Current Counterpick Format
1. Winner bans stage(s).*
2. Loser picks stage.
3. Winner picks character.
4. Loser picks character.
Proposed New Counterpick Format
1. Winner picks character.
2. Loser picks character.
3. Winner bans stage(s).*
4. Loser picks stage.
*Total stages to ban depends on the game and includes Dave’s Stupid Rule.
This modification notably weakens counterpick strength by guaranteeing that stage decisions are based on a character matchup. This reduces the current surprise factor of character changes based on the stage which can create a very bad matchup or turn the counterpick against the loser. With so many new and potentially volatile matchups in Smash 4, updating this rule is most important early.
Smash 4 and Project M have many matchups and stages, so they see the most significant results, but the new order is also important for other games. Because Melee has a small stage list (under 7), using this order for counterpicking will require an additional small change as described in part 2.
Part 1: Explanation
With our traditional ruleset, because the stage is selected first, the characters sometimes change because of the stage choice. However, it makes more sense to base decisions for banning and selecting stages when the characters are determined. Otherwise the following scenarios can happen.
Final Destination is a common ban against Ice Climbers players in both Melee and Brawl. In either game, if a winner does not ban FD, they could be unaware that the loser may switch to Ice Climbers. In a case where characters are known before stage selection, it is likely that an obviously advantageous stage would be banned. By removing this extreme counterpick option, pocket counterpicks give less advantage but still hold weight. Smash 4 has far more matchups, so there are many more opportunities for these extreme counterpicks. (Note that having many stages and not enough stage bans can still create significant counterpick advantages.)
Locking characters before selecting the stage also prevents the winner from turning the counterpick matchup against the loser. In Melee, a Falco may counterpick a Marth to Dreamland to find that the Marth player has a surprise Jigglypuff. Despite this rewarding the winner for having more diversity in characters, the loser is now disadvantaged for choosing a stage based on the matchup that wouldn’t happen.
This change weakens the surprise factor for counterpicks by both the winner and loser,
so it slightly weakens and balances the overall counterpick strength. This helps guarantee that the better player wins rather than the player that won the first game and traded powerful counterpicks.
Should we be choosing the stage based on our characters, or should we be choosing our characters because of the stage?
Part 2: Effect on Melee Bans
For games with fewer than 7 stages, there cannot be a stage ban and Dave’s Stupid Rule (a player may not counterpick a stage on which he or she has won during this set) because there are not enough stages to support it naturally. Because Melee has 6 legal stages, the current ruleset’s solution is to remove the general stage ban in a best of 5. This proposed new counterpick order relies on always having a stage ban, so Melee should use the following stage ban rule for both best of 3 and best of 5. (Replaces step 3 in the order above.)
Winner bans one stage and may ban up to one additional stage on which he or she has lost during this set.
Note that this combines a limited version of DSR with the winner’s stage ban. In a best of 3, this ban change does not alter the total bans at all (ban one and DSR only affects a neutral stage in game 3). In a best of 5, both players regain the stage ban and can ban a stage they lost, so the game 4 and 5 stages end up on more neutral but often repeated stages. At the expense of slightly less stage variety in best of 5 sets, players can avoid lopsided matchups as discussed in the first part.
However, Melee has limited stage selection already, and in theory, there may not be many hard counterpicks after all. Here are a few traditional Melee counterpick strategies.
1. Fast and mobile characters can escape on large stages and make slower characters catch up to them. Dreamland, Final Destination and Pokemon Stadium give room to camp, but Yoshi’s Story and Fountain of Dreams prevent this.
2. Final Destination allows for easier chain grabs and Ice Climbers grab combos. Projectiles are harder to avoid without platforms.
3. Floaty characters avoid lower ceilings (Yoshi’s Story and Pokemon Stadium) and often choose high ceilings (Dreamland and Fountain of Dreams). Characters with good vertical kill moves prefer the opposite.
4. Battlefield is average in many ways, and some characters without strong counterpick options may choose here. It also limits some recoveries, like Fox and Falco angles.
Note that these are not rules to matchup advantages. For example, in Peach vs Fox, Peach may enjoy chain grabs on FD and surviving longer on Dreamland, but Fox can camp on both stages. Fox can get early kills on Yoshi’s, but Peach can get harder punishes without worrying as much about Fox escaping.
