Legal Stage List

[shapular]

Delfino was banned in Apex 2014 for Brawl FYI.

Apex's stage list shouldn't have much bearing on a conversation about what stages should be legal. Apex has always had a small stage list to cater to the Japanese players who only play on a few stages. Everybody always seems to forget this and automatically looks at Apex's list as the gold standard for stage lists just because Apex.

 

[mimgrim]

Apex's stage list shouldn't have much bearing on a conversation about what stages should be legal. Apex has always had a small stage list to cater to the Japanese players who only play on a few stages. Everybody always seems to forget this and automatically looks at Apex's list as the gold standard for stage lists just because Apex.

I was just pointing out that the latter stage has been banned before.

That is all.

I'm a nitpicker.

Sue me.

 

[shapular]

I was just pointing out that the latter stage has been banned before.

That is all.

I'm a nitpicker.

Sue me.

Very well. You'll hear from my lawyer soon.

 

[Kankato]

Apex's stage list shouldn't have much bearing on a conversation about what stages should be legal. Apex has always had a small stage list to cater to the Japanese players who only play on a few stages. Everybody always seems to forget this and automatically looks at Apex's list as the gold standard for stage lists just because Apex.

In their defense, Apex is the premier Smash event of the year. If ANY one tourney's opinion on stages matters most, it's Apex.

With that in mind, the Apex stage list is crap simple. GHZ shouldn't be a CP and we don't need both Pokemon stadiums. I vouch for the ability to customize the stage list freely by assigning starter/CP ahead of time. More customization means more variety.

 

[Guilu]

Stages aren't banned because they are "different" or "weird". They are banned for one of two reasons:
1. They introduce a degree of chance which is deemed too great, thus diminishing the validity of competitive play, or,
2. They give far too great an advantage to certain characters/match ups.

Because that's definitely how stage lists have been built in the past, right ? Are you really going to pretend "I don't like this map" had no place in it ?
By your logic we could and should play on nearly every stage available. Not only is that silly in terms of logistics, it would also cause an uproar from the players. We have people who think Lylat should be banned, how do you think they would react when they see Delphino Plaza legal ? They won't come to your tournaments.

I vouch for the ability to customize the stage list freely by assigning starter/CP ahead of time. More customization means more variety.

How would you accomplish that exactly ?

 

[Terotrous]

How would you accomplish that exactly ?

I would assume by repurposing random stage switch: Starter / Counterpick / Banned.

Might be hard to implement though.

 

[ThreeSided]

Because that's definitely how stage lists have been built in the past, right ? Are you really going to pretend "I don't like this map" had no place in it ?
By your logic we could and should play on nearly every stage available. Not only is that silly in terms of logistics, it would also cause an uproar from the players. We have people who think Lylat should be banned, how do you think they would react when they see Delphino Plaza legal ? They won't come to your tournaments.

Which maps do you believe are banned simply because people don't like playing in them? Some more specific examples with your argument would help me better understand your point!

 

[Guilu]

Which maps do you believe are banned simply because people don't like playing in them? Some more specific examples with your argument would help me better understand your point!

Just about every single one of them by the logic you proposed. Does Hyrule Temple have random elements with an overwhelming influence on play ? No. Is it overly advantageous for certain characters ? We have no clue because we've never seriously played there, and you'd have to consider which part of the terrain they're playing on. Already Hyrule Temple escapes your two criterias for determining how stages should be allowed, even though it promotes situations where neither players wants to approach (like all stages that have big dividers) and nobody seriously wants to allow that stage in a tournament. Onett could be another example, as could Fourside. Even if we had clauses that exclude stages with walkoffs and major dividing walls, we still have Hyrule Castle, Castle Siege or Rumble Falls in PM, Kongo Falls and Rainbow Cruise in Melee (Pokémon Stadium sets a precedent for temporary banned features) that are systematically banned while not being covered by our four criterias.
Player's opinion is also something to consider. While people may accept to play on Metal Cavern or Dracula's Castle, the more alien the stage is, the greater the negative reaction. Ultimately most tournaments are held for the players, so their enjoyment is paramount to success and should absolutely be considered when creating a stagelist. Camping is not enjoyed by a great number of players and spectators, and thus we can justify excluding stages that promote it in excess.

