Melee Counterpick Stages Debate

[Pakman]

I am just going to respond to the stuff in response to my posts.

This is a terrible example Pakman. Using instant replay just lets you see the same thing again to properly determine if it was a homerun/ball/foul. Instant replay doesn't change the way the game is played. A change that would be comparable to removing all the CP stages would be to remove second base.

Actually it is a pretty relevant example. The point I was making was in response to the claim that the ruleset has been around for years and therefore doesn't call for a change. Last I checked, Baseball was around a little longer than Melee (or video games in general), and RECENTLY had a change in the rules to make the game more deterministic by reviewing questionable homeruns. By removing more questionable stages you are making the results more deterministic.

Here's the argument: That the rule set is NOT reasonable. If you tried to host a tournament with only Hyrule Temple and Icicle Mountain, would you expect to NOT get a ton of crap?

How are they not reasonable? Playing on a subset of the usual legal stages should give legitimate deterministic results. The real question is whether they are more deterministic then with the counterpick stages. I contend that they are. Regardless, I find it pretty close-minded to consider them unreasonable.

Look, the reason for the complaints that this is a 99% chance of what is going to happen "LOLOL THOSE STAGES THAT BLOW WEREN'T ALLOWED OH MAN I AM SO COOL WITH THIS RULESET AND WILL USE IT FOREVER!"

It is an experiment. If the stage rules fail to give deterministic results, then I put my faith in Scar and Eggm as reasonable people to change them back.

 

[pockyD]

for the record, most sports leagues have had legitimate playing rule changes as well in the past 10 years (most often in the nfl with all sorts of hits becoming illegal/legal and absurd rules for what constitutes a catch nowadays)

 

[Alex Strife]

^ ah i see you saw the raiders vs chargers game as well

 

[teh_spamerer]

I am just going to respond to the stuff in response to my posts.

Pro-tip for the future: So you don't have an empty line put the text immediately after the quote tag. like

{quote=teh_spamerer;random numbers}wall of text here{/quote}

except with normal brackets instead of curly ones.

Actually it is a pretty relevant example. The point I was making was in response to the claim that the ruleset has been around for years and therefore doesn't call for a change. Last I checked, Baseball was around a little longer than Melee (or video games in general), and RECENTLY had a change in the rules to make the game more deterministic by reviewing questionable homeruns.

Yes, but the way the rules are being changed is VERY different. If football had a new rule that declared that the uprights have to be painted bright orange the effect it has on football games is minimal.

By removing more questionable stages you are making the results more deterministic. How are they not reasonable? Playing on a subset of the usual legal stages should give legitimate deterministic results. The real question is whether they are more deterministic then with the counterpick stages. I contend that they are. Regardless, I find it pretty close-minded to consider them unreasonable.

Pick any single stage among the neutrals and make that the only stage. That follows the rule of "subset of the usual legal stages." Will there be a difference between only FoD and only FD? Probably. Does M2K winning both of those or with the normal ruleset instead of SSS(Shitty SPOC stageset) make the fact that only FoD or only FD allowed is a bad idea? No.

It is an experiment. If the stage rules fail to give deterministic results, then I put my faith in Scar and Eggm as reasonable people to change them back.

"Men are weak" - Elrond

 

[Mogwai]

"Men are weak" - Elrond

dude, not cool, don't use only part of the quote.

Full Quote:

"Men are weak, that's why they fell the need to go to Pokefloats" -Elrond

 

[teh_spamerer]

dude, not cool, don't use only part of the quote.

Full Quote:

"Men are weak, that's why they fell the need to go to Pokefloats" -Elrond

I am teh_spamerer and I approve this message.

 

[blast_ssbb]

sorry for double post scars, just hate didnt want to write REALLY long posts just long posts, ill edit next time.

