MELEE-FC Tournament Ruleset Discussion

[Prince_Abu]

just make it so that you cant ban 3 neutrals or sometihng and it will be fine

top players will probably agree to mbr 5 anyway

 

[KishSquared]

Not much to add yet, but it's clear that 95% of people in opposition of bunk bed stages have no idea how they work. It's hard to take their arguments seriously because there's no ground for what they're saying. Especially regarding Klaptrap.

If we ban JJ, we're banning YI YS. If you don't want to die 'randomly' by KT, then I don't want you living 'randomly' by a cloud save.

EDIT: Oops YS

 

[Strong Badam]

But Jeff, both versions of Yoshi's Island (64 and Pipes) are already banned even in the FC stage list!

 

[Kal]

That was an error on Kish's part. Both Kishes and I agree that Pipes is a legitimate stage, and any decision to ban it is shallow and pedantic.

 

[Strong Badam]

And extremely scrubby

 

[KishSquared]

Sorry, it's been 17 YEARS since I played the game, lol.

YS, it has been corrected.

 

[Dart!]

While i don't agree with a lot of the stage list i will probably go to rep the midwest in the crew battle and play doubles.

 

[Wake]

dart and i played for about three hours on brinstar once

it.. was a rough afternoon for him

but he wanted to learn!

EDIT: the night before FC, we will play many games there, wake.

MN probably wouldn't appreciate me learning to have fun on that stage.

 

[Drephen]

i fear that a lot of well known decent players willing to travel will not come to this due to stages (which is a little ridiculous but whatever)

In my opinion i think its better to have the same old rule set thats been going on for 4 years with well known players then have a tournament that caters to more of what "neutral stages" are, and to "fully play the potential of the game SSBM in competitive play."

hell if it was my tournament id prolly put these stages on a more with considering what i think is fair but the kishes kinda have a reputation of hosting national tournaments. Id rather see big names rather than an interesting ruleset.

For the past 4 FCs its gone like this
1.) Makes rules for tournaments
2.) Has intellectual conversations about it with the community
3.) Kishes be stubborn and nothing gets changed (i love you guys but its true)

not that ive disagreed with the rules in the past but that how it always goes

but as always "your tournament, your rules" Ill have fun reguardless of the ruleset as should everybody, but if it reallllyyy is a big problem for people meaning good people not coming and attendence taking a huge hit, i think its a change thats necessary.

Also, Pumpkin Delights are my favorite food, everyone should get some

 

[Deleted member]

i like the stage list.

anyone missing FC for the stage list is stupid

FC is basically for anyone who's even been semi-serious about this game ever.

 

[KishSquared]

3.) Kishes be stubborn and nothing gets changed (i love you guys but its true)

D-rephen!

I <3 you too, but nothing could be further from the truth. We've banned stages at each FC to blend the MW and Coastal rules, stages that we'd have never banned otherwise. So when people complain (because, let's face it, they always do regardless of the rules), we say "no, we've already compromised, anything more would be unfair to the other side."

I think the problem is that we're preemptively banning stages. We should just post OUR RULES at day 1, let people complain, and THEN compromise. Instead we try to find a balance and then we're forced to be 'stubborn', and thus have apparently earned a heck of a reputation.

Not disagreeing with anything else you said, but it's very interesting to watch people call us stubborn so repeatedly. It's simply not true - we compromise more than any other TO.

<3 <3 D-rephen

 

[Drephen]

D-rephen!

I <3 you too, but nothing could be further from the truth. We've banned stages at each FC to blend the MW and Coastal rules, stages that we'd have never banned otherwise. So when people complain (because, let's face it, they always do regardless of the rules), we say "no, we've already compromised, anything more would be unfair to the other side."

I think the problem is that we're preemptively banning stages. We should just post OUR RULES at day 1, let people complain, and THEN compromise. Instead we try to find a balance and then we're forced to be 'stubborn', and thus have apparently earned a heck of a reputation.

Not disagreeing with anything else you said, but it's very interesting to watch people call us stubborn so repeatedly. It's simply not true - we compromise more than any other TO.

<3 <3 D-rephen

good stuff, let the discussion keep going then!

Also, how the heck are you guys replying to everything so quickly and so effectively? Dont you guys have families or something silly like that?

 

[KishSquared]

Yes, which is precisely the problem. I'm currently up trying to get my 2-month-old to go to sleep

 

[Drephen]

Yes, which is precisely the problem. I'm currently up trying to get my 2-month-old to go to sleep

this will put him to sleep
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vfpf7pCV0mU&feature=relmfu

 

[KirbyKaze]

My favourite children's lullaby.

 

[Prince_Abu]

D-rephen!

I <3 you too, but nothing could be further from the truth. We've banned stages at each FC to blend the MW and Coastal rules, stages that we'd have never banned otherwise. So when people complain (because, let's face it, they always do regardless of the rules), we say "no, we've already compromised, anything more would be unfair to the other side."

