Melbourne Brawl | STIGMA-B for 2010 yes or no?

[Shaya]

People have to stop thinking that competitive smash is about their characters.

Characters are only ONE FACET of the competitive game.
Getting butthurt that you hear the words "Jungle Japes", fully able to change your character, but choosing not to, is not the rule's fault, it's YOUR fault for thinking the competitive game is some scrubby "character vs character" ideal, rather than PLAYER VS PLAYER.

Realise what you're actually doing in competitive smash.
And then the argument of "fairness" when you're INFORMED of the stage before hand becomes fallacious.

However, saying that doing character first then stage for OTHER reasons is completely valid, but the whole 'fairness' thing is not.

 

[Attila_]

@shaya: smash is about characters, not stages. i should always be able to win, regardless of the stage. i should not have to shift my main (the character that i have spent the most time playing with and enjoy the most) to make a match winnable. i should not have to be awesome with multiple characters because certain stages are gay. by picking a stage before hand, it is more than likely that it will have absolutely nothing to do with the match, as the opponent can then choose a stage that has nothing to do with the character that i suspected them to use. in which case, what the hell was the point of banning anything in the first place? i can still be hard countered, or forced to use a character that im not as good with. if the system was reversed ie characters were chosen before stages, then i could use my comfortable character, and ban a stage that is actually relevant to the match, which in turn makes a massive advantage into a much smaller, fairer, one.

@dekar: im assuming youd only win the second round against me

@condog: i dont second falco, but that doesnt mean i couldnt destroy 99% of melbourne with him on japes. his advantage on most characters on that stage is huge, and im pretty decent at abusing that.

 

[Dekar289]

well if i only win 2nd round, what does it matter. you won the random neutral, you get the advantage. that's the point.
if it was finals, best of five, japes wouldn't be enough anyway.

besides, if falco is supposedly unstoppable on japes, then it just shows what an unbalanced game brawl is anyways

 

[Attila_]

its only unbalanced with the current cp rules. if we changed them, falco would never be able to choose japes, so it wouldnt be an issue.

 

[_X_]

No more stage bans, as it is we should have Onett and Green Hill Zone back

No we should not.

People have to stop thinking that competitive smash is about their characters.

Characters are only ONE FACET of the competitive game.
Getting butthurt that you hear the words "Jungle Japes", fully able to change your character, but choosing not to, is not the rule's fault, it's YOUR fault for thinking the competitive game is some scrubby "character vs character" ideal, rather than PLAYER VS PLAYER.

Realise what you're actually doing in competitive smash.
And then the argument of "fairness" when you're INFORMED of the stage before hand becomes fallacious.

However, saying that doing character first then stage for OTHER reasons is completely valid, but the whole 'fairness' thing is not.

 

[C~Dog]

What if we went like this:

1/ Winner Picks Character
2/ Loser Bans Stage
3/ Winner Picks Stage
4/ Loser Picks Character

That way the winner gets a level good for their character, but not one they will autorape on, and the loser can pick a character that can give them an advantage. just throwing it out there

thoughts?

 

[Splice]

does it matter if your opponent gets a massive unfair advantage for one match?
I mean, if they can only beat you under those conditions, then you should have won the neutral starter, and then you get to CP and have a massive advantage and win.
If they did win the first match, and get to CP you later, then it shows they have the potential to beat you anyway, so really, the Random Starter match is the most important match to win, IMO.

@Condog doesn't your idea wreck the idea of a CP a bit? The winner has stage advantage but the loser has character advantage, so the loser doesn't have much more chance over the winner. If the loser mains, say, Kirby, and the winner picks Meta Knight and Rainbow Cruise, the winner is going to have the advantage not the loser. I guess it would reward players that main lots of characters, or, Meta Knight players. Cause MK has no bad stages, pretty much.

 

[Shaya]

Attila, you missed my point...

Stages is also just ONE FACET of the GAME.
Characters is a FACET of the game.

Now when we turn that into 'competitive game', we add things like RULES, etc etc, more facets for the game.
But all those facets could also be said to be in the game itself, if the players want to.

The main point is...
ITS NOT CHARACTER VS CHARACTER, STAGE VS CHARACTER, OR WHATEVER.
It's PLAYER VS PLAYER.

The competitive game is about THE PLAYER vsing and beating ANOTHER player.
If you want to talk about 'fairness' in terms of "oh I may have to change my character from the one I like to play, etc etc", here's a similarity... "its not fair that my character I like to play has a bad match up against SNAKE, let's make it fair, by not letting the snake use grenades, then it's fair for my character who has a bad match up with snake."
Whilst sitting back maining your top tier character, you'd probably say "man up" or "nah man you did good, better luck next time". Are you still out to claim it's fair that I want to main captain falcon, who has really no chance against Snake? shock and HORROR if you were to suggest to that player they use ANOTHER CHARACTER against Snake...

If a stage is universally too good for one character, as in the stage holds an advantage for that character against every other character that makes the match up theoretically unwinnable, then the stage should be illegal.
Meta Knight for Norfair, Rainbow Cruise...

