New Singles Ruleset Idea (just want feedback)

[LatexRhombus]

Yes getting an auto-win is more depth and more fun, grats.

comments like this are why new players won't be joining/staying in the community anytime soon

 

[EPsilon933]

comments like this are why new players won't be joining/staying in the community anytime soon

Would desperation for new players drive away new players?

 

[Divinokage]

comments like this are why new players won't be joining/staying in the community anytime soon

I'm giving you as much information as you give me. You never said why CP stages adds depth and is more fun.. you just assume it's like that. I made my point clear in a previous post about this as to why CP stages creates unfair advantage in a ****ton of matchups.. Tell me if I choose Ganon on Brinstar against ANY other character in the cast and then tries to challenge me on that stage, they will LOSE. How is that depth? It destroys every matchup fairness.

True depth to me is the ability to make conscious/subtle decisions in order to gain the advantage over an opponent without having the need to fight anything else. Even with extensive knowledge about those CP maps, there's simply nothing you can do in order to regain an advantage in certain matchups just because those advantages are simply extremely more apparent. With only the neutral stages, EVERY character stands a MUCH better chance to win.. why wouldn't anyone want that?

 

[Redact]

I'm giving you as much information as you give me. You never said why CP stages adds depth and is more fun.. you just assume it's like that. I made my point clear in a previous post about this as to why CP stages creates unfair advantage in a ****ton of matchups.. Tell me if I choose Ganon on Brinstar against ANY other character in the cast and then tries to challenge me on that stage, they will LOSE. How is that depth? It destroys every matchup fairness.

True depth to me is the ability to make conscious/subtle decisions in order to gain the advantage over an opponent without having the need to fight anything else. Even with extensive knowledge about those CP maps, there's simply nothing you can do in order to regain an advantage in certain matchups just because those advantages are simply extremely more apparent. With only the neutral stages, EVERY character stands a MUCH better chance to win.. why wouldn't anyone want that?

Agree 100%

Thus why our local tournaments are 7 neutrals with stage strike (normal stages + pks+kj64) and 0 cps

The ban is there to remove a stage you are uncomfortable with, not there to remove matchups that are impossible to win (or nigh so) due to the stage.

 

[Grim Tuesday]

The ban is there to remove a stage you are uncomfortable with, not there to remove matchups that are impossible to win (or nigh so) due to the stage.

Why?

10whys?

 

[adumbrodeus]

I like FD in counters, but why are we getting rid of every other CP stage?

 

[-ACE-]

Agree 100%

Thus why our local tournaments are 7 neutrals with stage strike (normal stages + pks+kj64) and 0 cps

The ban is there to remove a stage you are uncomfortable with, not there to remove matchups that are impossible to win (or nigh so) due to the stage.

I like this.

Kage is right also. In a bo5 if he takes a campy fox to BS and wins, and in another match he gets taken to RC and loses, depth has not been gained, it has been lost. If having a stage assist you in beating your opponent (to a substantial degree) adds depth, it's not the kind of depth I would ever want to see in this community lol.

 

[Grim Tuesday]

In which case you don't ban stages, you add stage bans or use Hybrid Stage List Striking!

>_<

 

[Redact]

In which case you don't ban stages, you add stage bans or use Hybrid Stage List Striking!

>_<

Systems that allow flawed stages just promotes people to have pocket characters and force people to always ban the same stages each time.

If we allow more stages, the rules will either have to be Character first then stage (we have it the other way around here) or you would need a ridiculous amount of bans to pretty much nullify people just going pocket fox/peach/whatever on you (and no, pulling out a pocket character to achieve victory through stage abuse is not depth in the slightest)

Please show me which rule set you propose yourself, I'd like to see honestly

 

[Divinokage]

I like FD in counters, but why are we getting rid of every other CP stage?

It's a proposal that I think will change the outcome of tournaments for the better and will encourage more players to choose their own favorite character without worry. I personally hope that this ruleset will eventually become a standard. It's something amazing since I think you'll see more lower tiers place well and I think people want to see that.

Because for me, without change = stagnation.