On another topic Smash Down South 2 recently ran a stagelist with Metal Cavern on it and so we've got some video footage of matches there :
http://youtu.be/BStYnWzk-Fg?t=8m (Kirby vs Ike)
http://youtu.be/aYfK_JQnn2Q?t=7m50s (Ike vs Snake)

 

[ThreeSided]

Just about every single one of them by the logic you proposed. Does Hyrule Temple have random elements with an overwhelming influence on play ? No. Is it overly advantageous for certain characters ? We have no clue because we've never seriously played there, and you'd have to consider which part of the terrain they're playing on. Already Hyrule Temple escapes your two criterias for determining how stages should be allowed, even though it promotes situations where neither players wants to approach (like all stages that have big dividers) and nobody seriously wants to allow that stage in a tournament. Onett could be another example, as could Fourside. Even if we had clauses that exclude stages with walkoffs and major dividing walls, we still have Hyrule Castle, Castle Siege or Rumble Falls in PM, Kongo Falls and Rainbow Cruise in Melee (Pokémon Stadium sets a precedent for temporary banned features) that are systematically banned while not being covered by our four criterias.
Player's opinion is also something to consider. While people may accept to play on Metal Cavern or Dracula's Castle, the more alien the stage is, the greater the negative reaction. Ultimately most tournaments are held for the players, so their enjoyment is paramount to success and should absolutely be considered when creating a stagelist. Camping is not enjoyed by a great number of players and spectators, and thus we can justify excluding stages that promote it in excess.

On another topic Smash Down South 2 recently ran a stagelist with Metal Cavern on it and so we've got some video footage of matches there :
http://youtu.be/BStYnWzk-Fg?t=8m (Kirby vs Ike)
http://youtu.be/aYfK_JQnn2Q?t=7m50s (Ike vs Snake)

It is a well known fact that Hyrule Temple is banned because of it's massive size, which gives far too great an advantage to characters who are fast and can run out clocks and/or camp, as well as because the massive size gives a huge advantage to characters which kill off the top, as killing off the sides is extremely difficult on a stage so horizontally wide. See: http://supersmashbros.wikia.com/wiki/Hyrule:_Temple#Competition

You do, however, bring up a good point, and Hyrule Temple is a good example of it. Another reason it is banned is because of the "cave of life" at the bottom, where a character can live for ludicrous amounts of time given the right amount of teching ability. This does not cover either of my two criteria. So, I'd be willing to amend my list with another reason:

3. The stage greatly encourages play styles which slow down and/or change the general nature of the game.

Onett does not pass my first two, as walls allow for certain characters to have infinites or extreme lock downs (large advantage), and the cars present a very large chance element, in that even if you don't get hit, given the very limited space available on the stage, being forced to move away greatly limits your options, far more than, say, a giant laser on a flat stage. Walk offs in general are relevant to my second rule, as any character that kills largely by gimps or spikes is SOL, and characters with chain grabs have a possible super early kill. It also fails the new third, in that the walls are going to cause some serious teching matches, and the walk offs encourage blast zone camping.

Fourside fails #2 because it gives a massive advantage to characters that can wall jump. Recovering becomes extremely easy in the middle pits for those who can. The platforms are also extremely small, which gives a large advantage to aggro and tech chasing specializing characters. You could also make an argument for #3, as teching the middle pillar could be annoying, but I could see that one going either way.

Castle Seige fails #1 because inopurtune transformations with little warning can give characters a free out from tech chases and combos, as well as cause failed recoveries.

Rumble falls fails # 2 because it gives a huge advantage to characters which cover vertical distance quickly, as characters who do not will have to spend much of their time just trying to not die off the bottom. It fails #3 for that exact reason.

Kongo Jungle fails #3 because of the rock on the far right, which encourages camping/stalling. By extension, certain characters can take huge advantage of that over others, so it fails #2.

Rainbow Cruise is a similar issue to rumble falls, in that it forces characters to use their mobility resources on merely surviving, giving a large advantage to those characters with mobility resources to spare, thus failing #2. It could also be argued to fail #3 due to runnaway stalling, though that is more minor.

 

[Guilu]

The problem is that most of your clause #2 usage is theoretical. Do we really know that Fourside makes walljumps unbearable, or would it be something that's still within the limits of what could be reasonably expected from a counterpick ? Have we really ever experimented ?

The more you try to put precise rules on why certains stages are banned, the more questionnable those rules become. You need to interpret what an unfair advantage is. You need to interpret what the nature of the game is. You need to interpret how slow is too slow. Ultimately, they become guidelines, with the final judge being the question that people here seem to want to ignore : Will people play it ?

Also Castle Siege transitions are predictable if you look at the timer and bother to learn the timings.. which you should not.