Then there goes the whole Dedede thing.
I pick Dedede, you pick Snake. "Oh it's pretty unfair that I can't go Snake's best level (Corneria) because D3 is also good on this stage, but the current Australian ruleset decided that D3 is too good on Corneria because he can infinite against the wall like every other character can, it's too unfair, so I'll have to pick another stage, THIS COUNTER PICKING SYSTEM IS SO UNFAIR".

Rules are adjusted when the current ruleset becomes outdated due to previously unforseen circumstances that the rules could not incorporate that hinder every/most facets of the game, to the point that it is negating the result of a PLAYER VS PLAYER set.

 

[I LAG]

is it really player vs player when its d3 vs dk?

 

[Nixernator]

Wait don't we pick chars, then ban a stage, then choose the stage?
Ie Winner Picks Char
Loser picks Char
Winner bans Stage
Loser Picks stage?
Or am I thinking of something completely wrong?

 

[Shaya]

You miss the point completely ILAG...
D3 vs DK is an arbitrary CHOICE of two players.
It's character vs character.

If you ignore other facets of the competitive game for one area, you're going to eventually lose to those who are 'playing to win'.

 

[Dekar289]

the current cp system will not change
there is nothing wrong with it

 

[Slashpockets]

Wait don't we pick chars, then ban a stage, then choose the stage?
Ie Winner Picks Char
Loser picks Char
Winner bans Stage
Loser Picks stage?
Or am I thinking of something completely wrong?

That's what attila wants it changed to.

Whereas the current system is
Winner bans
Loser picks stage
Winner Picks character
Loser picks character

Why don't you read the rules some day Nix?
Maybe then you'll stop coming last. =P

 

[I LAG]

You miss the point completely ILAG...
D3 vs DK is an arbitrary CHOICE of two players.
It's character vs character.

If you ignore other facets of the competitive game for one area, you're going to eventually lose to those who are 'playing to win'.

sorry i didn't read like any of the post all i saw was player vs player and character vs character

 

[earla]

@jei .. suggestions:

- people who bring a tv plus wii shudn't have to pay entry fee to singles.
- chicks enter for free in tourney
-current counterpick rules sweet. shud check out those stages at genesis and go by them maybe. the stage list looks really small. onett and green greens would be fresh
- the dude at EB said 172 people went to their tourney over the 2 weeks. when they do another tourney someone could go everynite and hand out stigma flyers.

pumped to see this falco **** 99% of melb. on JJ

 

[Dekar289]

all of earl's suggestions win

also, how bout a decent pot OH I WENT THERE

 

[C~Dog]

@jei .. suggestions:

- people who bring a tv plus wii shudn't have to pay entry fee to singles.
- chicks enter for free in tourney
-current counterpick rules sweet. shud check out those stages at genesis and go by them maybe. the stage list looks really small. onett and green greens would be fresh
- the dude at EB said 172 people went to their tourney over the 2 weeks. when they do another tourney someone could go everynite and hand out stigma flyers.

* tv or wii. i cant bring a tv lol
* so....leish enters for free? XDXDXD
* yes go genesis we must follow the leeeeeadeeerrrr =P
* oh wow, thats pretty sweet. i shall talk to vermydogs about flyers =D

 

[M]

So... Shaya would get in free if he went? =S

 

[Splice]

I agree with all of Earls ideas.
Onett would spice up our stage list and Green Greens is a very fun stage.
They are both absolutely 'fresh'.
The 'TV or Wii gets entry for free' idea is also very good.
It's a pity that it'll be a year before they have another Nintendo Experience tournament.

 

[Attila_]

@shaya: how troublesome... player vs player is a good thing, and in that sense, id like to keep things as even as possible. under the current cp rules, it is very possible for the loser to pick the best stage for his character, assuming the opponent doesnt know who hes going to choose. the idea of cp is to provide a slight advantage, not an outrageously large one. fact is, certain characters are good against other characters, and stages can dramatically increase this advantage. turning a 60:40 into a 75:25 is silly by anyone's standards. and dont even try to bring that high tier trash into this. snake has more than his fair share of bad matchups (i am NOT saying snake is bad character, or is anything less than top tier), and im happy to verse any of them, assuming the stage doesnt dramatically exaggerate the advantage. let's keep it player vs player, yeah?

@nix: if you thought this was how we're supposed to play, id assume youre not the only one, and hence why people dont care if this gets changed. pay attention people!

@earl: tv + wii idea is a good one. if people give me flyers id be happy to advertise at uni too... onett has too many walls and a walk off on both sides. completely ********. and green greens has walls that explode, which is even more ********.

 

[Vermy]

@Attila: not green greens, green hill zone.

 

[Nixernator]

Oh in that case I demand the CP rules changed Lol, I'm with Attila. Everyone I've ever played used those CP rules anyway . Also Green Greens is made of win, put it in, nao. But I don't see how Onett should be legal, too much camping on the edges for grabs and wall **** for my liking.
And Earl is also made of win.

 

[Shaya]

The current counterpick system is player vs player.
It does not break the idea of player vs player at all.
It only breaks the idea of character vs character in certain circumstances.