 

[Supreme Dirt]

I just want a stagelist where against Marth, I don't have to basically pull out my pocket Ganon/Pichu, or choose to play him on DL/YS/BF as Mewtwo. Seriously, Marth MU is retardedly hard, and he basically has an auto-win first game because of the stagelist.

 

[Divinokage]

I just want a stagelist where against Marth, I don't have to basically pull out my pocket Ganon/Pichu, or choose to play him on DL/YS/BF as Mewtwo. Seriously, Marth MU is retardedly hard, and he basically has an auto-win first game because of the stagelist.

Real talk... You are wrong, that's because you are bad. Pretty sure players like Iori/Taj can do it. Is it so wrong that you can't attain that level or surpass that level if that's your goal?

 

[Supreme Dirt]

When a number of players have 10 years experience, and I started playing Melee competitively about 5 months ago, I'm pretty sure I don't really stand a chance of that.

 

[Divinokage]

When a number of players have 10 years experience, and I started playing Melee competitively about 5 months ago, I'm pretty sure I don't really stand a chance of that.

You are wrong again, you can overcome any problems in life or in smash. Why wouldn't you be able to beat another 5 month Marth either or any Marth eventually? What's really holding you down? All you have to do is recognize where the problem lies and then you do what you can to fix it.

 

[Smasher89]

Limited rulesets has made timeout strategies more powerful then ever(given me a few wins when I'm in the mood for timeout).
"Neutrals"+KJ64 has got atleast 2 potencial stages(Dl64, KJ64, possibly BF, but I´ll need to test it more) for timeout based strategies in certain matchups (puff against any slow jump char, peach, samus, ganon).

That will be abused and when it does, it creates more "stagnation" in the metagame we will see by then then the variety that counterpicks has allowed (this strategy can be countered with stages not on the neutral list).

I posted an example in this or a similar thread a while ago where a puff (tero) wins by planking the ledge as Jiggs on battlefield against pepito(fox), pepito then counterpicks mute city, which has no ledges, and outdominate tero on a stage that jiggs is "supposed" to be good on. If the counterpick was on a neutral, the same time out strategy could have been used again if the oppoturnity comes (lead) and get the game into "dont lose lead or lose the match".

EDIT:
Kage- That logic could be applied to your set against pink shinobi on KJ64!

 

[Divinokage]

Limited rulesets has made timeout strategies more powerful then ever(given me a few wins when I'm in the mood for timeout).
"Neutrals"+KJ64 has got atleast 2 potencial stages(Dl64, KJ64, possibly BF, but I´ll need to test it more) for timeout based strategies in certain matchups (puff against any slow jump char, peach, samus, ganon).

That will be abused and when it does, it creates more "stagnation" in the metagame we will see by then then the variety that counterpicks has allowed (this strategy can be countered with stages not on the neutral list).

I posted an example in this or a similar thread a while ago where a puff (tero) wins by planking the ledge as Jiggs on battlefield against pepito(fox), pepito then counterpicks mute city, which has no ledges, and outdominate tero on a stage that jiggs is "supposed" to be good on. If the counterpick was on a neutral, the same time out strategy could have been used again if the oppoturnity comes (lead) and get the game into "dont lose lead or lose the match".

EDIT:
Kage- That logic could be applied to your set against pink shinobi on KJ64!

I never played Pink Shinobi in tournament before...

Doesn't melee have a LGL rule?

 

[Dark Hart]

Melee shouldn't need an LGL rule...

 

[Divinokage]

Melee shouldn't need an LGL rule...

Ya seriously, if someone can camp you effectively from the ledge then imo the one getting camped is really dumb.

 

[-ACE-]

Lol that was RockCrock, not Kage.

I agree Lucas.

 

[Redact]

Limited rulesets has made timeout strategies more powerful then ever(given me a few wins when I'm in the mood for timeout).
"Neutrals"+KJ64 has got atleast 2 potencial stages(Dl64, KJ64, possibly BF, but I´ll need to test it more) for timeout based strategies in certain matchups (puff against any slow jump char, peach, samus, ganon).

