MELEE-FC Tournament Ruleset Discussion

[KishSquared]

i think it says something that all these good players (lovage, leffen, armada, silent wolf,) are arguing against the ruleset whereas not one top player has taken the other side (kish ruleset > mbr)

Not really, that's still old school vs new school. Keep in mind that FC is a reunion, meant to celebrate Smash. We're not trying to find the best stages per the new school mindset. We're trying to find a compromise.

Generalization time: So far, most new school players are making it clear that they have no desire to learn new stages, and that if they lose on such a stage then it will not be their fault. There is no room for the possibility that they could learn a stage and master it. They view these stages as 'the enemy'. It's clear they have no idea why certain stages were banned when they were. Their minds are made up, and they don't want to compromise.

Here's the deal - You all want FC to be a national/international championship in the vein of new school thought. It will never be that. If we compromise further, you have made it clear that you will STILL hate our ruleset, which gives us inclination not to change a thing. People threaten not to come as if FC will somehow be less awesome without you. It will not. FC will be awesome without you. Because FC is awesome.

FC is not new school Smash. If that means FC isn't the international championship you all crave, then so be it. We didn't sell it like that, we sold it as a reunion that celebrates Smash. We sold it as a time for old school and new school to come together and play. And this is what it will be. It will not be an MBR5 tournament. You might see a winner's semi match on Brinstar. And it will be amazing.

We will continue to debate and look for a compromise. People will post trashy arguments and insult us, because this is Smashboards and that's what happens. But make no mistake: FC will be awesome. If you choose not to come, FC will not be less awesome. FC will not miss out; YOU will miss out. And we'll shed tears for your sake.

For those that are honestly debating with an open mind - we appreciate you and look forward to working with you. Mostly, we look forward to hugging at FC in August.

<3 <3 Smashboards

 

[KishPrime]

Kishes, I have two questions.

1. Is the first FC in which there has been no distinction between "neutral" and "counterpick" stages? i.e. this will be the first FC where it'll be possible for something like Peef's IC's vs. Floaty scenario to occur, where a character like IC's are forced to play on a stage like Jungle Japes right off the bat and have Battlefield as their best counterpick? I think that's probably the biggest issue with the stage list, in my opinion, anyway. I think differentiating between "neutral" and "counterpick" stages will solve a lot of the problems people have been raising, i.e. floaties or spacies banning a lot of neutral stages against weaker characters right off the bat and then abusing stage properties, or just being forced into an awkward matchup+stage combination on the first match in a set. Having the 1st match take place on a MBR5 "neutral," or say disallowing the banning of more than 1 neutral stage, might be simple ways to improve the ruleset without actually changing the current stage list.

2. Also, what is the reasoning for the rule "you can't choose a stage that has already been played on?" If you lose on your counterpick in a Bo5, why aren't you able to go back to that stage? Hasn't Dave's Stupid Rule, or a variant thereof, been standard since old tournaments? Is this the first FC that will be implementing the "you can't choose a stage that has already been played on" rule?

Not much time, but I will say I appreciate the relative civility of the discussion, all. Please keep it up. Here are a couple more points for further discussion, since we were directly asked.

1. I don't believe in "neutral" stages because every stage contributes to matchup definition, so the idea behind the stagelist was that it would give players the opportunity to ban to the most neutral (defined by the players) 5 of the 11 stages to provide a better framework than just flat/plat, because obviously we don't buy into the flat/plat mentality of "that's all there is to Smash." So, again, if you've got the middle 5 of this set of stages, it should be a relatively representative round of the matchup between the characters in a variety of settings. We've always used a 5-stage starter list before, so yeah, we're open to it. This seemed like a system that made sense given the fact that you are almost guaranteed to end up on an MBR5-stage anyway with a more representative sample and multiple permabanned hard cps. But an MBR-5 starter list makes sense, too.