Circumstances that for Snake are RARE and FAR BETWEEN.

Whilst the challenge of discerning whether or not a player bringing out a 'secret' underhanded tactic is worth arguing on whether or not it breaks player vs player, my general 'theme' so to speak is as follows.

You (not you, anybody) mains a top tier character. What makes a character top tier? Great matchups, Great stage selection, Miniscule or nil bad matchups or stages.
What makes smash a different competitive fighter? It's facets extend beyond character, they also include stages. And other things.
You argue that the counterpick system is skewing the player vs player ideal. Even though the same advantage stretches to you the winner of the next match. As well as the player being able to switch character when they see a stage their 'main' doesn't do well on.

So, what's my REAL reason for not supporting a counterpick system I USED TO run tournaments with?
I pick Meta Knight, I Pick Snake.
My opponent's character, at WORST is going to get an evenish match up with my top tier character. Pretty sweet deal for the winner so far.
Now I know your character, I get to ban a stage, a stage that, most likely as my main is a top tier character would only have one weak stage (OR NONE) against your said character. Just about EVERY other stage legal would not give any advantage to the loser, most likely having the loser forced to pick a NEUTRAL, the next best stage they could possibly use (whilst already LOSING on the neutral in the previous match... HMM)
Oh looky, you picked Falco and I then banned Japes, okay, you're going to go final destination. But who cares? I STILL have the advantage on this stage, so it looks likes its going to be a repeat of the previous match. Rinse repeat.

A large selection of counterpicks are neutrals already. Using an alternate counterpick system pretty much invalidates the purpose of having counterpick stages.

And the ULTIMATE choice is just using Meta Knight or Snake, with their maybe 1 or 2 ACTUALLY bad stages IN PARTICULAR match ups only.

 

[Ledge_g2]

i completely agree with shaya, its how ive always thought the system should be (how it is now).
it would actually keep it fair,.. ok think about the bad situation of (in rules adelaide has): me picking olimar in the first match, the opponent picks DK... I win. ok so now i ban Japes, now he picks MK and goes Rainbow cruise :O..... oli now has extreme little chance of winning.

in the current rules i would still have a choice of changing my char to 1 that better suits rainbow cruise like lucario(my other main) and they are still able to pick a char that is good against him but not in such an extreme way

theres a reason for the rest of the world using the CP system we already have set up.
the current CP ruleset is fine...

 

[_X_]

We've got some sweet ideas spittin', keep at it guys and Jei and I shall brain storm all up in this biatch and get back to you with some sticky sweet words.. (no homo)

 

[Toby.]

For what its worth I agree with Shaya as well. I was going to pad this out with points but they would just be a rehash of what he said. It makese sense, people.

 

[Attila_]

given that we're just repeating our points over and over again, im not arguing with shaya anymore. there isnt any point. i guess my falco will just have to prove how stupid the system is at the next stigma.

@ledge: if you knew he was gonna pick mk, then youd get a chance to ban rc. thats the point i was trying to make.

@vermii: oic... green hill zone is even more ******** times 100!

 

[Ledge_g2]

@attila: yeah i c what you mean but how would i know he was going to pick MK? given that he first picked DK.

 

[C~Dog]

^ if you lose the first match you go mk. its called competitive brawl.

 

[Nixernator]

^ if you lose the first match you go mk. its called competitive brawl.

Unless your name is Nixernator, then you go Sonic and lose even harder .

 

[Vermy]

green hill zone IS ********. as are 90% of the stages in our CP list.
i agree with Shaya. The system is fine. i play Poketrainer, and ill always have more than one go-to cp stage. Have a backup, problem solved.

@attila: ban RC? Take some norfair to the face and die faster. MK has no bad stages.

 

[C~Dog]

green hill zone IS ********. as are 90% of the stages in our CP list.
i agree with Shaya. The system is fine. i play Poketrainer, and ill always have more than one go-to cp stage. Have a backup, problem solved.

My CP is smashville. I dont need another. XDXDXD

 

[Vermy]

now that you've told everyone, we can just ban smashville XD

 

[Dekar289]

stop arguing and play melee

 

[C~Dog]

now that you've told everyone, we can just ban smashville XD

Okay fine, i choose FD then. desynced ib spam ftw mowahaha

 

[Attila_]

@ledge: i didnt think it was that confusing...

1. you win against him in the first round
2. you pick your character (oli)
3. he picks his character (mk)
4. you ban a stage (rc)
5. he picks a stage (not rc)

thats how i think it should work. you cant get hard countered this way.

@vermii: i like norfair against most characters, mk included. rc is waaaaaay worse.

 

[tibs7]

lol dekar...

yay please choose FD or smashville condog ill be very happy =)

earls suggestions are good apart from the green hill zone thingy

 

[C~Dog]

yay please choose FD or smashville condog ill be very happy =)

O_o i dont wanna play anymore you guys....

 

[Dekar289]

new pork city needs serious consideration

 

[Ledge_g2]

@attila: yeah soz your right about that, didnt realize you were saying to ban the stage after char selection.

@vermii: yeah RC = MKs best level + olis worst.