If you want it to be MORE fair take off kongo, yoshis, FoD, and pokemon, leave bf,FD, and dreamland and dont put any limit on which stage gets played and make it random everytime. you can tech just as well on FD, dreamland as yoshis, and battlefield and dreamland have enough variation in size and platform distance to test this imaginary skillset u came up with. thats how i think it should be if you take off counterpicks.

i give up on trying to convince you guys about anything as you are all in teh "our skillset is the only skill set that we think that matters". i agree that green greens and japes is random, but i think corneria is a perfectly fine stage, it allows you to take advantage of character weakness's (bad vertical kills, bad projectiles) and use them to your advantage. brinstar is fine it lets you take advantage of no walls and fastfallers get punished in lava. rainbow cruise is fine it actually has so many different forms that i think its an amazing stage that really shows more skillsets combined than having the CHANCE to play on a random stage of 7, 4 of which are more biased than half the counterpicks.

pocky made some good points. i do think having set stages to play on would be better, bf fd and dreamland r much better than the other 4. even if u just had it be random of those 3 each game as opposed to being 1 of each.

and quite frankly can we cut out the omg fox camps me on pokefloats bull****? like cmon seriously what is this 2005?

random side question: didnt europe or japan or somewhere play with JUST fd and dreamland on? just curious.

 

[Mogwai]

japan's ruleset circa Ken vs. Bombsoldier was just FD and DL64

 

[Cia]

daaaamn spam. ****

 

[JFox]

spam, you literally have no idea how to argue. All you do is write tl;dr posts that point to irrelevance.

Here's what you, teh_spamerer, will do in an argument. I will say "Pretend a fox and marth player of equal skill play on corneria. Isnt it obvious that that stage gives fox a statistical advantage?"

Now you will divert the question by saying "well marth can up b directly onto the fin. he can also chain grab up to 40% without moving on any part of the ship. also if he stays on the bottom up against the wall and never misses a tech or DI, he will live much longer than fox. i was once playing Eazy in a $1 money match on corneria with my marth vs his fox, and i 2 stocked him by staying on the bottom of the fin. Not to mention that you can always play a character that does well on that stage...why not just fox ditto him"

I refuse to argue with someone who will say anything, regardless of what they believe to be true, in order to stick to a side of an
argument.

edit: spamerer, stop posting.

ps im completely sober

 

[teh_spamerer]

JFox stop posting drunk

 

[JFox]

Compromise Ruleset?

deleteddddd

 

[blast_ssbb]

I SUPPORT JFOX'S RULESET 100%. just have a few questions.

can u explain why round 3 has to be played on a neutral if round 2 is? u essentially take away the advantage the player gets a win in round 1. he may have WON on a neutral but PREFER a counterpick.

from the looks of it though the counterpick stages will always dissolve into FD as a lesser of 2 evils for floaties, most floaties wont leave rainbow and corneria but they dont necessarily do great on FD, especially if theyre fighting a char that relies on lack of platforms to excel like iceys or ppl that get off on grabs like doc.

another question would u strike the stages b4 or after char changes? or would winner have to stay char? ( i know thats never been supported in smash but it makes learning other chars a + instead of a minus since u essentially dont necessarily get stage advantage anymore.

edit: ive kinda stopped arguing in favor of the old ruleset since you guys definitely wont go back it seems and i dont want to have to quit goin to tourneys just because u guys r being hardheaded so lets try to find a mid ground yeye?

 

[Cia]

i.. hate the thought of FD not being a 'neutral' stage.

and wtf, what good is a counterpick is your opponent has a say in what stage gets chosen?!?!

i'm sorry if i seem .. uhh.. uncooperative. but i do not approve of that ruleset. at all.

 

[Eggm]

While I feel its better than the current ruleset I still have mixed feelings about it. Also I am a bit confused about this 3rd part.

Third game- If the second game was played on a neutral, the third must also be played on a neutral. If the second game was played on a non-neutral, the loser may choose to play on the set of their choice.

Umm. Scenario 1 me vs you jfox. You win r1. I choose neutrals then I win r2. you start off by saying in r3 that now you have to choose a neutral but also you say that you the loser may choose to play the set of their choice(meaning he can choose CP and then pick a CP stage?). I think if you remove that last part it will be less confusing. Or am I just reading it wrong?

This is way to in favor of spaces in spacies vs peach btw. Because if peach wins r1 the other guy can say neutrals and you can't CP even FD anymore the whole set, and thats like peaches best neutral vs spacies. If FD is put back on neutrals and the CP's are left alone and you clarify how r3 works I could be in favor of this ruleset.

