Melee Counterpick Stages Debate

[blast_ssbb]

yea like vanz was saying jfox, had eggm decided to go counterpicks (we all know he wouldnt but hypothetically) he loses his advantage because u would get to strike both corneria and rainbow no matter wat, and hed be stuck with 3 stages that arent even in his advantage, however if u make round 2 and 3 just winner gets 1 ban within the set of stages, u could ban corneria OR rainbow cruise and he'd still get his advantage by choosing the other stage. i dont think it makes much sense any other way. the way u currently have it is u only really get an advantage if u play the same set of stages 2 times in a row which might not necessarily be wat u want.

same example: Jfox vs Blast (peach vs falco)

r1- i strike FoD, u strike stadium, i strike dl, u strike yoshis (pretty much same thing as eggms) we play on battlefield. lets say jfox wins.

now if i stay in neutrals, jfox would only get ONE strike by his current ruleset (cuz daves stupid rule + my ban = only 3 stages left) you could essentially say if u pick neutrals again he gets one BAN of the 4 stages that were not played.

However if i decide to go to counterpicks Jfox now has 2 strikes and essentially gets complete control over where we play (since i wont play him on brinstar or japes he can pick FD freely). which isnt an advantage for me, however If you made it after round 1 the winner gets one BAN within the set of 5 stages in counterpick (essentially the same number of strikes he would get if we stayed neutrals) then i could still take him to rainbow cruise if he decided to strike corneria which i would much prefer to Kongo or FD.

r2 (My way)- We both stay same characters, If I say counterpicks Jfox bans corneria If i say neutrals he bans yoshis, i still have the option of PS or Rainbow, I go to Rainbow. now im Definitely getting my counterpick regardless of the set of stages i pick. Lets say i win for the sake of their being a r3.

r3(my way again)- again we both stay same characters, If jfox says counterpicks i ban brinstar, and if he says neutrals i ban FoD, now he can pick between dreamland and or kongo/FD so he still gets stage advantage. whoever wins on any of those stages is really upto the players with peach only getting a 60/40 advantage on the stages because of size and chaingrab options.

BASICALLY IF U DONT WANT TO READ THE EXAMPLE WINNER OF R1 GETS 2 BANS FOR R2(one neutral and one counterpick essentially) AND THE LOSER CAN STILL CHOOSE THE STAGE, ITS JUST SIMPLIFYING JFOX'S RULESET WHILE ADDRESSING THE ISSUE THAT SWITCHING FROM ONE SET OF STAGES TO THE OTHER NEGATES YOUR ADVANTAGE.

This way ensures that you get your counterpick while also ensuring that the winner isnt super penalized for winning. u could also pick chars after the bans this way, allowing for secondaries to make a surprise showing on ur counterpicks.

I actually had a really long post yesterday but apparently smashboards didnt register. vanz do u kinda agree with the modifications i made? the fact of the matter is scars not gonna change his ruleset, i wouldnt even be surprised if he unsunscribed from this thread. I really think this ruleset however will make eggms tourneys refreshing and different and sorry if u think mute city isnt unbalanced but just like u shouldnt be forced to learn chars to play on neutrals others shouldnt be forced to learn chars just for mute, and DL/FD/FoD/Brinstar is enough counterpicks in your pocket for any matchup.

 

[JFox]

yeah blast, im cool with these rules actually. it makes more sense in almost every way. it still keeps the core points i had in mind, and makes for a more fair/simple ruleset.

good work, i like it.

______________________________

So basically we have this-

Neutrals- Battlefield, Dreamland, Yoshis, Pokemon Stadium, and Fountain of Dreams

Non-Neutrals- Final Destination, Kongo Jungle, Rainbow Cruise, Brinstar, Corneria

Banned stages- Everything not listed.


First game- Players take turns striking stages from the neutral ruleset until one is left (Slot one picks first). The last one is the one played game 1.

Second game- Winner announces a ban for both neutrals and non-neutrals. Loser than picks a stage. Winner chooses character, than loser chooses character.

Third game- Winner announces a ban for both neutrals and non-neutrals. Loser than picks a stage. Winner chooses character, than loser chooses character.