I mean, you would literally never play against Peach on Mute or Fox on Cruise, so examples like that are irrelevant, those are stages in the game with unique features that heavily favor those characters and that's why the bans are there, but it doesn't mean that, say, a Fox vs. Falcon match on Mute or Fox vs. Falco on Cruise might not be interesting if both players are willing to give it a shot (I grabbed that out of thin air). Other geographies contribute to matchup definition, if you buy into a whole-game approach.

I don't disagree that it seems to hurt ICs the most, but since it's about widening the stage variety, yeah, matchups will be different from flat/plat only. Some go up, some go down, there's no right answer to this.

I also don't agree with the statement that it simply "widens the tiers," because that is an extremely bold statement to make without evidence. I'll admit that it may even be true, but there's literally no evidence of this from tournament placings that anyone has cited. Tournament placings were very diverse back when these rulesets were used as well.



2. This has always been our rule since Day 1. Double jeopardy, to me, is ridiculous. I've literally never understood why this is fair. If you've already endured someone's best counterpick and came out on top, why should you have the same uphill fight again (unless both players are fine with it, of course)? I'm sorry, I don't see the justification at all, especially if you already had to play on a first-round stage that slants against your character (which will happen if the majority of starters go against you). There's supposed to be finality to tournament rounds.

Shrug.

 

[choknater]

ic's are not bad on rainbow or brinstar or even mute

u just gotta know what to do and be really patient.

good stuff kishes u guys know what you are doing.

 

[Lovage]

Per your arguments, YS is a horrible stage. Cloud interferes with gameplay and Shyguys extend hitboxes. You want the stage to be an inert observer, and yet you're calling a stage full of variance 'fantastic'.

I agree that YS is fantastic, but that's because it's consistent with my main points. You're showing obvious bias to YS by ignoring your own claims. You like YS and dislike JJ, so you adjust your arguments to match your preference. This is call 'bias'.

no dude, my argument was that yoshi's is 1/50th as bad as jungle japes when it comes to stage hazards, and it really confuses my how people are trying to equivocate the two

and for everyone who thinks tiny trolly remarks at the end of my post = mY ARGUEEEMTNT and are "disappointed" by that, blow me


edit: and yea, maybe people think i'm new school or w/e but i played in tournies with rainbow/corneria/brinstar/mute city on for years. these stages blow and everyone likes tournaments more now that they're off.

 

[Violence]

StrongBad, Klap Trap does nothing to stop Sheik's Ledge camping, it gives her MORE ledges to work with. If lava doesn't stop shino stalling, a klap trap is not going to do it either.

There are many characters that love to go off the edge offensively, and don't want to ban Japes, like Fox. I can imagine a Fox ditto in grand finals on Japes, where a Fox goes for a below stage height shine to kill his opponent, but before his opponent dies, that same Fox gets hit by a Klap Trap and dies.

Similarly, any kind of below stage height actions is just asking for trouble, but it's not even consistent trouble, it's just a chance that something can go terribly wrong.


Old School vs New School? I don't like this argument, I've played since TG6 and I still don't think that it's very fair to allow a map where you have the random chance of instadying.

Edit: I also think it's very dismissive to collectively call all the good points that have been made against the inclusion of JJ as "new school."

Drephen was also in favor of change if it was necessary.

 

[PEEF!]

ic's are not bad on rainbow or brinstar or even mute

Chok....this is some garb. Nana doesn't care if you know what to do.

What MBR stages do you think are worse?

 

[Mahone]

2. This has always been our rule since Day 1. Double jeopardy, to me, is ridiculous. I've literally never understood why this is fair. If you've already endured someone's best counterpick and came out on top, why should you have the same uphill fight again (unless both players are fine with it, of course)? I'm sorry, I don't see the justification at all, especially if you already had to play on a first-round stage that slants against your character (which will happen if the majority of starters go against you). There's supposed to be finality to tournament rounds.

Shrug.

It's because in the MBR ruleset, the first stage is almost always very neutral, and thats the one you would go back to in a bo5. In your ruleset, i could see how it could be worse.