That will be abused and when it does, it creates more "stagnation" in the metagame we will see by then then the variety that counterpicks has allowed (this strategy can be countered with stages not on the neutral list).

I posted an example in this or a similar thread a while ago where a puff (tero) wins by planking the ledge as Jiggs on battlefield against pepito(fox), pepito then counterpicks mute city, which has no ledges, and outdominate tero on a stage that jiggs is "supposed" to be good on. If the counterpick was on a neutral, the same time out strategy could have been used again if the oppoturnity comes (lead) and get the game into "dont lose lead or lose the match".

EDIT:
Kage- That logic could be applied to your set against pink shinobi on KJ64!

If you get ledge camped, then you need to re-evaluate your strategy and how you deal with it. It is far from effective when countered correctly.

Also with a stage like mute city being picked, whats to stop Tero from picking Peach on that stage? I personally dont believe Jiggs is that good on that stage (yes she is solid, but it is far from a stage you should always pick as jiggs)

Really when I read that, all I think is "man he should have a pocket peach" which would have made Pepito's choice an absolute failure without adding a drop of depth to the game.

 

[Grim Tuesday]

Systems that allow flawed stages just promotes people to have pocket characters and force people to always ban the same stages each time.

If we allow more stages, the rules will either have to be Character first then stage (we have it the other way around here) or you would need a ridiculous amount of bans to pretty much nullify people just going pocket fox/peach/whatever on you (and no, pulling out a pocket character to achieve victory through stage abuse is not depth in the slightest)

Please show me which rule set you propose yourself, I'd like to see honestly

I can definitely see the logic in that, and I admit it could be a problem.

That's why I'd instead suggest Hybrid Stage List Striking, which goes something like this:
1. Both players double-blind pick characters.
2. Both players strike from a large liberal stage list (to save time, make the order something like 9, 10, 1 for 20 stages).
3. When they get a certain number of stages through the list (up to the TO's discretion, depending on how conservative they are), every remaining stage (not striked) is considered a counter-pick.
4. Players keep striking until they reach the last stage, that stage is the "starter".
5. Game 1 is played on the starter.
6. Counter-picking works normally (same way as we have it right now).

It allows players to perfectly tailor stage-lists to the match-up and makes "lol I has pocket Puff and you didn't use your ban on Mute City" much less effective.

 

[Kuro Neko]

Melee does not need a LGL.

 

[Redact]

I can definitely see the logic in that, and I admit it could be a problem.

That's why I'd instead suggest Hybrid Stage List Striking, which goes something like this:
1. Both players double-blind pick characters.
2. Both players strike from a large liberal stage list (to save time, make the order something like 9, 10, 1 for 20 stages).
3. When they get a certain number of stages through the list (up to the TO's discretion, depending on how conservative they are), every remaining stage (not striked) is considered a counter-pick.
4. Players keep striking until they reach the last stage, that stage is the "starter".
5. Game 1 is played on the starter.
6. Counter-picking works normally (same way as we have it right now).

It allows players to perfectly tailor stage-lists to the match-up and makes "lol I has pocket Puff and you didn't use your ban on Mute City" much less effective.

The issue with this is, Any player with a decent range of pocket characters will have two outcomes to their matches:

A: The stages end up as the current neutral list and the match is played the same as my proposed rule list

B: Certain stages dont get banned, and everything becomes a ****fest really. With this outcome, the game ends up deteriorating in MANY ways which EXTREMLY favours players with more characters behind them, and make it REALLY harsh on players with a large amount of knowledge:

B1: A newer/less experienced player simply gets romped because they didn't ban a broken *** stage and they don't have a pocket fox/puff

B2: A worse off player wins against a better player simply due to stage abuse.

B3: Both players end up just doing a ditto with neither of their mains, get used to seeing fox or peach dittos on ******** *** stages, with camping being a main stay of the game.

Whilst a hybrid list would be fine if all players can play the majority of the high tier and had a good amount of stage knowledge, it is so badly against lower end players/players who play few characters its rediculous. Whilst it can promote depth at higher levels, the amount of depth that is removed at lower level play is just stupid.