Dave's stupid rule- Players cannot choose a stage that has already been played on already in the set.
______________________________________






this ruleset is ****

 

[Eggm]

yeah blast, im cool with these rules actually. it makes more sense in almost every way. it still keeps the core points i had in mind, and makes for a more fair/simple ruleset.

good work, i like it.

______________________________

So basically we have this-

Neutrals- Battlefield, Dreamland, Yoshis, Pokemon Stadium, and Fountain of Dreams

Non-Neutrals- Final Destination, Kongo Jungle, Rainbow Cruise, Brinstar, Corneria

Banned stages- Everything not listed.


First game- Players take turns striking stages from the neutral ruleset until one is left (Slot one picks first). The last one is the one played game 1.

Second game- Winner announces a ban for both neutrals and non-neutrals. Loser than picks a stage. Winner chooses character, than loser chooses character.

Third game- Winner announces a ban for both neutrals and non-neutrals. Loser than picks a stage. Winner chooses character, than loser chooses character.


Dave's stupid rule- Players cannot choose a stage that has already been played on already in the set.
______________________________________






this ruleset is ****

Its not as good as spoc's rule set, but its a good compromise and I'd be willing to use it at my next tournament to see how it works out. I'd like to make a slight tweak tho. Instead of controller ports deciding who gets 1st strike all the time. How about we make it so the lower tiered character gets it? Cause otherwise some people will john about how the other guy beat him to the gamecube to take the slot and got more strikes.

Edit : If its a ditto THEN go by controller slot. Oh also you should expand your final summary that I quoted to clarify how this works in BO5's.

 

[EmuKiller]

the spoc rules are ok

perhaps it's time TOs start making some changes

 

[CT Chia]

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

Did you even read my post? I feel like you quoted the wrong thing.

 

[JFox]

nah, im leavin it as controller slot 1 picks first.

and for BO5 you just keep going til the set is over, but no repeat stages allow.

 

[Deathknight]

Ugh, overly complicated... though I guess I can deal with this. No Mute though..

 

[Scar]

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.

ok **** this definition because **** the given ruleset and **** what we've been doing for years

since when have i EVER not questioned something that has been presented before me? i will never accept something just because "it's what was there," that's so... stupid.

frankly the ruleset is bad BECAUSE it allows unearned advantages and random factors to play a significant role in determining the outcome of a set

there is a fine line between whether nimbus is too random or the barrel on DK64 is too random or the lava from brinstar or the cars from mute or the apples from green greens, but i think that it's distinguishable and i think that everyone who has an open mind about the rulesets that i've spoken to has said that the line is drawn at the lava

moving stages i suppose could be debated further and i'm open to hearing reasons for WHY they should be allowed. but many people are taking the stance where like the ruleset now is innocent until proven guilty, i think that we should have a discussion from scratch and i would like to hear why people think it's valuable to include rainbow cruise and pokefloats in tournament matches

in the interest of fairness (which has been a big cause of concern for peach/jiggs players since they gain an apparently needed advantage from brinstar and mute city), what's the argument for cruise and floats? fox gets a huge advantage on these stages that isn't otherwise available to him on the 7 neutralish stages, and that's a big cause of concern for everyone BUT fox players.

i very much don't understand why people have a problem with the idea that excluding counterpick stages is more conducive to tournament set results that more accurately decide the better player.

________________________________________
two entirely different arguments are being posed to me, and they are directly correlated with two entirely different groups of players

campy spacie players NEED floats and cruise and corneria

peach/jiggs players NEED mute city and brinstar

i think it's obvious that they're all looking for their own piece of the pie.
________________________________________


vanz you fall under this category and i resent the implication that i want to take success away from jiggs/peach players. success is great, but i refuse to condone undeserved success like a stage that favors your character more than any other stage favors any other character ONLY able to be chosen AFTER losing a match.

jfox's rules are too complicated, corneria is totally unfair and random, and i wonder, again, why rainbow cruise is necessary.