I think the problem is that we're preemptively banning stages. We should just post OUR RULES at day 1, let people complain, and THEN compromise. Instead we try to find a balance and then we're forced to be 'stubborn', and thus have apparently earned a heck of a reputation.

Not disagreeing with anything else you said, but it's very interesting to watch people call us stubborn so repeatedly. It's simply not true - we compromise more than any other TO.

<3 <3 D-rephen

The reason you have to compromise and other TOs dont is cause you dont use the MBR ruleset, which is the recommended ruleset for optimal competitive play. no one would be complaining at all really if you just used the APEX stagelist. i personally dont care tho this ruleset isnt that bad

 

[baka4moé]

isn't choosing not to change things, after people are voicing their desires to change them, considered being "stubborn"? lol or am i missing something

 

[Metà]

i tried playing on some of these stages today. I guess I can deal with them if I have to... I'll just play really, really, really campy. So I guess not much has changed

but seriously, the only rule I think REALLY needs to be changed is the 'no stage can be played twice' rule. Just use modified DSR!


EDIT: Also, the way current stage striking rules work, is that you have to pick your character before striking (with or without double blinds). I didn't see this in the rules, have you guys thought about this? It's a really important part of the set, because you need to know what you're up against before the first round.

 

[ORLY]

yeah AFAIK you pick your chars first. obviously the MU has a lot to do with how you decide to strike.

that'd just be silly, meta!

 

[Mahone]

Can you guys tell me what "bunk bed" stages are good for puff?

I never played these so i was just curious

 

[PEEF!]

You know what we could do?

Take a poll...? Not saying that it beats the rational argument that we are having, but it could give us another facet to discuss, because right now only the people with lots of time and patience are still posting in this thread.

A poll with names included would be best.

 

[KishSquared]

The reason you have to compromise and other TOs dont is cause you dont use the MBR ruleset, which is the recommended ruleset for optimal competitive play. no one would be complaining at all really if you just used the APEX stagelist. i personally dont care tho this ruleset isnt that bad

The point is we want to compromise between Apex and FC. We could have gone straight old-school FC, but we found a compromise we believed works. And yes, plenty of people would complain if we used Apex rules.

isn't choosing not to change things, after people are voicing their desires to change them, considered being "stubborn"? lol or am i missing something

I'll give you that one. Yes, we're stubbornly trying to compromise between two very difficult mindsets towards this game. If 100% of players were in agreement about the MBR5, we'd play MBR5. People express their opinions thinking that everyone agrees with them, but that's not the case.

 

[Strong Badam]

I think a public poll should literally never be even made for a ruleset issue. In a rational debate, you define your criteria and explain why you feel that some stages meet or exceed your criteria. You have to have good reasons for your opinion, or you look like an idiot and no one takes you seriously. In a poll, you can vote for or against something with no regard as to the reasoning and have no consequence. It's part of the reason the Meta Knight banning poll was so stupid; people could vote no because they didn't like fighting the character, because they lose to a player that uses Meta Knight, because their character is hard countered by Meta Knight, or they dislike Meta Knight's selectable colors, and the poll made no distinction.
The same would happen in this case. The vast majority of newer-school players haven't used the stages for 2+ years now, and deviating from that has no visible benefit to most players (increased stage diversity/counterpicking depth isn't a popularly held virtue). Several people would vote to ban a stage not because they legitimately feel that the stage is uncompetitive or doesn't test a player's skill, but rather because they don't like playing on the stage. There's also a large number of people who simply don't care about the stage list, and will attend regardless of it, so I can't see them voting either way, which would skew the results.

 

[Dart!]

so if i just play doubles do i still pay 85 bucks? ouch, didn't think about that. Definitely is swaying me towards not going.

 

[Kal]

I agree that a poll to determine a ruleset is stupid. Popular vote just means the minority gets shafted. But a poll to determine who is in favor of what ruleset could be useful.

 

[Divinokage]

No one argued my point for MK 2 being banned, I'm tight! Like i said before it deviates from regular "smash" play, there isn't even an edgeguarding game in that level so it removes depth completely.. and also you can be a little ***** and use the edge constantly to keep a strong position, it doesn't seem like a competitive stage at all.. and also birdo of course. All the other stages I can deal with because all of the requirement that I think a match should be played is there so I'll just have to adapt to the stage, I don't mind doing that.

 

[Mahone]

can't fox also abuse invul ledgedash on that stage?

 

[Strong Badam]

He can do that on any stage.
Except Mute City.

 

[PEEF!]

Well, I think that a poll will be useful to measure the consequences of rulesets. If many people would not travel cross country to play on what they view as a garbage stagelist (as stabbedbyanipple said) then that is worth considering. Losing good players over "creative and throwback" stagelists for the sake of diversity does not seem worth it at all.