 

[mimgrim]

Also Castle Siege transitions are predictable if you look at the timer and bother to learn the timings.. which you should not.

I guess we should ban Yoshi's Story then?

 

[Guilu]

I guess we should ban Yoshi's Story then?

If Randall was larger than he is, sure. He's not though, so he's tolerable.

 

[The_NZA]

What do people think of Drac's ? I've heard some complaints that it favoured some characters, but that's not an undesireable trait for a CP stage as far as I'm aware.

We've run it for a season of Smashing Grounds to a great success. The onus is on the players to ban it if they know they are playing an Ike, just like it is the onus of players to ban YI melee if they are playing against a bowser.

 

[Hinichii.ez.™]

Castlesky, smaller boundaries, legal, in full build, now.

 

[Eisen]

I think what bothers most people about Halberd is not that it forces change, but rather that something other than a character can kill you. Now, the cannon may be utilized by an opponent to kill you, but it's not by means of, say, Luigi's Up B or a Knee. When you're playing as Squirtle, you don't have as much RAW FSMASH POWAH as Bowser (or Marth lol) does, but conversely, the cannon does. Theoretically, you could be picking a certain character for your matchup against Squirtle, but then the Squirtle player picks Halberd as the stage and, while skillfully forcing you into the blastzone of the cannon, still uses the CANNON, and not Squirtle's moveset (or your inability as the Squirtle's opponent to fully utilize your character's moveset), as a tool. We already have a ton of matchups to account for in PM, so why does an extra "maybe-move" need to be added to those matchups? Sure, it's skillful to know how to adapt to the stage, but I don't think the adaptation should have as big of consequences as large damage intake and potential death. It's similar to why Port Town and Mute City were chosen as banned, I'd speculate.

Personally, though, I'd be interested to see Halberd played without the initial opening location and without the cannon, perhaps without the drop to the Halberd itself at all.

Also, Neutral Orpheon still needs to be a thing. Like a Page 1 thing.

 

[Guilu]

Updated first post to promote Metal Cavern to Occasional Counterpick.

@ Kankato @\Apples
I actually don't like the idea of putting GHZ as a starter stage. FoD may be the least picked starter, but I feel that replacing it with Green Hill Zone would imbalance the starter selection somewhat. My reasoning for this is that our starters' list, while providing as much diversity as possible, should also be representative of the diversity of the totality of our selection of stages, so as not to make the counterpicks and starters lists very different environments. Green Hill Zone is one of our most bare stages, along with Final Destination, Pokémon Stadium 2 and Smashville. If you put it as a first-round pick, this means that the terrains that allow most for unhindered chaingrabs and aerial combos are all starters, which I feel could create a great gap in how characters perform in the first round compared to the CP rounds.
As for the rest of the variations between FoD and GHZ, I don't think they really matter. FoD possibly has the largest edge walls in the lineup if you discount full ones (YI, GHZ, YS and Drac's), along with size and boundaries that are similar to GHZ. The issue of FoD being too similar to YS, because I think that's the root of the problem here, is one that needs more balancing than a mere swap. Said balancing may not ever be possible because I don't see PS2, Smashville and FD going anywhere in the future.

 

[Empyrean]

The people at S@X started using Halberd as a legal counterpick at the last weekly. I'm happy that people are trying out different stages at weeklies and because Halberd is my favorite Smash stage ever. You guys should check it out. The weird curved ledge on the ship's deck actually caused more trouble than any of the hazards. Ofc, this is only one instance.

EDIT: My mistake, they aren't on VGBC yet. They'll probably be uploaded over the course of the weekend.

 

[Kankato]

The people at S@X started using Halberd as a legal counterpick at the last weekly. I'm happy that people are trying out different stages at weeklies and because Halberd is my favorite Smash stage ever. You guys should check it out. The weird curved ledge on the ship's deck actually caused more trouble than any of the hazards. Ofc, this is only one instance.

EDIT: My mistake, they aren't on VGBC yet. They'll probably be uploaded over the course of the weekend.

Nice to see a respected weekly tournament break away from the lackluster Apex stage list.

On the subject of Halberd, I find the low ceiling an overlooked aspect. Kills off the top (Fox Usmash, Lucas Uthrow, Snake C4) happen super early (~70% I think).

@ Guilu
Great post. You bring up a solid point I hadn't considered. If not GHZ, do you think any stage currently not a starter stage should become one?

Oh, and the ability to customize Starter/CP/Banned would be an easy editing system for the green/yellow/red outlines on the SSS. Apparently it exists as is, I think people should be more free about using it.