 

[pockyD]

jfox that ruleset is terrible

simply put, whatever stages you decide to put into the set of "non-neutral" stages will exclusively dictate whether it will be selected or not

for example, if the stages were floats, cruise, corneria, brinstar, and mute city and the expected matchup is fox vs peach, you are handing fox the easy advantage on CP-ing, while simultaneously denying peach her CP. This is far worse than either extreme because in the current system, both players get their wacky CP, while in the "neutrals only" system, neither player does. Whatever you select as the set of stages for 'non-neutrals', given that they are clearly universally recognized as less "balanced" than the neutrals, the set itself dictates who can and will use it, rather than the players

edit: ok i just realized i skipped 2 pages so this reply might be ambiguous, though based on the content it should be easy to determine what it was targeted at (post 132)

as for the "newer" system, why is this any better than straight up giving each player 2 stage bans without worrying about whether it's "neutral" or not?

 

[Scar]

i agree w pocky for that ruleset, how are you going to leave corneria? that's so lol.

2 stage bans imo aren't enough, there's an unwritten rule that you ban neutrals against people who generally don't pick gay cp stages against you and that you ban cp stages and sacrifice your neutral ban against those that do

2 bans again are not enough bc peach/jiggs in particular have DL64/mute/brinstar and fox in particular has any number of neutrals and floats/cruise

so whatever you ban you still have to sacrifice your neutral ban just because the opponent plays fox or jiggs as opposed to any other of the 20 characters

 

[pockyD]

well the point isn't to eliminate all stages that afford the character an advantage

it's to eliminate the most extreme stages

otherwise, we would just play on one stage so that nobody has an advantage (relative to our selected "neutral" stage anyway)

 

[Teczer0]

frankly the ruleset is bad BECAUSE it allows unearned advantages and random factors to play a significant role in determining the outcome of a set

there is a fine line between whether nimbus is too random or the barrel on DK64 is too random or the lava from brinstar or the cars from mute or the apples from green greens, but i think that it's distinguishable and i think that everyone who has an open mind about the rulesets that i've spoken to has said that the line is drawn at the lava

I think playing a certain character should allow the player all the advantages that said character has.

Its still a skill and it takes some time to learn the stages if you win on it why shouldn't it be deserved?

The only case when the stage gives an undeserved win is when the stage plays the match itself. An example would be Hyrule Temple where fox has what might as well be infinite space to run on.

Brinstar for example isn't remotely that devastating. The entire screen shakes when the lava is about to rise its pretty obvious when it is going to come up. The lava also doesn't auto KO you or anything. In fact you could use it to your advantage if you play it right. Which is recover but into the lava to regain your up-b to recover either elsewhere or just to extend your recovery. I mean sure it CAN kill you if you aren't careful about it and yea it may make you adjust your game but thats a part of the game. Its basically a double edged sword and learning how in general it works shouldn't be discouraged just because the normal 6 stages don't offer hazards that can be used to your advantage.

Stuff like Mute City is also a similar stage except instead of lava its cars and there are no ledges. Again you have to adjust to it but the fact that it doesn't have ledges are disadvantageous to every character in the game. Peach and Puff may have to use it less so they can take a slight advantage from it, but it by no means is an advantage big enough to have it become a permanent ban.

moving stages i suppose could be debated further and i'm open to hearing reasons for WHY they should be allowed. but many people are taking the stance where like the ruleset now is innocent until proven guilty, i think that we should have a discussion from scratch and i would like to hear why people think it's valuable to include rainbow cruise and pokefloats in tournament matches

in the interest of fairness (which has been a big cause of concern for peach/jiggs players since they gain an apparently needed advantage from brinstar and mute city), what's the argument for cruise and floats? fox gets a huge advantage on these stages that isn't otherwise available to him on the 7 neutralish stages, and that's a big cause of concern for everyone BUT fox players.

Moving stages I guess I'd have to leave up to discussion like you. I mean personally I really couldn't care. Both stages are extremely predictable and its not extremely difficult to force people to come to you as long as you don't play dumb about it.

Again I personally don't care that much about these 2 stages although I feel like they should be left on because they don't offer any random hazards or anything. They promote camping but just because it promotes camping is not a good basis for a permanent ban of the stage.

It only deserves to be banned if the stage kills for no reason like green greens or Jungle Japes. Or if the stage makes a certain strategy completely unbeatable like hyrule temple.

i very much don't understand why people have a problem with the idea that excluding counterpick stages is more conducive to tournament set results that more accurately decide the better player.

What people dislike generally is that it takes AWAY from the game. I quite honestly do not believe you had ill intentions since I know overall you're an extremely talented player but its because of your character choice and stage preferences that don't allow you to see the other side of the coin as strongly as players that have character choices like puff and peach whatever.