 

[JFox]

i edited the rules, but now they LOOK super confusing. I have work, so ill just clarify later

 

[Alex Strife]

Crismas: Why does it sound like everyone is afraid of Peach

 

[blast_ssbb]

no one is afraid of peach we just happen to have like 4 ppl who play peach in this debate, me,jfox,vanz and tec0 so she comes up alot as the example of chars that suck in spocs ruleset but excel in current ruleset.

and vanz FD is anything but neutral, and i agree with jfox that most sets wind up banning it unless theres some other really scare stage (like mute), i dont think u should be difficult just cuz its not what were used to, and i think its much more fair, especially since its stage strike, for example r1 assuming ur playing a fox, u can choose to strike the stages wit low ceilings (yoshis,pokemon) or the one with camping platforms (dl, and the other of ur choosing) i much prefer that then have to play on a random neutral thats super biased (lol yoshis) and as the spacie player myself i enjoy the fact that i can strike dl without banning it and FoD and theyll have to play on a stage like battlefield which is totally fair i think in most matchups.

jfox put a lot of thought into it, even if we dont take it exactly how it is its much better to 7 horrible neutrals.

also i dont think ive ever asked someone "just wanna play fd?" and theyve said no, i think spacies might be wary of u (but theyd prob ban it anyways).

my 2 cents. so far ive given almost a quarter


edit: just want to make sure, the stage striking round 2 and 3 happen BEFORE char select right?

and i wanna point out that if u take them to counterpicks they essentially have to play u on kongo fd or brinstar which r all stages that benefit the matchups ur worried about i think.

 

[Cia]

i basically implied in my last post that was it's not my intention to be difficult. but every stage set on the 'Neutrals' list has platforms. which means characters that absolutely **** platforms (i.e sheik) will be in heaven. I could easily see Reno loving this ruleset and i wouldn't even blame. him.

and wtf. here's how a set with me would go.

me (prolly peach) vs Spacieplayer94,000,000 (Fox)

rd 1.
i strike PS
they strike FoD
i strike Dreamland
they strike battlefield
we get Yoshi's.

(good. i hope he doesn't camp the top platform and kill me from 75% >_<)

ok, so lets say i lose round 1.

"uhh.. can't we go to a non-neutral plz"

"ok. but i forbid you to go to brinstar"

"ok, i'll strike corneria"

"noFD"

"uhh.. i'll strike rainbow cruise?"

so we get DK64.

(i hope he doesn't camp those high *** platforms either.)

STUPID STUPID STUPID

i'd feel like the victim of my counterpick.

the ruleset 'seems' really nice and it was creative, but i just don't like it.

 

[Teczer0]

Jfox's ruleset basically contradicts the entire purpose of counterpicking.

Counterpicking should give YOU a slight advantage momentarily. Vanz's example is a pretty valid possibility which wouldn't even give him the advantage.

EDIT: Vanz wtf is with your sig.... >_>

 

[EmuKiller]

wth jfox? why???

 

[R3N0]

i <3 platforms. but i suck anyway. so? who kurrrs (cares)

 

[Teczer0]

i <3 platforms. but i suck anyway. so? who kurrrs (cares)

>_>

I learned half of my sheik from you . That would mean I suck....

Well......

 

[R3N0]

hey tec0..
http://www.smashboards.com/showpost.php?p=8400362&postcount=3660

read it n weep

 

[Teczer0]

hey tec0..
http://www.smashboards.com/showpost.php?p=8400362&postcount=3660

read it n weep

That **** don't mean anything.

I think in tourney I'm technically 0-1 against you. Yeaaa tourney records.

ROFL

 

[R3N0]

yah like 10 years ago when i was good @ the game.

 

[Deleted member]

okay, I have thought about this, and here's what I'd like to do:

1. add pound 4 hosts to the MBR
2. pound this **** out
3. try pound 4 with a *slightly* revised rule set. don't expect any revolutionary moves.

 

[Eazy23]

ps how am i known to have cp trouble

that doesn't make any sense i usually beat everyone on their counterpicks

me getting ***** on cps in recent memory include swiftbass on rainbow cruise, spammer on floats a year ago, pink shinobi on mute city -- these are the only 3 times i can even think of on which i have lost an important tournament match on a counterpick stage chosen against me

that's pretty much it

also i employed CP stages very many times to beat players better than me, most notably chudat, and you know what i think it's ******** that at least 50% of the reason i beat chu in tourney was because i said brinstar

the better player should win -- cp stages hinder that

No. You are actively creating a standard for being "better", which excludes MANY factors that contribute to what being better really is. ( Or has been accepted to be)

Your definition of better seems to be -a person who, for whatever reason, wins more in a neutral and common setting.

