• Welcome to Smashboards, the world's largest Super Smash Brothers community! Over 250,000 Smash Bros. fans from around the world have come to discuss these great games in over 19 million posts!

    You are currently viewing our boards as a visitor. Click here to sign up right now and start on your path in the Smash community!

MK2 should be legal

D

Deleted member

Guest
MK2 should be a legal stage, at LEAST for teams. It's really strategic for its abuse and all of the characters are basically equally ******** there.

Let's make it legal. This stage is amazing.
 

Fortress | Sveet

▀▄▀▄▀▄▀▄▀▄▀▄▀▄▀▄▀
Joined
Dec 21, 2005
Messages
16,260
Location
Northern IL
samus is more ******** than other characters there and i'm of the belief that space belongs to animals not people so **** samus.
 
D

Deleted member

Guest
her dsmash is gay but you learn to beat it quickly.

why do you ****ers all have more posts than me? i've been here ****ing forever. i hate you all.

but you should still agree with me on mk2 being legal.

that stage is the ****.
 

Fortress | Sveet

▀▄▀▄▀▄▀▄▀▄▀▄▀▄▀▄▀
Joined
Dec 21, 2005
Messages
16,260
Location
Northern IL
I actually somewhat agree about onett, enough to play-test. Stationary camping is highly discouraged by having multiple paths over every wall as well as timed stage hazards to allow an attack opening against that type of play. On paper it seems somewhat legit, but i wasn't around for it in the MLG days or before (or enough to have a legit stance on the stage).


TBH tho we should make a stance as to liberal CPs or no CPs. I don't really see a reason to have anything in between. I think the consensus so far has been no CPs over liberal CPs, but hey...
 

Cactuar

El Fuego
BRoomer
Joined
Mar 10, 2006
Messages
4,823
Location
Philadephia, PA
Onett is broken because of internal ledges that are close to the ground existing. Refreshing invincibility rapidly there is op. At least mk2 has big holes under the internal ledges.

:phone:
 
D

Deleted member

Guest
also mk2 is actually fun. onett is only fun if you're fox or falco.

which is like half of the players in this community.

honestly it's kind of ****ing annoying.
 
D

Deleted member

Guest
if fun isn't a major factor to this game, we wouldn't play it.

i just want this stage to be legal.
 
D

Deleted member

Guest
i don't know why you're not taking me seriously. i wouldn't suggest the idea if i thought it was a bad one.

i sometimes randomly play people on this stage at events and it's always fun, but more importantly there's nothing really wrong with the stage.
 

LLDL

Smash Hero
Joined
Apr 27, 2007
Messages
7,128
MK2 honestly isn't that bad of a stage. It's symmetrical, random events are down to a minimum. The only reason I stay away from it is because I don't like getting back throw / fsmash gimped on the left and right boundaries.
 

Teczer0

Research Assistant
Premium
BRoomer
Joined
Mar 25, 2007
Messages
16,863
Location
Convex Cone, Positive Orthant
I would love this stage to be legal omg.

And yea, I have no problems with the stage but I'm not sure what to say to have it be legalized besides that its really not all that broken.
 

ArcNatural

Banned ( ∫x, δx Points)
Joined
Jul 19, 2006
Messages
2,965
Location
Boston, MA
I take it none of you have tried taking Jigglypuff and just bair/fair spammed off the ledges? That stuff is stupid. Other than that it's fun though.
 

KishPrime

King of the Ship of Fools
BRoomer
Joined
Jun 22, 2003
Messages
7,802
Location
Indiana
Yesssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss
 

Fortress | Sveet

▀▄▀▄▀▄▀▄▀▄▀▄▀▄▀▄▀
Joined
Dec 21, 2005
Messages
16,260
Location
Northern IL
Would it be possible for fox to invincible ledge stall at the higher edges and if edgehogged travel to the lower edge safely?
 

Cactuar

El Fuego
BRoomer
Joined
Mar 10, 2006
Messages
4,823
Location
Philadephia, PA
So, I have this idea that I feel kinda legitimizes a lot of the banned stages and allows for more viable characters.

2 stock matches, with more matches in a set. DSR enabled, standard neutrals are disabled, no stage bans.

The effect of this is that it reduces the impact of any one stage on the outcome of a set, promoting the idea of "oh, that stage was a good pick, I got *****. Now I'm going to **** you on this other stage!" and moving away from the idea of "I lost the set because (specific stage) is stupid."

Reducing the number of stock also improves the chances for lower tier characters, as many of them tend to be gimp heavy, or benefit from odd stage layouts, etc. It opens up opportunities for players to find stage+character synergies. The longer a match is, stock wise, the high the odds are for current viable characters to take an advantage and keep it. With a smaller stock pool, the effect of burst (gimp heavy characters) play becomes viable versus sustained dps (most of the high/top tiers).

We can basically open up the entire stage list in this format.


In the current ruleset, the matches are simply too long and individually have too much importance to allow stages to strongly influence the outcome. Hence our direction towards neutrals only.

Trying to influence the standard ruleset away from that is a bad idea. If we change how we approach the ruleset and vary what factors hold importance, we can create legitimately competitive alternative rulesets with vastly different rules and stagelists.



(Beware: I am going to start promoting teams coin mode, 4 minute timer, team attack: OFF. There is an obscene amount of strategy involved. The most intense game of melee I have ever played was with this ruleset, and it was on ****ing Hyrule of all places.)

I might bundle this singles+doubles alternate and call it something catchy...
 

Cactuar

El Fuego
BRoomer
Joined
Mar 10, 2006
Messages
4,823
Location
Philadephia, PA
I'm going to start working on an actual rule set to accompany it, but I wanted to see if there was interest first.
 

Zankoku

Never Knows Best
Administrator
Premium
BRoomer
Joined
Nov 8, 2006
Messages
22,994
Location
Milpitas, CA
NNID
SSBM_PLAYER
Brawl's run similar experimentation, with both 2 and 1 stock games. It's... interesting, to say the least, but needs multiple tournaments' worth of experimentation before valid opinions can be achieved because everyone starts off playing as though they still have more stocks than they actually do.
 

Cactuar

El Fuego
BRoomer
Joined
Mar 10, 2006
Messages
4,823
Location
Philadephia, PA
Did you guys go into it with valid reasoning for each of the stock counts or just "lets try it out"?


Matchups in brawl are less impacted by stage variety than melee due to the difference in available movement options and the difference in combo game. I've never thought about that before.
 

Zankoku

Never Knows Best
Administrator
Premium
BRoomer
Joined
Nov 8, 2006
Messages
22,994
Location
Milpitas, CA
NNID
SSBM_PLAYER
I'm not sure what 1 stock was for (probably taking things to an extreme), but for 2 stocks I think the plan was to encourage stage variety (sets being bo5 instead of bo3), lower emphasis on each stage's impact, decrease average game time (which unfortunately worked "too well" to measure effectively, since everyone played as though they had 3 stocks instead of 2), and answer to the fact that comebacks from a 2-stock deficit are relatively rare in Brawl (not so much the case in Melee, though...).
 
D

Deleted member

Guest
I remember the first time m2k grabbed and threw one of those at me. I killed him for ignoring me and letting me pin him to the far side of the stage.

You can say "lol look at what _________ can do on this stage" but ****ing EVERY character has something like that and it's awesome. except mewtwo, mewtwo is still awful.

I'll try coin teams next time I get to play humans lol. I fully endorse any experimentation so long as it is honest in its evaluations.
 
Top Bottom