I think TO's choosing to eliminate certain CPs is up to them. But eliminating CPs completely takes away from certain character strengths that quite honestly don't give automatic wins is just a bad idea.

Peach on Brinstar/Mute City are definitely not auto wins. Sure it makes them a little harder to fight but its definitely not going to make peach vs falcon a 90/10 match up all of the sudden.

I'm kinda being rushed but I'll post when I get back to my dorm room I think the general idea is obvious.

 

[Inui]

Haley made a serious, intelligent post.

I agree with it.

 

[Scar]

tec0 i haven't read your post yet but i will right after i post this, however i did get to see "it takes away from the game" and hopefully that isn't the core of that tl;dr post bc if it is i'm going to be really upset

well the point isn't to eliminate all stages that afford the character an advantage

it's to eliminate the most extreme stages

otherwise, we would just play on one stage so that nobody has an advantage (relative to our selected "neutral" stage anyway)

if we eliminated all the stages that afforded a character an advantage we would indeed eliminate all stages in the game, as you have staded many times pocky, since none of the neutrals are neutral at all, it's just a name we've chosen for them

and how do you define an extreme advantage, well surely nothing i say will be anything but what i think, and you'll call it arbitrary

so like what are you looking for

relatively large advantages IMO should be eliminated from tourney rulesets bc why do you get a large advantage for losing r1 or r2? i really don't know.

 

[pockyD]

if we eliminated all the stages that afforded a character an advantage we would indeed eliminate all stages in the game, as you have staded many times pocky, since none of the neutrals are neutral at all, it's just a name we've chosen for them

and how do you define an extreme advantage, well surely nothing i say will be anything but what i think, and you'll call it arbitrary

so like what are you looking for

relatively large advantages IMO should be eliminated from tourney rulesets bc why do you get a large advantage for losing r1 or r2? i really don't know.

well, the amount of "extreme" advantages varies by character matchup

for example, fox has like 8 "advantaged" stages vs ice climbers as opposed to 2-3 "neutral" and 1 "disadvantaged" (all relative to the hypothetical 'perfectly neutral' stage), while fox vs falco has a far more even distribution

and when looking for stages that offer an "extreme" advantage to a specific character (in the neighborhood of an "unfair" advantage), it should be considered vs the entirety of the rest of the cast, not in a specific matchup

 

[teh_spamerer]

why do you get a large advantage for losing r1 or r2? i really don't know.

If you LOSE R1 you don't get a large advantage. If two players are equally skilled and can play all the characters in the game at that same skill level, whoever loses R1 is obviously going to be at a large disadvantage with or w/o counterpick stages because each player has a 50/50 chance of winning each match and whoever won R1 only needs to win 1/2 matches.

i think it's obvious that they're all looking for their own piece of the pie.

lololol as if you wouldn't object if the only stages allowed were Rainbow Cruise, Brinstar, Mute City, Poke Floats, Corneria.

 

[Scar]

Hopefully this isn't a double post.

I think playing a certain character should allow the player all the advantages that said character has.

your character choice and stage preferences that don't allow you to see the other side of the coin as strongly as players that have character choices like puff and peach whatever.

ok i have problems with these two quotes and this is why

In fact you could use it to your advantage if you play it right. Which is recover but into the lava to regain your up-b to recover either elsewhere or just to extend your recovery.

we can all agree that the lava is MUCH more easily used advantageously by some characters than others

so it stands to reason that a matchup where one character benefits greatly from the lava and another character benefits very slightly from the lava changes significantly only because this new factor exists

so now hypothetically there is a 50/50 matchup, player skill character select and otherwise entirely even, we'll call them player A and player B

there exists a stage X which adds an otherwise unavailable factor Y to the game that benefits character A much more than it does character B

they have done everything the same up to this point (tourney time) except player A chose character A some years ago and player B chose character B some years ago

if player A wins the first round he has a very high chance of winning the set even if he loses round 2

if player B wins the first round there is a very high chance of the set going to round 3

so player A has this HUGE advantage for absolutely no reason

note that in this argument i have specifically mentioned no characters in particular and no stages in particular, it is simply the principle of counterpick stages that i have a problem with

and if i need to prove that point any more thoroughly (the point that it's for MELEE, not for me), then i'd be happy to amend the SPOC Stage System and add that anyone can pick CP stages against me, because i don't give a **** either way, CF does really well on all of the CP stages and i play just fine on them

it's about not affording players a great advantage for doing something BAD like losing a match