 

[Kal]

2. This has always been our rule since Day 1. Double jeopardy, to me, is ridiculous. I've literally never understood why this is fair. If you've already endured someone's best counterpick and came out on top, why should you have the same uphill fight again (unless both players are fine with it, of course)? I'm sorry, I don't see the justification at all, especially if you already had to play on a first-round stage that slants against your character (which will happen if the majority of starters go against you). There's supposed to be finality to tournament rounds.

The only reason I include DSR at my tournaments is to prevent a scenario where you only win because of your abilities on a single stage (especially when that stage heavily favors you). Obviously, if you haven't won there, it isn't an issue, which is why I utilize DSR instead of a rule preventing double jeopardy.

Also, if you've already won on a stage that heavily favors your opponent, why should you care if he goes there a second time? If he wins, then it falls to your counterpick anyway. If you don't allow people to reuse counterpicks that they lost on, then you're potentially just widening the gap between who is in the lead and who isn't. I see DSR as a healthy solution to this.

 

[Metà]

Not really, that's still old school vs new school. Keep in mind that FC is a reunion, meant to celebrate Smash. We're not trying to find the best stages per the new school mindset. We're trying to find a compromise.

Generalization time: So far, most new school players are making it clear that they have no desire to learn new stages, and that if they lose on such a stage then it will not be their fault. There is no room for the possibility that they could learn a stage and master it. They view these stages as 'the enemy'. It's clear they have no idea why certain stages were banned when they were. Their minds are made up, and they don't want to compromise.

Here's the deal - You all want FC to be a national/international championship in the vein of new school thought. It will never be that. If we compromise further, you have made it clear that you will STILL hate our ruleset, which gives us inclination not to change a thing. People threaten not to come as if FC will somehow be less awesome without you. It will not. FC will be awesome without you. Because FC is awesome.

FC is not new school Smash. If that means FC isn't the international championship you all crave, then so be it. We didn't sell it like that, we sold it as a reunion that celebrates Smash. We sold it as a time for old school and new school to come together and play. And this is what it will be. It will not be an MBR5 tournament. You might see a winner's semi match on Brinstar. And it will be amazing.

We will continue to debate and look for a compromise. People will post trashy arguments and insult us, because this is Smashboards and that's what happens. But make no mistake: FC will be awesome. If you choose not to come, FC will not be less awesome. FC will not miss out; YOU will miss out. And we'll shed tears for your sake.

For those that are honestly debating with an open mind - we appreciate you and look forward to working with you. Mostly, we look forward to hugging at FC in August.

<3 <3 Smashboards

this is great. I agree 100%, even if I personally hate some of the stages. However, nowhere in any of this "old school new school" mindset is there any indication we should do away with DSR... please correct me if I'm mistaken, but taking someone back to a stage you already lost on has never been a problem before

 

[MattDotZeb]

no one wants to play...on ******** *** stages.

I do... .

 

[Strong Badam]

You're clearly no one, Matt.

 

[Fly_Amanita]

...so I don't see how a stage hazard you have to be literally off the stage to be hit by is suddenly a new thing to look out for.

I just want to say that Bowser can be hit by a Klaptrap passing beneath him if he's standing on the main platform.

</pointlessobservation>

I might make a more substantial post later, although I don't have much to say that I haven't said before; I suppose my views on rules have changed a bit over the past year, but I'm only less certain of things than I was before.

I also think Peef's ICs breakdown is oversimplified and somewhat inaccurate, but this isn't the ICs board and I'm not going to dwell on that here.

 

[Strong Badam]

So can Donkey Kong. I ragequit once because of it. It was a really hilarious incident.

 

[Violence]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=csOBXOTqnes

What about this glitch?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YcUwhdk53yA

 

[KishPrime]

this is great. I agree 100%, even if I personally hate some of the stages. However, nowhere in any of this "old school new school" mindset is there any indication we should do away with DSR... please correct me if I'm mistaken, but taking someone back to a stage you already lost on has never been a problem before

We've never done standard DSR going back forever. Check my post below Squared's for the reason.