Say I played you, you banned all the bad stages for ICS, then I simply banned all neutral stages I could. We get left with 6-7 broken *** stages where I'll just pull out some lame *** pocket characters and win by either timing you out or just dominate you due to the character played, not due to my own skill.

 

[EPsilon933]

I think some stuff is starting to get complicated

 

[Redact]

I think some stuff is starting to get complicated

That's why I like it nice and simple

7 stages, no cps, 1 ban

easy peasy poosy weesy

 

[-ACE-]

Neutral: BF, FD, YS, DL
CP: PS, FoD

Upon request, a coin flip will determine which player has choice of port (or RPS, or G&W).
Stage striking: 1,1 Then the game will choose between the remaining 2 via random stage selection.
Modified Dave's Stupid Rule (MDSR): In a bo5, you may not CP a stage you have already won on twice.

^^ random idea I had.

 

[Divinokage]

Neutral: BF, FD, YS, DL
CP: PS, FoD

Upon request, a coin flip will determine which player has choice of port (or RPS, or G&W).
Stage striking: 1,1 Then the game will choose between the remaining 2 via random stage selection.
Modified Dave's Stupid Rule (MDSR): In a bo5, you may not CP a stage you have already won on twice.

^^ random idea I had.

That's probably the best idea so far imo.

 

[Smasher89]

Really when I read that, all I think is "man he should have a pocket peach" which would have made Pepito's choice an absolute failure without adding a drop of depth to the game.

My bad, knew it was a Ganonplayer that I think had placed in some tournaments.


Why this adds alot of depth in counterpicking:

Pep(as in the earlier examples lost last match and picks mute city:
In the example it was a wierd but very good pick due to getting rid of ledges (which is impossible with starters only).

This puts pressure on the puffplayers choice!
If the puffplayer has a pocket peach the pick can also be a bait to switch character to peach(since she is known to do well there).

Just to realize the one picking mute has a very strong Marth on that stage with alot of peach experience (something the one usng pocket peach in very many situations aren't as used to, but can be) and wins, and therefore made an excellent pick, calling the bad familiarity with the stage or whatever, earning a win by a smart strategic pick.

I use this alot with Corneria (fox is easily baited here, and wont beat me unless perfect(!) technical play and totally outplaying my climbers)


Getting in this situations and know when to call a switch and not are adding depth to the counterpickgame, and less removing the actual need(gameplay) to play the game to learn alot of things and not sticking to one char, same basic strategies.




Redact- Anyone playing ICs will either stay the character all set (banning their bad timeout stages, every single of them is done by platform camping.
IC picking a stage that don´t promote this excact kind of camping is fair (onett, corneria) as long as that pick earlier was fair or have a secondary to deal with it if theres an oppoturnity to pick that stage.
There´s even proof that IC's "bad stages" aren't as bad as they seemed (looking at wobbles @ brinstar).
If there would be rules based on "bad players" we would play FD only, since it´s the simplest stage to understand and doesn´t need the depth of strategic positioning with platforms.


If there´s room for experimenting theres room for possibly more depth, is this possible to disagree?

And is there anything that justifies that we should make the players more one char mainers? That direcly removes depth since less players plays each char and less gets (re)discovered/used.

 

[Redact]

My bad, knew it was a Ganonplayer that I think had placed in some tournaments.


Why this adds alot of depth in counterpicking:

Pep(as in the earlier examples lost last match and picks mute city:
In the example it was a wierd but very good pick due to getting rid of ledges (which is impossible with starters only).

This puts pressure on the puffplayers choice!
If the puffplayer has a pocket peach the pick can also be a bait to switch character to peach(since she is known to do well there).

Just to realize the one picking mute has a very strong Marth on that stage with alot of peach experience (something the one usng pocket peach in very many situations aren't as used to, but can be) and wins, and therefore made an excellent pick, calling the bad familiarity with the stage or whatever, earning a win by a smart strategic pick.