AND it's also about not affording players advantages or disadvantages for choosing which character they want to main like probably when they don't even understand this argument

sorry guys but we do play a game with a VERY steep learning curve and you can't expect everyone to learn every character, nor should you want to because it eliminates the advantage you get by playing the character in question anyways, who would ever pick mute if they knew with 100% certainty it would turn into a peach ditto jiggs ditto or jiggs vs peach match? same with floats if it would turn into foxes shooting lasers (besides spam who i really do hate sometimes)

and when looking for stages that offer an "extreme" advantage to a specific character (in the neighborhood of an "unfair" advantage), it should be considered vs the entirety of the rest of the cast, not in a specific matchup

i entirely agree, which is why i have a problem with moving stages for fast characters vs slow characters and characters with projectiles vs characters without them; and a problem with peach and jigglypuff on mute city (they really do beat everyone there); and mostly a problem with jigglypuff on brinstar but peach is really good there too

If you LOSE R1 you don't get a large advantage. If two players are equally skilled and can play all the characters in the game at that same skill level, whoever loses R1 is obviously going to be at a large disadvantage with or w/o counterpick stages because each player has a 50/50 chance of winning each match and whoever won R1 only needs to win 1/2 matches.

k great point, let's come back from fantasy spammer world where we take small points from other people's posts and turn them into an entire argument that tries to disprove a larger point by saying something that's blatantly obvious, and also where no one plays every character in the game

players who main characters with good CP stages at their disposal are affected less than other players by losing r1

players who main characters with good CP stages at their disposal have a GREAT chance of winning sets relative to players that don't

lololol as if you wouldn't object if the only stages allowed were Rainbow Cruise, Brinstar, Mute City, Poke Floats, Corneria.[/gaycolor]

spammer you make no ****ing sense. of course i'd object because who the hell came up with that ruleset? some moron who has no idea what competitive play is all about

 

[ZoSo]

AND it's also about not affording players advantages or disadvantages for choosing which character they want to main like probably when they don't even understand this argument

I'm not really sure what you mean by this, but I think you're saying that you believe players shouldn't have advantages or disadvantages going beyond the inherent strengths and weaknesses of their character, in which case I would say that I think said character's performance on various stages is but another aspect of that.

players who main characters with good CP stages at their disposal are affected less than other players by losing r1

players who main characters with good CP stages at their disposal have a GREAT chance of winning sets relative to players that don't

I think you've basically been saying that all along, but I don't think everybody (or even most people) would agree that that's a good reason to ban CP stages.

 

[teh_spamerer]

sorry guys but we do play a game with a VERY steep learning curve and you can't expect everyone to learn every character, nor should you want to because it eliminates the advantage you get by playing the character in question anyways, who would ever pick mute if they knew with 100% certainty it would turn into a peach ditto jiggs ditto or jiggs vs peach match? same with floats if it would turn into foxes shooting lasers (besides spam who i really do hate sometimes)

Minor point: Because no one IS going to learn every character, if someone has secondaries or more than one main, they should be rewarded for that and not punished. You have to put a good amount of time and effort into a character to be able to play them on a counterpick stage to beat someone good. Especially because if you lose R1 and you only know that one character on that one stage, your opponent can pick random for R3 and you're screwed.

k great point, let's come back from fantasy spammer world where we take small points from other people's posts and turn them into an entire argument that tries to disprove a larger point by saying something that's blatantly obvious, and also where no one plays every character in the game

This is what I do.

Scar makes argument A supported by claims B, C, D, E, and F. I prove B, C, D, E, and F are all wrong and because they were the ONLY support given for A being true I say that A is not true. Just because I can read the **** out of you in matches DOES NOT MEAN I can read your mind in everything. IF you have other reasons to believe your argument, it is YOUR obligation to TELL me them instead of saying "tl;dr", "you're wrong", [insert moronic response here]

players who main characters with good CP stages at their disposal are affected less than other players by losing r1

players who main characters with good CP stages at their disposal have a GREAT chance of winning sets relative to players that don't

Let's be honest.