Now this is not some outlandish definition, but given our circumstances, and what the melee community has been imposing for years, a better definition would be " the player who is better at winning 2 matches out of 3 with the given ruleset" is better. Thus, the player who has a WINNING strategy, which may or may not include using a weird cp stage, is BETTER.

If you are trying to imply that because you can **** someone on pokestad 99/100 times, that you are a better tournament player than they are, and that them having a chance vs you because of pokefloats is stupid, you are nonchalantly compromising the importance of the cp system as if it were nothing, and with this is my problem.

Why not ban low tier characters as well? I mean, people john about losing to someone who uses a crappy unknown char all of the time. " Man, I'm way better than him, he just did weird stuff that I didn't practice against".

Why is it acceptable to beat someone better( using your definition) than you because of a weird character, but not ok to do so because of a stage?( A stage that has been deemed fair for quite sometime I might add)

Any logical thinker can understand my connection. Just as any illogical, irrational thinker will say wtf are you talking about.

Please understand this, I am not disagreeing that the ruleset could be cool etc, but false premises are false premises. Scar, I'm sure you wouldn't want to win this debate with a weak, untested arguement right?

 

[blast_ssbb]

vanz i definitely acknowledge that we overlooked the fact that all the stages have platforms, but i think its a lesser of 2 evils (id rather fight shieks on platforms then worry about the endless list of chaingrabs and tech chase chaingrabs on FD). I think your example is too biased, its your own personal decision to strike the stages in that order leaving u with the stage you got, u couldve striked yoshis cuz in general opinion the low ceiling is too deadly for peach, and then either dl or ps for whichever u prefered to play on cuz IMO its more of a balanced playing field (although its obvious u worried about getting camped but i dont think thats legitimate reason to go to Yoshis over DL).

also had u decided to play on neutrals round 2 after losing on yoshis round 1, yoshis and a stage of ur choosing (either ps or dl im assuming from ur striking wouldve been banned) leaving u wit battlefield FoD and the one left over, (again i think striking dl was not in ur favor which if u banned ps leaves u wit FoD or dl since u could strike battlefield which i think is an advantage for peach.

I do agree that there needs to be a similiar rule for the counterpick stages as it stands, because if u switch formats you lose the advantage because u no longer can minimize the pool of stages yourself but rather have to alternate with your opponent. maybe give ur opponent only 1 strike from counterpicks(essentially a ban) and allow the loser to pick from there? its almost the same as if u stayed neutral (daves stupid rule + 2 bans only gives winner 1 strike). I actually think thats a good idea. thoughts?

also the difference between this and current system is A) the lack of extremely biased stages, and the lack of un-necassary bans because u ban per round not per set. it gives u more defense ( no point in banning dl if ur opponent is gonna take u to brinstar) but also more counterpick options if u say cp and they ban brinstar u can still chain grab to death on fd or take advantage of size of kongo in vanz case.)

feed back on this idea?

 

[teh_spamerer]

again i think striking dl was not in ur favor

If someone decides to play really gay, DL64 is hard for Peach to play on. Platform camping her on that stage is extremely effective because she lacks vertical mobility. The platforms are higher on that stage then other neutrals and the top platform is really high. Someone shoots lasers then jumps on a platform when she gets close enough that if they wait longer she can stop them from going there. Then getting to top platform is easy and she's out of options. If she tries to get there from one of the side platforms the other person is just going to run off the other side and double jump up b from underneath it is too slow.

 

[blast_ssbb]

yes spam i understand that but thats half the argument, my main point is it was his choice to play on yoshis instead of dreamland, he couldve played on ps if he wanted to by striking the other 2, it becomes which one is a lesser of 2 evils(or 3 in this case). while it is unfair that fox has more advantage on the neutrals he did have some control over where it was played. as opposed to randomly getting dreamland or pokemon on random which any other system would promote (i think this is also part of spocs ruleset,the striking part).

like i said his example was biased he used a char matchup that was uneven(not that many are even) and his own char only has wat 2 stages that r actually an advantage in that matchup (assuming mute is banned). what he needs is not a different ruleset but a ruleset that doesnt strike ALL of his options at once which i think the modification i gave would help with.