 

[Guilu]

If not GHZ, do you think any stage currently not a starter stage should become one?

I don't think any stage is as strong a contender for the starters' row as Green Hill Zone. In an ideal world though, one where Pokémon Stadium is relegated to page 2 where it belongs, I think Lylat Cruise could be a starter replacing Pokémon Stadium 2 or Smashville. They're said to be the most neutral stages of this game but I suspect they're as picked as they are mostly because they're rather similar and you will rarely be able to get rid of both when you've got more polarised stages like Yoshi's Story, Dreamland or Final Destination to worry about. Lylat's ledges are the most unforgiving in Project M but other than that the stage is mostly unremarkable, I feel that it could make a good choice for characters who don't really have a use for ledge walls, like Ivysaur, and be a general neutral stage for the rest. GHZ could then step in and replace FoD as a starter as well.
Lylat Cruise definitely doesn't have the credit of other starters stages though, where I play it's a stronger contender for the ban list than it is for the starters'. ;o Better to pick our fights, there are bigger problems with the stage list right now.

Oh, and the ability to customize Starter/CP/Banned would be an easy editing system for the green/yellow/red outlines on the SSS. Apparently it exists as is, I think people should be more free about using it.

There's also the possibility of moving stages around between the various rows. That could be a great use for the launcher.

 

[shapular]

@ Guilu
Great post. You bring up a solid point I hadn't considered. If not GHZ, do you think any stage currently not a starter stage should become one?

I don't see why Yoshi's Island isn't one already. It is in Brawl and nothing has changed about it. It's a better candidate than Dreamland 64, imo.

 

[Empyrean]

If anyone wants to see Halberd in tourney, here are two vids from the latest Xanadu. Unfortunately, this is only one example of one Sonic main counterpicking Halberd, so we can't draw conclusions yet. Nevertheless, I find them to be interesting, and it's also worth noting that the hazards have practically no involvement in the two matches listed below.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1glAHPrXrIk :Game 3 at 7:44, vs Falco.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sN2bB0Aq2nU :Game 3 at 14:43, vs Sheik.

 

[Kankato]

I don't see why Yoshi's Island isn't one already. It is in Brawl and nothing has changed about it. It's a better candidate than Dreamland 64, imo.

I've heard the rescue platforms on Yohsi's Island are random, which is huge problem because they're so game changing. Having a huge recovery assist in a game with fantastic recoveries is totally unneccesary & unlike the Infamous Randall, these platforms aren't following a predictable system like a timer. A clutch match with anything more than pride on the line should never be decided by completely uncontrollable random elements, and the stage list only concerns serious matches (you can play friendlies wherever you like).

If the platforms aren't random and have some wierd system no one's figured out yet, there's still the randomly tilting middle platform & the whack sloped edges. Both of these are completely negligible & it's incredibly nitpicky to ban the stage for any of these reasons, but people will always find a way to complain about something.

btw, Halberd's cannon doesn't select a target randomly: It always aims at whoever's in the lead. Halberd is still a very radical stage on any stage list, and the ban count will need to be tweaked accordingly.

 

[shapular]

I've heard the rescue platforms on Yohsi's Island are random, which is huge problem because they're so game changing. Having a huge recovery assist in a game with fantastic recoveries is totally unneccesary & unlike the Infamous Randall, these platforms aren't following a predictable system like a timer. A clutch match with anything more than pride on the line should never be decided by completely uncontrollable random elements, and the stage list only concerns serious matches (you can play friendlies wherever you like).

If the platforms aren't random and have some wierd system no one's figured out yet, there's still the randomly tilting middle platform & the whack sloped edges. Both of these are completely negligible & it's incredibly nitpicky to ban the stage for any of these reasons, but people will always find a way to complain about something.

btw, Halberd's cannon doesn't select a target randomly: It always aims at whoever's in the lead. Halberd is still a very radical stage on any stage list, and the ban count will need to be tweaked accordingly.

You say this as if this is the first time the legality of these stages has ever been discussed. What you're forgetting is that Yoshi's Island has been an accepted neutral for six years and that nobody ever complains about it. Halberd has also been a ubiquitous counterpick stage for six years. You're going to have to come up with an irrefutable reason why this should be changed if you want to argue your points.

 

[Guilu]

You say this as if this is the first time the legality of these stages has ever been discussed. What you're forgetting is that Yoshi's Island has been an accepted neutral for six years and that nobody ever complains about it. Halberd has also been a ubiquitous counterpick stage for six years. You're going to have to come up with an irrefutable reason why this should be changed if you want to argue your points.

