he threw M2K into the laser, would you say that M2K didn't know how to use the laser to his advantage? No, you'd say that it's somewhat convenient that the laser happened to be fire in an area that Armada could take advantage of. The cannon is unpredictable enough that a player at stage select cannot every safely be able to rely on it, but it is significant enough that it could change the course of a game. It's a variable that cannot be accounted for in a concrete way like platforms, ledges, etc. can.

 

[lordvaati]

I just don't get why they didn't disable the cannon like they did with Mr. claw.

If they aren't gonna fix it they may as well put the stage on page 2 and swap it with Delfino or something.

 

[Terotrous]

If Armada were to beat M2K on Halberd because he threw M2K into the laser, would you say that M2K didn't know how to use the laser to his advantage?

No, I'd just say M2K got outplayed. Throwing someone into the laser is actually pretty hard to land in a real match, because it's the most obvious play and people are watching for it. If Armada managed to fake out / outplay M2K and got the grab, I'd say he earned that kill.


Also, why does no one complain about the bomb? You can also get thrown into the bomb. What makes the cannon worse than the bomb?

 

[Empyrean]

It's only the last hitbox of the canon (which also happens to extend further) that has big knockback. SDI-ing out before it nears the end is pretty easy. It will still cause some damage though.

 

[lordvaati]

I think the general concensus is that the entire part where the ship attacks you is a problem, and that only removing 1/3 parts isn't helping much.( at least here anyway as they can remain CPs for all I care in Brawl.)