 

[Prince_Abu]

if u cant take them back to the stage u lost on then you cant salty runback which is dumb

 

[Metà]

The only reason I include DSR at my tournaments is to prevent a scenario where you only win because of your abilities on a single stage (especially when that stage heavily favors you). Obviously, if you haven't won there, it isn't an issue, which is why I utilize DSR instead of a rule preventing double jeopardy.

Also, if you've already won on a stage that heavily favors your opponent, why should you care if he goes there a second time? If he wins, then it falls to your counterpick anyway. If you don't allow people to reuse counterpicks that they lost on, then you're potentially just widening the gap between who is in the lead and who isn't. I see DSR as a healthy solution to this.

exactly. and what if you want to go back to the first stage from the set? that wasn't a counterpick.

 

[Deleted member]

I like how all the players *****ing about the rule set are fox players. this stage set MASSIVELY benefits fox. you guys should just accept your free advantage and move on.

i love this rule set. we're going to find out very quickly how smart some players are at CPs. that said, I expect all of the California fox/falcos to CP to stupid **** like battlefield over autowin stages and they'll all get like 33rd or something awful.

Prove me wrong.

edit: kal is the man. iron man > dark knight all dai.

 

[MattDotZeb]

i love this rule set. we're going to find out very quickly how smart some players are at CPs.

Yeah, I think a lot of people now aren't truly smart about their CPs. I look forward to seeing strategy put back into stages choices.

 

[Kal]

Actually, I've realized now that, by preventing double jeopardy, all five stages will be played in any best of five set. For the most part, the fives stages will look like this (more colors!):

• Good for me
• Good for me
• Good for my opponent
• Good for my opponent
• "Neutral"

By construction, the neutral stage will be picked first. Supposing I win the neutral, then lose on my opponent's counterpick, then lose on my counterpick, then I get to use my other counterpick and, if I win, I have to win on my opponent's counterpick.

If I lose the neutral, then lose on my counterpick, I have to win on my other counterpick, then both of my opponent's counterpicks.

The scenarios are normal as long as you are able to strike such that you have two stages that are beneficial for you. If you only have one, you could argue this is a character flaw, but these characters who aren't able to strike in such a manner will be sort of shafted. So, in the end, this double jeopardy rule seems ok. I can't say for certain, though, because I haven't looked at it enough.

And really, it sort of makes sense. If we were running MBR5, would anyone really have a problem with just running all five matches in a specific order, with regards to stage choice? Some will like it more, and some will like it less, but it's certainly no less valid. This is basically the same thing, except we start with eleven stages and narrow it down to five, and we allow for the order of stages to be permuted.

i luh u umbreon

 

[Deleted member]

it's almost like it's designed such that the better player is more likely to win!

'cept bowser on japes. take that, jeff.

 

[Kal]

Yeah, in retrospect, it's just testing a different skill: can you win three of the five matches on the following five stages? So you better be sure you're competent enough to win on all five stages, because there's no going back if you **** up.

 

[HoChiMinhTrail]

I was under the impression that most of Kish's region like it this way. Of course, we could get into an analysis of whether enough people want it to justify things, but I'm sure you can see how that is sort of dangerous thinking.

Nope, the midwest has been hating on the Kish stages for years too lol. They are renegades, we need to hunt them down and bring them to order.

 

[C!Z]

Didn't really read many posts, but I will say as a marth main this stage list is enough to make me not come. I don't wanna travel to play my secondary at least once every set =/

 

[baka4moé]

lol, so it seems even in the midwest ppl dont like the FC rules?

a few questions/concerns:
1) Ive heard a few times that no matter what u change the rules to be, people are gonna complain. Did anyone complain about the ruleset for pound 5 and/or apex 2012? And if so, did people argue/complain to the extent that people are doing here? It seems like the TOs are aware that its totally possible that the majority of the people like the MBR ruleset, but that doesnt matter. So is upholding what you're idea of "being right" more important than serving the community? I'm curious, cuz although this may make sense for a local, for a national, it makes less sense in my eyes at least.