I would rather have stabbedbyanipple at this tournament than Mushroom Kingdom II. If an antiquated and many-years-banned stage is more important than one of the best video uploaders in the country, then we might have our priorities in the wrong place.

(Anticipating possible counterpoint): "What if everyone starts threatening attendance to get their way?" I think we have no evidence that this would happen/has been a problem, and I think the community should trust these (respectable) players/community members. When they say they don't think it is worth coming to for them because they would like a more standard ruleset to make it worth their time or that they don't want to fear of lose matches to randomness that wouldn't be involved in an MBR list, then we should believe them.

 

[Bl@ckChris]

If higher level players don't like the ruleset, then they can just agree to use mbr5 in their matches. If its an overwhelming majority and the players would agree to it, then the kishes won't and can't really force them to use this stagelist.

If a poll says everyone wants mbr5 then everyone should come, sit down, and play their matches with the mbr5, and still get the great tournament experience that I'm sure fc will offer.

 

[PEEF!]

If higher level players don't like the ruleset, then they can just agree to use mbr5 in their matches. If its an overwhelming majority and the players would agree to it, then the kishes won't and can't really force them to use this stagelist.

If a poll says everyone wants mbr5 then everyone should come, sit down, and play their matches with the mbr5, and still get the great tournament experience that I'm sure fc will offer.

The higher level players will probably agree to MBR or play only MBR maps at least. It is the fact that some won't agree and will be rewarded with fraudulent wins that discourages people.

 

[Silent Wolf]

please read

i would really really hate to not see players go because of the stage list, including my friend ciz. kish, any chance you could make it so BOTH players have to agree on this rule set to use it, whereas otherwise, if one person disagrees with it, they would play using the normal MBR rule set? that way players who dont mind or want to try out this rule set, for whatever reason, can, while others will not be forced to.

this rule set seems like it would be fun for a lot of match ups, but also much too different for others to want to travel and compete.

 

[PEEF!]

kish, any chance you could make it so BOTH players have to agree on this rule set to use it, whereas otherwise, if one person disagrees with it, they would play using the normal MBR rule set? that way players who dont mind or want to try out this rule set, for whatever reason, can, while others will not be forced to.

this rule set seems like it would be fun for a lot of match ups, but also much too different for others to want to travel and compete.

This seems like a quality compromise.

 

[KishPrime]

Anyone that thinks we don't compromise clearly don't understand how we really think...lolz. This ruleset isn't even close. We were also the first TOs to ban about 6 stages, as well. You're dealing with old people here.

We're having discussions on this side too, don't worry. Keep tossing out more ideas and we'll figure something out eventually.

 

[Silent Wolf]

id like to know your disagreements with my compromise so maybe i (and others) can reinforce it, because i feel its the best option in terms of maximizing the greatness of this tournament while simultaneously trying 'new' things

 

[ORLY]

obviously there will always be disputes regarding a stage list. if you go to MBR5, people will complain. if you deviate from what you already have set up, people will complain.

i have no real solution to offer; merely stating that there are a lot of people complaining.

also: i will be disappointed if you enact silent wolf's idea of having both players agree to the FC stagelist for it to be active.

 

[Strong Badam]

how about something like if there's a discrepancy in which one to use, a stage list of 9 stages (JJ/MK2 removed) will be used?
dunno, just throwing ideas out there. i can see an issue of the ruleset being too complicated though.

 

[Kal]

I would rather have stabbedbyanipple at this tournament than Mushroom Kingdom II. If an antiquated and many-years-banned stage is more important than one of the best video uploaders in the country, then we might have our priorities in the wrong place.

Do you really think it's worth compromising that much for one player? What if Hax refuses to come if they don't run Battlefield only? Where is the line drawn?

any chance you could make it so BOTH players have to agree on this rule set to use it, whereas otherwise, if one person disagrees with it, they would play using the normal MBR rule set? that way players who dont mind or want to try out this rule set, for whatever reason, can, while others will not be forced to. .

You see that there are two choices, right? So what you're saying is "if players don't agree, we use the second choice."

So players who like that choice are always going to have it. It's not a compromise. It's players who prefer the MBR5 getting what they want. In the end, this isn't a compromise: it's the MBR5 ruleset, because "Gentleman's Clause" already accounts for this.

Something like what Strong Bad suggested is actually a compromise, but it seems sort of silly. The ruleset as it's been written is already a compromise. You get three bans for the set, and two strikes for the first match. There are five counterpick stages, hence you can always strike to a starter. And, if your opponent is so intent on leaving counterpick stages legal that he only bans and strikes starter stages, the remaining counterpick stages won't be his optimal ones anyway. They will potentially even be bad for him.

 

[Bl@ckChris]

Kal, do you play much these days/have any intention on coming to this tournament, or are you arguing simply for what you believe is right?

 

[Kal]

You see how that question serves no purpose, don't you?