Fox - has good CP stages
Falco - has good CP stages
Sheik - has good CP stages
Marth - doesn't really have good CP stages
Captain Falcon - has good CP stages in important matchups
Jigglypuff - has good CP stages
Peach - has good CP stages

Out of all the top characters in the game(even though Peach isn't one I'm including her), everyone except Marth has good CP stages. Let's be honest here, if you're not using one of the top characters you are choosing to handicap yourself FAR more by not using a good character than being hurt by counterpick stages. And it's not like you can't have gay strats on CP stages in low tier vs top tier. On that note: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pvd4HwjmdMs

spammer you make no ****ing sense. of course i'd object because who the hell came up with that ruleset? some moron who has no idea what competitive play is all about

I guess the point went over your head. I'm saying you're looking out for your own piece of the pie too.

 

[ZoSo]

Spam you're dumb.

 

[blast_ssbb]

i agree w pocky for that ruleset, how are you going to leave corneria? that's so lol.

2 stage bans imo aren't enough, there's an unwritten rule that you ban neutrals against people who generally don't pick gay cp stages against you and that you ban cp stages and sacrifice your neutral ban against those that do

2 bans again are not enough bc peach/jiggs in particular have DL64/mute/brinstar and fox in particular has any number of neutrals and floats/cruise

so whatever you ban you still have to sacrifice your neutral ban just because the opponent plays fox or jiggs as opposed to any other of the 20 characters

i disagree with almost everything in this post.

corneria is a dreamland with a low ceiling, instead of wind u have arwings which matter about as much as the wind in my opinion, its a perfectly legit stage for characters that excel at vertical kills while defending them from charcters that excel at horizontal kills.

how the hell should i know what stages players like to choose? how am i supposed to know b4 match 1 if fox player A) is the campy type thats gonna run around on floats or the pressure type thats gonna try to destroy me on yoshis? so let me get this straight ur fine with leaving only 1 ban but limiting the players options to 7 stages instead of just giving them 10 and giving them 2 bans?

jfox ruleset ELIMINATES mute for peach jiggs, and eliminates floats green greens for fox, and gives u 2 bans yet ur still *****ing about those 2 char's advantages? FACE IT FOX IS GOOD NO MATTER WHAT YOU DO. AND GUESS WHAT JUST BECAUSE OTHER PEACH PLAYERS ARENT AS GOOD AS ARMADA YOU SHOULDNT PUNISH THEM. its funny ive seen armada brought up as a peach who can win no matter what yet almost all his sets on youtube from genesis he counterpicks mute. yet by ur definition he didnt deserve to place second at genesis, i guess hes lucky that genesis didnt promote SSS.

again did u even read wat me and jfox came up with? it really solves all your complaints while still allowing chars to get advantages, if u want to just play on FAIR stages go play SF4 plz and stop rejecting everything we say.

P.S. if you have such a problem with counterpicks why do u still have FoD, FD, Kongo, Yoshis, PS on ur ruleset? just make it battlefield or just battlefield and dreamland, or FD, battlefield and dreamland? dont say u hate when chars get HUGE advantage from random factor in stage Y but u still have all stages that promote the same advantage for different chars just have been more universally accepted from the start. why dont YOU look at it from scratch.

 

[Scar]

I'm not really sure what you mean by this, but I think you're saying that you believe players shouldn't have advantages or disadvantages going beyond the inherent strengths and weaknesses of their character, in which case I would say that I think said character's performance on various stages is but another aspect of that.

k well this is a true statement, but it just makes no sense to me that those aspects can only be used after you lose a match

I think you've basically been saying that all along, but I don't think everybody (or even most people) would agree that that's a good reason to ban CP stages.

i don't want to BAN them, it's not like im trying to modify the current ruleset, i'm trying to make a new one that makes more sense for competitive play, but i agree with a lot of the old ruleset, like what stages are neutral

______


Spam, you're dumb. Like seriously. You THINK you're disproving point A by disproving points B C and D but really what you're doing is turning point D into something you read last week in a Dr. Seuss book, typing lots of garbage, and ultimately taking everything out of context and proving a tangential point that has no relevance to anything at all.