Fox and Falco make for an interesting argument because they can do well in large and small spaces. Some characters do not have strong counterpicks against them and have to deal with their advantages, often including Pokemon Stadium. This is also the case for other top characters that counter low tiers. Giving the better character a ban removes one of their few weaknesses that could be used in the matchup. Low tiers likewise are allowed to cover one significant weakness in the matchup. Because the high tiers have more favored stages, the ban arguably helps high tiers more.
This is simply a bad matchup. Better characters and bad matchups are unavoidable in Smash. For people who use worse characters, they have to be better than opponents rather than let stages decide results. A player is responsible for understanding matchups and stages, and it’s the worse character player’s choice to not switch characters. In practice, it remains the player’s job to win, neither the stage’s nor the character’s.
If a player can’t win game one after stage striking, the same player can only win the set by winning on their opponent’s counterpick. Nerfed counterpicks will not change game one, but it will allow comebacks to happen more appropriately for the better player who adapts, and it will prevent worse players from winning on stronger counterpicks only to prolong the set.
For those interested in additional arguments and examples regarding part 2, please refer to this document.
Summary
If characters are chosen before the stage, counterpicks are nerfed, so results are better balanced. This relies on the winner having a stage ban, which the winner does not in a Melee best of 5. Melee can have a stage ban using the above part 2 suggestion as an additional rule update to potentially more debate. Regardless of counterpick and stage selection nerfs for all players, having character diversity and playing good characters will always hold value.
I propose that at least Wii U and Project M adopt this new counterpick order. I also propose that Melee does this, and it must also update its stage ban rule for the new counterpick order to work correctly. I personally have used this new ruleset in local tournaments to decent success. The biggest challenges are and will be spreading the word and people remembering to use it. Most people have been supportive, especially for Smash 4, so it should be interesting to see the rest of the community’s response.
To reiterate the rule change, here’s how it can read in a ruleset.
Counterpick format:
1. Winner picks character.
2. Loser picks character.
3. Winner bans stage(s).*
4. Loser picks stage.
*Game dependent:
Wii U and PM: Winner bans two stages (depends on stage list size) and includes Dave’s Stupid Rule.
Melee: Winner bans one stage and may ban up to one additional stage on which he or she has lost during this set. (Replaces DSR.)
1. Winner bans stage(s).*
2. Loser picks stage.
3. Winner picks character.
4. Loser picks character.
Proposed New Counterpick Format
1. Winner picks character.
2. Loser picks character.
3. Winner bans stage(s).*
4. Loser picks stage.
*Total stages to ban depends on the game and includes Dave’s Stupid Rule.
This modification notably weakens counterpick strength by guaranteeing that stage decisions are based on a character matchup. This reduces the current surprise factor of character changes based on the stage which can create a very bad matchup or turn the counterpick against the loser. With so many new and potentially volatile matchups in Smash 4, updating this rule is most important early.
Smash 4 and Project M have many matchups and stages, so they see the most significant results, but the new order is also important for other games. Because Melee has a small stage list (under 7), using this order for counterpicking will require an additional small change as described in part 2.
Part 1: Explanation
With our traditional ruleset, because the stage is selected first, the characters sometimes change because of the stage choice. However, it makes more sense to base decisions for banning and selecting stages when the characters are determined. Otherwise the following scenarios can happen.
Final Destination is a common ban against Ice Climbers players in both Melee and Brawl. In either game, if a winner does not ban FD, they could be unaware that the loser may switch to Ice Climbers. In a case where characters are known before stage selection, it is likely that an obviously advantageous stage would be banned. By removing this extreme counterpick option, pocket counterpicks give less advantage but still hold weight. Smash 4 has far more matchups, so there are many more opportunities for these extreme counterpicks. (Note that having many stages and not enough stage bans can still create significant counterpick advantages.)
Locking characters before selecting the stage also prevents the winner from turning the counterpick matchup against the loser. In Melee, a Falco may counterpick a Marth to Dreamland to find that the Marth player has a surprise Jigglypuff. Despite this rewarding the winner for having more diversity in characters, the loser is now disadvantaged for choosing a stage based on the matchup that wouldn’t happen.
This change weakens the surprise factor for counterpicks by both the winner and loser,
so it slightly weakens and balances the overall counterpick strength. This helps guarantee that the better player wins rather than the player that won the first game and traded powerful counterpicks.
Should we be choosing the stage based on our characters, or should we be choosing our characters because of the stage?