We have enough good stages that we don't have to deal with random and alien stages. This is the first time this has been the case, and we should take advantage of it. Yoshi's Island, Frigate Orpheon, Pokémon Stadium or Halberd may have been legal in previous games, but were always flawed and ultimately kept because there just weren't that many stages fit for competition.
That and the nature of the recovery game in Project M is not that of Brawl, and any element added to it is a more drastic change here than it was there. The fact that it is random doesn't play in its favour.

 

[mimgrim]

Oh gawd. Is Yoshi's Island (Brawl) really being argued to get banned? xD

 

[Kankato]

You say this as if this is the first time the legality of these stages has ever been discussed. What you're forgetting is that Yoshi's Island has been an accepted neutral for six years and that nobody ever complains about it. Halberd has also been a ubiquitous counterpick stage for six years. You're going to have to come up with an irrefutable reason why this should be changed if you want to argue your points.

Guilu beat me to the punch. With seven deterministic starters, why put up with randomness?

 

[Guilu]

Updated the OP with more stages receiving the "Familiar from past games" mention and said mention now including which games the stage was legal in.
I've also recently fallen through Pokémon Stadium's rock transformation, even though I was near the centre of the stage. I'm not sure what exactly happened as I was looking at my opponent and I play Wolf, so it happened rather fast as you might imagine. Does anyone have video footage of that particular glitch ?
Pokémon Stadium is in a rather amusing situation where it's banned at most locals yet legal at most nationals :D

 

[Kankato]

Updated the OP with more stages receiving the "Familiar from past games" mention and said mention now including which games the stage was legal in.
I've also recently fallen through Pokémon Stadium's rock transformation, even though I was near the centre of the stage. I'm not sure what exactly happened as I was looking at my opponent and I play Wolf, so it happened rather fast as you might imagine. Does anyone have video footage of that particular glitch ?
Pokémon Stadium is in a rather amusing situation where it's banned at most locals yet legal at most nationals :D

I have never heard or seen this before. Have you been tampering with any of the files or perhaps it was just a bad launch?

Anyways, I think most nationals keep Pokemon stadium because it was legal in past iterations of smash and they don't feel comfortable banning it at large scale competitions. It creates problems for people who don't enjoy fighting on PS as banning PS1 & 2 leaves you with one strike left.

 

[Guilu]

This video has an example of a similar glitch happening in vanilla Brawl : youtube.com/watch?v=F7m1TA5eJ1c
However, in my case I was not standing near the edge and in fact I was in the middle of a jump. I don't remember if the stage was transforming when I fell or not, I feel like it wasn't. I have not tampered with the Pokémon Stadium file. Should probably create a bug report thread.

 

[Debra washingbeard]

I don't know where to fit this, but I have a simple suggestion to the stage list. use the alternate stage loader to have melee version of battle field, and a N64 and brawl version of Final destination by holding L or R or something. I kinda feel like there going to do this eventually anyways tho.

 

[shapular]

I don't know where to fit this, but I have a simple suggestion to the stage list. use the alternate stage loader to have melee version of battle field, and a N64 and brawl version of Final destination by holding L or R or something. I kinda feel like there going to do this eventually anyways tho.

Melee Battlefield is horrible, but I think Brawl FD (with fixed slope) should be the default anyway. There was no reason to change it, especially since Brawl FD is prettier.

 

[XXXX1000]

FD was changed to remove the lip underneath the stage. I dunno if they used the Melee skin because it was easier than fixing the Brawl version, or because they really wanted it, but the lip was definitely the problem. Which makes me sad because I could get easy DK stage spikes with that lip in Brawl

Once again, for people talking about "well we've had X stage in Brawl for 6 years, why take it out now?" the answer to that question is that A) Brawl is a much different game than PM and B) PM is able to be modified and edited. PM currently has between 14 and 17 accepted stages depending on what ruleset you use, with 7 neutrals and the rest as CPs. We have the freedom to be picky about these things. It's cool that the Brawl scene got along just fine with using Halberd and Delfino, but PM may not have a need for them.