2) on japes, i thought we found out that the klaptrap does come regularly, but in a like 4-7 second window every 20~ seconds or so. THATS A LOT IN MELEE, nothing at all like the 100% predictable randal

3) the TOs have said that they're reading all of our posts and appreciate the discussion, but is anything going to actually change? i havent really seen any feedback other than "we're already compromising, so there". it seems like this thread is just for people to blow off steam in vain, which is pretty lame/shady if u ask me

4) as for old school/new school, it seems like a good number of old school players (lovage, armada, drephen, etc.) also dont like this ruleset. so where is this argument getting ground?

5) as for DSR, i dont get how keeping it on doesnt make sense. if u won on ur opponents cp, you're already at an advantage for having doing that, since ur opponent has one less game to potentially win, and if ur winning the set, u have the power of counterpickng back even if u lose the next game. why give the one currently winning EVEN MORE of an advantage? (by forcing the loser to go somewhere else, somewhere potentially even bad for him)

 

[Kal]

3) is just silly, Baka. Don't dismiss their well thought-out responses by only paying attention to when they've said they're already compromising. I think I did a good job of addressing 5), but what I've written may not reflect Kish's stance on the issue. Your response is just the opposite of "why give the one currently losing an advantage?" There's an argument to be made in both directions, I feel, and I think it's up to the TO to decide which one he feels is better.

 

[baka4moé]

ok, to elaborate on 3) then, i dont think ive seen any willingness to change the rules theyve already established. nothing has changed despite so many complaints from different people, and ive seen no indication from how they respond to us that suggests they dont intend to keep it that way. which kinda sucks, cause it makes me feel that all of our voices dont even matter and we're wasting our time.

 

[JPOBS]

Baka's right though, Kish's post on the last page basically said "We're defnitely are not cutting stages not matter what you guys want. New school dudes don't understand how FC rolls"

Which is fine, they are the TOs, but he's totally right, this basically seems like a vent thread and nothing is gonna change in reality.

 

[Violence]

Which is fine, they are the TOs, but he's totally right, this basically seems like a vent thread and nothing is gonna change in reality.

I feel like we've made good points and the TO's are just going to be stubborn and do whatever the want. This thread is just an excuse to look like they're being understanding while they try to compare Yoshi Story shyguys with random instakill klap traps.

 

[Kal]

ok, to elaborate on 3) then, i dont think ive seen any willingness to change the rules theyve already established. nothing has changed despite so many complaints from different people, and ive seen no indication from how they respond to us that suggests they dont intend to keep it that way. which kinda sucks, cause it makes me feel that all of our voices dont even matter and we're wasting our time.

I wonder if they had started by creating a ruleset with nineteen stages, then gone on to dwindle it down to eleven, would people would still complain? People seem to miss that this stagelist is already heavily a compromise between the MBR ruleset and the No Johns ruleset. Just try and consider it from their point of view: they don't agree with the points you're making, and they got rid of several stages from the beginning just to make it appeal to the majority. And now people want even more stages removed? Obviously, convincing them to get rid of even more is going to be hard.

Violence, just because they disagree with people's arguments doesn't mean they're being stubborn. Every person is going to think his own points are good. This doesn't mean they're right or even agreed upon.

There's a lot of confirmation bias going on here. You see someone make a point you agree with, and you think "man, see, they won't listen to anybody." And you see a point you disagree with and you think "man, these guys are so stubborn." But it's not so simple. Everyone needs to relax and be a little more objective and open minded about this. As I said before, try and think of it from their point of view.

In the end, this ruleset is a pretty strong compromise. You get to ban three stages and strike two for a total of five stages, which means you can always strike to a neutral. However, if your opponent is so silly as to try and force a counterpick (something he can't even do), then the remaining counterpicks are likely to be bad for him, and the first stage chosen will probably be better for his opponent. All he will be able to do is make sure the two remaining neutral stages are his best ones which, with a few exceptions (e.g. Fox on Pokémon Stadium, Marth on Yoshi's Story), will not provide much of an advantage.