Part 2: Effect on Melee Bans
For games with fewer than 7 stages, there cannot be a stage ban and Dave’s Stupid Rule (a player may not counterpick a stage on which he or she has won during this set) because there are not enough stages to support it naturally. Because Melee has 6 legal stages, the current ruleset’s solution is to remove the general stage ban in a best of 5. This proposed new counterpick order relies on always having a stage ban, so Melee should use the following stage ban rule for both best of 3 and best of 5. (Replaces step 3 in the order above.)
Winner bans one stage and may ban up to one additional stage on which he or she has lost during this set.
Note that this combines a limited version of DSR with the winner’s stage ban. In a best of 3, this ban change does not alter the total bans at all (ban one and DSR only affects a neutral stage in game 3). In a best of 5, both players regain the stage ban and can ban a stage they lost, so the game 4 and 5 stages end up on more neutral but often repeated stages. At the expense of slightly less stage variety in best of 5 sets, players can avoid lopsided matchups as discussed in the first part.
However, Melee has limited stage selection already, and in theory, there may not be many hard counterpicks after all. Here are a few traditional Melee counterpick strategies.
1. Fast and mobile characters can escape on large stages and make slower characters catch up to them. Dreamland, Final Destination and Pokemon Stadium give room to camp, but Yoshi’s Story and Fountain of Dreams prevent this.
2. Final Destination allows for easier chain grabs and Ice Climbers grab combos. Projectiles are harder to avoid without platforms.
3. Floaty characters avoid lower ceilings (Yoshi’s Story and Pokemon Stadium) and often choose high ceilings (Dreamland and Fountain of Dreams). Characters with good vertical kill moves prefer the opposite.
4. Battlefield is average in many ways, and some characters without strong counterpick options may choose here. It also limits some recoveries, like Fox and Falco angles.
Note that these are not rules to matchup advantages. For example, in Peach vs Fox, Peach may enjoy chain grabs on FD and surviving longer on Dreamland, but Fox can camp on both stages. Fox can get early kills on Yoshi’s, but Peach can get harder punishes without worrying as much about Fox escaping.
Fox and Falco make for an interesting argument because they can do well in large and small spaces. Some characters do not have strong counterpicks against them and have to deal with their advantages, often including Pokemon Stadium. This is also the case for other top characters that counter low tiers. Giving the better character a ban removes one of their few weaknesses that could be used in the matchup. Low tiers likewise are allowed to cover one significant weakness in the matchup. Because the high tiers have more favored stages, the ban arguably helps high tiers more.
This is simply a bad matchup. Better characters and bad matchups are unavoidable in Smash. For people who use worse characters, they have to be better than opponents rather than let stages decide results. A player is responsible for understanding matchups and stages, and it’s the worse character player’s choice to not switch characters. In practice, it remains the player’s job to win, neither the stage’s nor the character’s.
If a player can’t win game one after stage striking, the same player can only win the set by winning on their opponent’s counterpick. Nerfed counterpicks will not change game one, but it will allow comebacks to happen more appropriately for the better player who adapts, and it will prevent worse players from winning on stronger counterpicks only to prolong the set.
For those interested in additional arguments and examples regarding part 2, please refer to this document.
Summary
If characters are chosen before the stage, counterpicks are nerfed, so results are better balanced. This relies on the winner having a stage ban, which the winner does not in a Melee best of 5. Melee can have a stage ban using the above part 2 suggestion as an additional rule update to potentially more debate. Regardless of counterpick and stage selection nerfs for all players, having character diversity and playing good characters will always hold value.
I propose that at least Wii U and Project M adopt this new counterpick order. I also propose that Melee does this, and it must also update its stage ban rule for the new counterpick order to work correctly. I personally have used this new ruleset in local tournaments to decent success. The biggest challenges are and will be spreading the word and people remembering to use it. Most people have been supportive, especially for Smash 4, so it should be interesting to see the rest of the community’s response.
To reiterate the rule change, here’s how it can read in a ruleset.
Counterpick format:
1. Winner picks character.
2. Loser picks character.
3. Winner bans stage(s).*
4. Loser picks stage.
*Game dependent:
Wii U and PM: Winner bans two stages (depends on stage list size) and includes Dave’s Stupid Rule.
Melee: Winner bans one stage and may ban up to one additional stage on which he or she has lost during this set. (Replaces DSR.)