______


blast i think you're like not understanding the vast majority of what i'm saying

i think that jfox's rules are too complicated, first and foremost. also if you have stage strikes there is no point in having counterpick stages anyways since if both players eliminate down to a CP stage it's probably the most neutral for that particular player matchup

and i think that the line of what is acceptable and what isn't ends at about pokemon stadium, which imo is borderline acceptable

i think that stadium is one of those stages that you can ban vs certain characters where it's borderline unfair (fox vs a lot of characters) and still be perfectly fine on the other 6 stages, same with yoshi's kj64 FoD and final destination. in the vast majority of matchups those stages are fine though, which is why people play on them all the time (besides kj64 just because no one ever picks, which won't change)

sooo... what's your problem now?

 

[GOTM]

honestly at this point i would just leave the counter picks on so everyone would just stop *****ing. its come to the point where i realize some people care way too much about this game and wont shut the **** up.

 

[Scar]

lol shut up gotm no one cares so much that they won't go to a tourney with different rules, especially since we're just TRYING something new

people just care in theory and hate the idea of change, especially when it means that they don't get to even out a set after losing r1 by picking a stage that grants them a huge advantage

 

[EmuKiller]

I wonder if smashpocalypse will receive a great crowd, we'll just have to wait and see.

 

[GOTM]

LMAO. scar that was like...so funny.

your like trying to generalize the whole situation at first and then you had to add in "after losing r1 by picking a stage that grants them a huge advantage"

LOLOLOL

everyone blows

 

[blast_ssbb]

back in web2zone days alex used to have the rules with him in WRITING to refer to them, i dont think confusing is a valid reason to not try it. Kongo and FoD and Dreamland are about as balanced as Corneria and rainbow cruise, i dont see anything in any of those stages thats extremely game breaking.

scar can u explain to me what u have against corneria and rainbow cruise? apart from fox vs (insert floaty here) but thats wat TWO matchups?

 

[Sliq]

If i'm not mistaken, aren't like half the stages in this game banned because fox is practically unbeatable on them? Why are peach and jiggs immune to this kind of logic?

Because Peach and Jiggs are never unbeatable.

 

[SwiftBass]

this thread has gotten no where. Only reason i came back cuz sliq posted and I was almost 100% sure that i'd see a prince of persia reference or something clever.

its too broad of a topic. Personally I think there should be threads addressing stages and not this large cluster of ppl bring up different points every 3 post.

 

[Teczer0]

this thread has gotten no where (amirite?)

its too broad of a topic. Personally I think there should be threads addressing stages and not this large cluster of ppl bring up different points every 3 post.

I agree actually >_>.

I feel like its a touchy topic in general.

I'm personally just gonna wait till after SPOC to decide how I feel about it.

 

[JFox]

Scar, I think you were reading my original ruleset. this is my latest and greatest.

(LOL 2 spamerer, get burned 1v1 vs scar. you really are hilarious, the way u think you're winning an argument while sounding like a delirious old man. thats priceless)

Neutrals- Battlefield, Dreamland, Yoshis, Pokemon Stadium, and Fountain of Dreams

Non-Neutrals- Final Destination, Kongo Jungle, Rainbow Cruise, Brinstar, Corneria

Banned stages- Everything not listed.


First game- Players take turns striking stages from the neutral ruleset until one is left (Slot one picks first). The last one is the one played game 1.

Second game- Winner announces a ban for both neutrals and non-neutrals. Loser than picks a stage. Winner chooses character, than loser chooses character.

Third game- Winner announces a ban for both neutrals and non-neutrals. Loser than picks a stage. Winner chooses character, than loser chooses character.


Dave's stupid rule- Players cannot choose a stage that has already been played on already in the set.

 

[Lovage]

ay....i didnt read any of this except like 2 posts
someone sum it up for me

lol

 

[Pakman]

It is an experiment and many people feel it will give more deterministic results.

I contend that "where you fight" should not be as important as "how you fight". The so-called "neutral" stages provide the most balanced arenas that minimize innate advantages gained by a combination of stage and character. Using neutrals forces a player to win by out-smarting, or out-teching (read: out-playing) his or her opponent.

I feel that using counterpick stages makes the inherent imbalance in the game much more pronounced. By eliminating stages that heavily favor the "where you fight" advantages, we are making results more deterministic by favoring the "how you fight" mentality.