 

[baka4moé]

if i were a TO for a national tournament id like to have a huge *** attendance and try to please the community. sure that would be hard, and im not a TO by any means, but that's what i would do, personally, even if i didnt completely like the game rules i were enforcing.

 

[shadrach kabango]

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.

agreed. only noobs like orly who won't be anywhere near bracket are the ones saying "zomg can't wait to go ghey"

i get what you're saying kishsquared but please don't compare a fantastic stage like yoshi's story, that has a tiny random platform that saves ur life somtimes, to ****y *** jungle japes that no one likes to plays on that will randomly ceiling spike you at 0% and kill you if you get sent off the edge at the wrong moment.


****TY STAGES SUCK

lmao amen. yoshi's story is god tier for stages

Chok....this is some garb. Nana doesn't care if you know what to do.

i've played fly on rainbow cruise at least five times. it's very tough.

ICs does fine on that stage. ime andre is correct.

 

[Kal]

if i were a TO for a national tournament id like to have a huge *** attendance and try to please the community. sure that would be hard, and im not a TO by any means, but that's what i would do, personally, even if i didnt completely like the game rules i were enforcing.

It's easy to provide commentary as an observer. It's also easy to try and please the majority when you share its opinion; when you disagree with the majority, it's not so straightforward, and I feel this is something you should try and realize. This stance you have is only obvious because you agree with the majority in the first place.

 

[KishPrime]

if i were a TO for a national tournament id like to have a huge *** attendance and try to please the community. sure that would be hard, and im not a TO by any means, but that's what i would do, personally, even if i didnt completely like the game rules i were enforcing.

Fine, feel free to put in the 100+ hours I've already spent planning this thing with virtually no possibility to profit over the last month yourself so you can make those decisions. I'm sorry for starting with the game of Melee that we believe in, massively compromising on it, and now still further trying to find a better compromise so we can make a community of massively diverse opinions relatively happy.

ok, to elaborate on 3) then, i dont think ive seen any willingness to change the rules theyve already established. nothing has changed despite so many complaints from different people, and ive seen no indication from how they respond to us that suggests they dont intend to keep it that way. which kinda sucks, cause it makes me feel that all of our voices dont even matter and we're wasting our time.

This is definitely not true. But we're not going to handle this piecemeal...that would just be confusing and unhelpful. We're going to wait until we make a decision and announce it at once. That's the best way to handle it, as a TO.

 

[baka4moé]

^ok sounds good, thanks. from the other kish's post it seemed otherwise though. do u have an idea of around when you'll make such an announcement?

 

[MattDotZeb]

agreed. only noobs like orly who won't be anywhere near bracket are the ones saying "zomg can't wait to go ghey"

People need to stop relating the use of stages that aren't current community standard to bad players. It gives off a lot of negativity that our community could do without and helps propel elitist ideas about our community, however false they may be on the whole.

I've made bracket at most nationals and I plan to use a lot of the stages the Kishes have put on for FC. =/

 

[KishPrime]

What he said was that it's not going to be the MBR5. Which is true - this is why we've been exploring and listening to all alternatives and having our own conversations about it beyond that. No, we do not have a timeline.

I'm sorry if I sound annoyed. Obviously, we made the mistake of thinking people still enjoyed this game from multiple perspectives when we announced this, and there seem to not be many people on that boat anymore, to the point where some feel the need to personally attack us over the fact that we think differently from them.

So, we'll compromise as much as we can up to the point where we feel it's still worth putting in the time, effort, and financial commitment to put on the event.

EDIT: By the way, the event will be spectacular, regardless of the ruleset. You all should really plan to come. We don't run events we're not proud of.