I use this alot with Corneria (fox is easily baited here, and wont beat me unless perfect(!) technical play and totally outplaying my climbers)


Getting in this situations and know when to call a switch and not are adding depth to the counterpickgame, and less removing the actual need(gameplay) to play the game to learn alot of things and not sticking to one char, same basic strategies.




Redact- Anyone playing ICs will either stay the character all set (banning their bad timeout stages, every single of them is done by platform camping.
IC picking a stage that don´t promote this excact kind of camping is fair (onett, corneria) as long as that pick earlier was fair or have a secondary to deal with it if theres an oppoturnity to pick that stage.
There´s even proof that IC's "bad stages" aren't as bad as they seemed (looking at wobbles @ brinstar).
If there would be rules based on "bad players" we would play FD only, since it´s the simplest stage to understand and doesn´t need the depth of strategic positioning with platforms.


If there´s room for experimenting theres room for possibly more depth, is this possible to disagree?

And is there anything that justifies that we should make the players more one char mainers? That direcly removes depth since less players plays each char and less gets (re)discovered/used.

The issue here is you don't seem to understand stage abuse correctly

Baiting people using CP's is understandable, The stages that are banned are banned due to nigh unbeatable strategies or just an extremely large advantage once a certain level of metagame is reached.

A ruleset needs to be able to apply to all levels of tourney correctly, from r1 losers from a local where its total scrub vs total scrub, or grand finals at a national.

A stage like corneria will just be romped at low levels if any player knows the ylink camp at the lazer stuff. Removing all depth at that point until a certail level is reached in terms of getting down to the lazer.


Players losing with their pocket characters on an advantageous stage isn't a lack of matchup experience, It's the lack of ability to correctly abuse the stage. The worst fox in the world could lose to the best bowser in the world on hyrule, but that doesn't mean that at higher levels the stage can't prove to be rediculous.

Having extra stages makes people who want to win learn how to abuse them rather than learning a character.

Eg: Say I don't know fox in the slightest, nothing is going to stop me from pulling out a random fox vs a dk player on kj64, and circle camping him till the game is over. Sure he can change characters when I pick KJ64, but changing characters is something that should not need to be done to overcome a matchup. Players need to have a chance to win with their own character if played correctly (unless their character will get romped on any stage, like sheik vs bowser) rather than having to change character due to the stage specifically providing a rediculous advantage.



Also the idea of having FD only on lower level matchups, what's abusable to next to unbeatable on FoD or BF? or DL or PKS? Nothing that I know of. The idea is not simplicity, it's inability to abuse to win without being better than the opponent.

 

[Smasher89]

Ah yea, I do understand your point but disagree since it´s yet to be proved totally broken and dominating in every match(as long as the "broken strategy character" is played) on the stage.

Picking Ness beats(up-b) that Y.L strategy on Corneria, which gives the player a option to call the Y.Link out(or use it for an own advantage).

If not in the position where you can switch to Ness (after choosing to stick with your char) you can approach with timing of the laser, so Y.L can´t protect himself with the shield if he decides to approach you(probably a dumb choice since the laser) and then just hit him>laser out (lol not even tested but I think fox/falcos side b can beat the strategy by using this timing, since attacking as y.l is not a good idea coupled with the laser).

The risk is that both might die to it(learn to tech), but if it´s just a % lead it´s even by then.



It is a skill to make picks work, that people should learn and "abuse". Also a skill to be aware of what the opponent might pick, and why.
To make good use of the stagebans is also a skill (call the opponent out of not picking a certain stage due to "dislike" for it).

Dream land for example has puffs pound away>eventual bair on the platforms against "slow jump/slow" chars.

Hbox didn´t even use this(going for time) against Armada but the switch to Y.Link was forced in a way (but was a sollusion to the problem).



KJ64 Fox example:
I do not really know how to play Jiggs in singles(do use her in teams though), but picking DL then winning as a "bad" singles puff has given me a few tournament set wins, and will be giving me more as long as people will stick to peach on DL against me.
I can´t see the difference in that and your KJ64 example with fox, except I´ve done this a few times in tournaments (not recorded though), since both is "abuse of the characters speed and size of stage". KJ64Fox can be beaten by shiek and falcon(sick camp character).