 

[Overswarm]

I contend that "where you fight" should not be as important as "how you fight". The so-called "neutral" stages provide the most balanced arenas that minimize innate advantages gained by a combination of stage and character. Using neutrals forces a player to win by out-smarting, or out-teching (read: out-playing) his or her opponent.

Shouldn't you ban FD then? That's a totally different game than the other stages.

 

[CanISmash]

wes had an old response to that. a long the lines of we aren't playing street fighter .stage and different terrain changes so much and it makes the game what it is.

 

[Pakman]

Shouldn't you ban FD then? That's a totally different game than the other stages.

I made sure to use the word minimized, because there is no way in any fighting to game to truly remove one character's advantage over another.

I know I am walking a fine line here, but here is how I see it. On a stage like mute city. Peach gets an advantage based on the stage. Regardless of the opponent's character, Peach's ability to win improves based on the stage selection and not on the character. On FD, there is a much less pronounced advantage gained.

As an example: Marth vs Fox. Marth gets a large advantage by picking FD, but I see that as a character weakness rather than the stage, because Marth as a character doesn't universally improve because of FD regardless of the opponent's character. Marth vs Luigi on FD, IMO, give Luigi a better chance to win then on other stages.

 

[CT Chia]

Neutrals- Battlefield, Dreamland, Yoshis, Pokemon Stadium, and Fountain of Dreams

Non-Neutrals- Final Destination, Kongo Jungle, Rainbow Cruise, Brinstar, Corneria

Banned stages- Everything not listed.


First game- Players take turns striking stages from the neutral ruleset until one is left (Slot one picks first). The last one is the one played game 1.

Second game- Winner announces a ban for both neutrals and non-neutrals. Loser than picks a stage. Winner chooses character, than loser chooses character.

Third game- Winner announces a ban for both neutrals and non-neutrals. Loser than picks a stage. Winner chooses character, than loser chooses character.


Dave's stupid rule- Players cannot choose a stage that has already been played on already in the set.

The only things I would change about that would be removing Corneria, and changing DSR so it's you can't pick a stage you already won on instead of picking a stage already used in the set. Also, can you explain the ban more clearly? Do you just get one ban from any stage, or one neutral and one cp ban? I would say keep it at one ban flat out whether it be neutral or cp.

Also about the whole port chooses first thing in striking, then people are gonna worry about who gets which port. Your just delaying what is worried about, the stage random strike or the port. Just do RPS BO3 if there's a dispute over who strikes first.

 

[teh_spamerer]

(LOL 2 spamerer, get burned 1v1 vs scar. you really are hilarious, the way u think you're winning an argument while sounding like a delirious old man. thats priceless)

You know what's REALLY hilarious? How I MASSACRE everyone's points time and again and people don't respond to my arguments and instead just post something like "LOLOL UR RONG!!!!" as a response

 

[pockyD]

edit: **** this thread is too busy

I made sure to use the word minimized, because there is no way in any fighting to game to truly remove one character's advantage over another.

I know I am walking a fine line here, but here is how I see it. On a stage like mute city. Peach gets an advantage based on the stage. Regardless of the opponent's character, Peach's ability to win improves based on the stage selection and not on the character. On FD, there is a much less pronounced advantage gained.

As an example: Marth vs Fox. Marth gets a large advantage by picking FD, but I see that as a character weakness rather than the stage, because Marth as a character doesn't universally improve because of FD regardless of the opponent's character. Marth vs Luigi on FD, IMO, give Luigi a better chance to win then on other stages.

FD improves ICs/dr. mario/others' chances against 90% of the cast

and you can "eliminate" stage edge by playing on exclusively set stages without any room for choice, because to this point, advantages afforded by the stage are all relative, and if there's only one stage, there's nothing for it to be unfair against

spam i'm sure you have me ignored but the point everyone is making is that you THINK you are "massacre"-ing everyone's points when you're just bringing up anecdotal and irrelevant evidence and strawman-ing all over the place, and when it's hard for others to see the relevance of your post, it's even harder to "respond" to it while staying on topic

p.s. the fact he has me blocked because i disagreed with him is the epitome of his mindset

 

[GOTM]

respond to my arguments

That's the problem Spam. You argue, not debate.