 

[Teczer0]

There is no way you could divide a match up in a way so that there is any chance of a "fair" fight no matter what match up you do.

Unless its a ditto match up.

In other words the character with the most stages that are disadvantageous to them will get the short end of the stick. No matter what you with the SSS.

 

[JFox]

all you guys are pointing out at this point is that peach sucks on every stage except Mute and Brin. Literally every stage you can find SOMETHING wrong with it. Peach just sucks, get over it, that really has nothing to do with the rule system.

Vanz, all you did was counterpick poorly. You could have easily gone to battlefield. I'm sorry that peach only has two decent neutrals, one of which fox ***** her on if he plays campy and gay. Seriously, I'm not a magic man, learn to compromise.

Blast, yes characters would be picked BEFORE stages in EVERY match. That means no surprise ****, like a marth having a jiggs in his/her back pocket that they can whip out when conning you into picking brinstar

edit: tec0 i agree. all im tryin to do is lessen the CP stage's influence on the match. Bad characters will always be bad, but at least now they arent forced to play on the hardest stages for that character.

 

[ZoSo]

If someone decides to play really gay, DL64 is hard for Peach to play on. Platform camping her on that stage is extremely effective because she lacks vertical mobility. The platforms are higher on that stage then other neutrals and the top platform is really high. Someone shoots lasers then jumps on a platform when she gets close enough that if they wait longer she can stop them from going there. Then getting to top platform is easy and she's out of options. If she tries to get there from one of the side platforms the other person is just going to run off the other side and double jump up b from underneath it is too slow.

The top platform on Battlefield is higher. DL64 is just wider and the side platforms are slightly higher.

 

[Cia]

I'm not a magic man

and i'm not asking you to be. i'm just pointing out my frustration with the rules you proposed because they are incredibly limiting. And i'm sorry if it seems like my anger is directed at you because it's really not. I'm just pissed off at this whole situation. Everything was going fine with the rules we had at all these tournaments with a few minor changes here and there. and for the first time in 8 ****ing years Jigglypuffs and Peach players are generally doing well and NOW the rules are UNFAIR?!?!

That's ****ing bull**** and I really don't care what some would say their motive is for wanting new rules because it would just be a LIE. they've already hated stages like Mute or w/e and they're using Hbox, Armada, Mango's recent success as a scapegoat for their arguement.

 

[ZoSo]

That's really constructive, Vanz.

 

[CT Chia]

Vanz, at least from what I've read I don't think Armada and Mango have even been brought up once. The general simile used is a very good notPeach player versus a worse Peach player having matches that seem to be too influenced by the stage. Mango and Armada are amazing enough to win with CPs like that, if anything they are proof that those characters can be fine without those stages.

Also, everyone acts like its only those two that are effected. Poke Floats would be banned as well right? There's a huge CP for Fox gone as well.

 

[CanISmash]

Vanz, at least from what I've read I don't think Armada and Mango have even been brought up once. The general simile used is a very good notPeach player versus a worse Peach player having matches that seem to be too influenced by the stage. Mango and Armada are amazing enough to win with CPs like that, if anything they are proof that those characters can be fine without those stages.

Also, evercp.yone acts like its only those two that are effected. Poke Floats would be banned as well right? There's a huge CP for Fox gone as well.

but who? which scrub in the last two years beat someone good bc of a gay cp... gimme just one match.

 

[JFox]

deletedddd

 

[JFox]

sorry for the double post, but this post is to vanz-

Vanz, for the most part, melee rules arent dramatically changing. Sure Spoc and maybe tunes bi-weeklies will support a new ruleset, but other locals like saffron and no johns arent changing. And this new ruleset is still temporary and experimental, no one knows what's going to come of it.

I find it more fair and I think on some level you know its more fair. Yeah Peach and jiggs usually depend on counterpicks, but when you run into a high tier like fox who knows how to use counterpicks, i think everyone can admit at times people are thinking "wow, this just isnt fair for the other guy"