An idea I'd like to raise is the idea of Distant Planet being a starter. This was mentioned on TKBreezy's stream a few weeks ago, after S@X started using the stage list with Halberd as a CP. The common excuse for banning DP or relegating it to doubles or CP is that it's "too big", but it really is about the same size as other stages. I don't know where the misconception of it being "too big" really came from, as it's size is quite similar to PS2 though the platforms are a tad larger and there are the two leaves. Honestly, I don't know about the blast zones, which could be the problem. Distant Planet could be a viable starter, I think, but the biggest problem is which starter would then be removed? People have been talking about swapping FoD for GHZ, which works because they're both small stages, but are any of the other stages worth being moved out of starters?

For size comparison: http://imgur.com/a/FLaoX (I didn't make these)

 

[Kankato]

FD was changed to remove the lip underneath the stage. I dunno if they used the Melee skin because it was easier than fixing the Brawl version, or because they really wanted it, but the lip was definitely the problem. Which makes me sad because I could get easy DK stage spikes with that lip in Brawl

Once again, for people talking about "well we've had X stage in Brawl for 6 years, why take it out now?" the answer to that question is that A) Brawl is a much different game than PM and B) PM is able to be modified and edited. PM currently has between 14 and 17 accepted stages depending on what ruleset you use, with 7 neutrals and the rest as CPs. We have the freedom to be picky about these things. It's cool that the Brawl scene got along just fine with using Halberd and Delfino, but PM may not have a need for them.

An idea I'd like to raise is the idea of Distant Planet being a starter. This was mentioned on TKBreezy's stream a few weeks ago, after S@X started using the stage list with Halberd as a CP. The common excuse for banning DP or relegating it to doubles or CP is that it's "too big", but it really is about the same size as other stages. I don't know where the misconception of it being "too big" really came from, as it's size is quite similar to PS2 though the platforms are a tad larger and there are the two leaves. Honestly, I don't know about the blast zones, which could be the problem. Distant Planet could be a viable starter, I think, but the biggest problem is which starter would then be removed? People have been talking about swapping FoD for GHZ, which works because they're both small stages, but are any of the other stages worth being moved out of starters?

For size comparison: http://imgur.com/a/FLaoX (I didn't make these)

People fear the dangers of runaway Fox, Link and Samus when given platforms on such a long stage. It's definitely a viable counter pick, and having a larger stage on the starter list is appreciated, as DL64 can't go it alone.

It should definitely be experimented with before we consider adding it.

 

[batistabus]

I don't think there needs to be an official stage list, but I do think there should be an official NUMBER of stages. Every tournament should use X neutral stages and Y counter-pick stages. I could see neutrals becoming standard, be it 5 like in Melee or 7 like most PM rule sets have been so far. There are so many good stages in PM, but I do think there are too many to pick from during tournaments. I think picking between 10 or whatever awesome counter-picks is really subjective, so to say that some should be allowed while others aren't is pointless. Leave it up to the TO.

As for neutrals, I'd prefer 5 like in Melee. Battlefield, Smashville, Yoshi's Story, Pokemon Stadium 2, and Dreamland 64. I don't think FD is neutral, and FoD is just slightly more weird than the rest of those. I'm not sure how many cps there should be, but I'd like fewer than are currently allowed by most TOs.

 

[Guilu]

Updated the OP with the article recently posted by Derrit and mentionned the APEX stagelist because for some reason I hadn't before.

The Derrit has an article on the subject, featuring Strong Bad, the NZA, GimR and TKBreezy. You can it read here : http://smashboards.com/threads/stages-in-project-m-are-we-using-the-right-ones.353474/

And somehow this first post did not explicitly mention the APEX 2014 ruleset, which has become a standard known to most players and spectators. It's perhaps the simplest stagelist, as the lowest row on page one are the starters, and the middle row on that page are the counterpicks. Each players has three bans. While few argue with the starters, the list of counterpicks is not anywhere near unanimous approval, as it features some controversial stages like Pokémon Stadium and the stagelist itself has been criticised of being composed in such a way that promotes logistical simplicity over enjoyment and competition.

 

[Kankato]

I think this is a solid list to go by:

Starters:
YS, BF, PS2, FD, SV, DL64, FoD
(No changes here)

Counter Pick
SW, LC, GHZ, YI, WW

Maybe: DP
Bans: 3

Basically cut Skyloft and PS1. It gives us twelve stages total, with more of them Starters than CPs (unless you consider FD or FoD a CP, in which case the number of Starters and CPs are balanced again).

Edit: Fixed ban count.

 

[XXXX1000]

remove two CPs but increase bans? not a fan of that idea.

 

[Kankato]

remove two CPs but increase bans? not a fan of that idea.

Did I type four bans? I'm sorry, I meant to type three. Fixed.