 

[Silent Wolf]

Generalization time: So far, most new school players are making it clear that they have no desire to learn new stages, and that if they lose on such a stage then it will not be their fault. There is no room for the possibility that they could learn a stage and master it. They view these stages as 'the enemy'. It's clear they have no idea why certain stages were banned when they were. Their minds are made up, and they don't want to compromise.

this couldnt be more wrong, at least in reference to me. i play on much crazier stages than these in money matches all the time and can guarantee i cant exploit them better than any of you old school players while having a really good time. dont assume we would blame the stage for a loss just because of its differences alone, we new school players are rational people =P we just dont want to have to blame the stage for something stupid and uncontrollable such as getting shined into a klap trap at 5% which happens all the time in fox vs fast faller on japes.

Here's the deal - You all want FC to be a national/international championship in the vein of new school thought. It will never be that. If we compromise further, you have made it clear that you will STILL hate our ruleset, which gives us inclination not to change a thing. People threaten not to come as if FC will somehow be less awesome without you. It will not. FC will be awesome without you. Because FC is awesome.

FC is not new school Smash. If that means FC isn't the international championship you all crave, then so be it. We didn't sell it like that, we sold it as a reunion that celebrates Smash. We sold it as a time for old school and new school to come together and play. And this is what it will be. It will not be an MBR5 tournament. You might see a winner's semi match on Brinstar. And it will be amazing.

We will continue to debate and look for a compromise. People will post trashy arguments and insult us, because this is Smashboards and that's what happens. But make no mistake: FC will be awesome. If you choose not to come, FC will not be less awesome. FC will not miss out; YOU will miss out. And we'll shed tears for your sake.

For those that are honestly debating with an open mind - we appreciate you and look forward to working with you. Mostly, we look forward to hugging at FC in August.

<3 <3 Smashboards

if thats what fc is gonna be then its honestly whatever. im gonna go and have a great time regardless. while i still think this rule set burdens some characters, they will get over it, cuz its not like every tournament is gonna use these rules lol. i wouldnt mind seeing some interesting stages in top level matches myself

 

[Violence]

What he said was that it's not going to be the MBR5. Which is true - this is why we've been exploring and listening to all alternatives and having our own conversations about it beyond that. No, we do not have a timeline.

I'm sorry if I sound annoyed. Obviously, we made the mistake of thinking people still enjoyed this game from multiple perspectives when we announced this, and there seem to not be many people on that boat anymore, to the point where some feel the need to personally attack us over the fact that we think differently from them.

So, we'll compromise as much as we can up to the point where we feel it's still worth putting in the time, effort, and financial commitment to put on the event.

I don't want to belittle the time, effort, and money you guys have put into FC.

However, the street goes both ways. Many players who are considering attending this tournament will also be putting in quite a bit of time, effort and financial commitment to attend this as well.

Norcal's current logistical analysis of total estimated cost to attend this event is over $750 per person. This is not a small amount of money, and though I'm sure your crew has put in more to hold this event, people don't make the decision to drop that much money and allocate that much time lightly.

That's why when some players, including skilled and respected players, give their opinions about a part of your rules and support that opinion with some good points, we would expect to at least see a response that isn't as dismissive as old school vs new school.

Please do not think we aren't giving enough heed to your stage list. I know of at least 3 upcoming West Coast locals that are using this stage list and we will soon have decent enough results with videos to have a better understanding of the stage list.

 

[KishPrime]

We do respect the cost of travel. It's always a two-way street, and I hope you have found us respectful while making our case.

Again, we felt that we were compromising when we announced. We did ask around and got, more or less, something that we felt approximated a sign-off from a variety of players. This is literally the most conservative ruleset we've ever run at an FC.

If you don't know us from the past, we've experimented with more rulesets than most TOs have ever run, and I was actually excited about the potential of this ruleset - just didn't realize how angry it would make so many people. I just sent a PM off where I pointed out that we actually ran the first 6-neutral only tournament in the Midwest (and hated it, lol).

Trust us when we say that we're listening.