It might be possible too on BF since the top platform is so high.

About low level play players:
Should be extreemly easy to abuse puff in that way on low/bottom level of play, since there´s like basicly 3 things to know, one is avoid conflict as much as possible. Even more broken at low level play then anywhere else.
I don´t really like that the rules should be based on "beginners" play, but to mantain as much possible that wouldn´t break the game(unbeatable strategies proved by frame data) or base it on luck.




Personally I do much rather play against a Fox on corneria then PS, since there is alot of tricks ICs can use with the wall, and Nana lives like forever on that stage, which in itself make a significant advantage for IC, since Nana can't get gimped(!).

IC's iceblocks travels fast for the lasercampy foxes (where if IC approach one call on jump can lead to grab, and ultimatly wobbling>stock)

If they regain the lead after getting camped, they can stick to be under the wall, so the lasercamp get useless, and also using the wall to be able to get grabs in more ways then on a stage without a wall. I do believe(but have yet to prove) that ICs should always beat Fox on that stage, due to being simply more effective (playing PAL, NTSC upsmash is a bit scarier), since gimping Nana is nullified.


I got picked to corneria in tournament against a Y.Link that got the lead(stock) and got to the cannon, but was able to win that match anyway, if it were broken I would´ve lost.

 

[Divinokage]

I think you are being too specific.. in this case you have to generalize every matchup and the possibilities. Can you imagine the amount of matchups that are normally winnable but then become unwinnable just because of one stage?

Edit: It's also unrealistic that players should have multiple characters at pro level.

 

[pockyD]

Yet there is no lava, and no stages that are almost auto-win for spacies (rc), and other stages where camping can prevail easily (kj).

i'm skipping 7 pages since i don't have time at the moment, but what makes a giant tree or mountain any less (or really, more) relevant than lava or largeness?

the mountain only appears sometimes? I might argue that that's WORSE, since it makes the stage significantly less predictable from the point you decide to play on it through the actual playing of the match

why have stadium on at all? why not 5 stages?

why not battlefield only?

 

[-ACE-]

BF only. Let's do it.

Lol

 

[Smasher89]

Unrealistic?, It used to be more players that used more characters in the top that had a chance of winning the tournament, atleast from the perspective of having watched alot of american tournaments since 05(or a bit later). You can look at earlier "mayor" tournament results, and also see that nearly every player had a secondary, or was innovative with their only char.


Something unrelated
Is the "twitterlike" update something new or have I just missed it until now?

 

[Divinokage]

Unrealistic?, It used to be more players that used more characters in the top that had a chance of winning the tournament, atleast from the perspective of having watched alot of american tournaments since 05(or a bit later). You can look at earlier "mayor" tournament results, and also see that nearly every player had a secondary, or was innovative with their only char.


Something unrelated
Is the "twitterlike" update something new or have I just missed it until now?

Geez... 2005!? Yes, it USED to be.. You cannot use the past to create a new ruleset with what's going on right now, it doesn't work... it's evolution.

Usually when I try to make a point across, you have to understand the top level right now. If I would use any other character than Ganon to try to win vs high/pro players.. I would most likely get my *** kicked. And this is mostly true for most of them too. It would probably take more YEARS of training before I can match their skill again. This is why I say it's unrealistic.

Edit: If you want to name all the top players.. then I'll glad do it.

 

[Beat!]

Unrealistic?, It used to be more players that used more characters in the top that had a chance of winning the tournament, atleast from the perspective of having watched alot of american tournaments since 05(or a bit later). You can look at earlier "mayor" tournament results, and also see that nearly every player had a secondary, or was innovative with their only char.


Something unrelated
Is the "twitterlike" update something new or have I just missed it until now?

The livetopic function is brand new.

 

[`Jammin' Jobus]

pokemon stadium is gay as hell horrible stage not neutral. FD is also horrible tho


I think the only playable stages should be battlefield dreamland and yoshis

 

[Beat!]

I would support that lol

 

[-ACE-]

Btw, pocky. You don't see me saying "why not bring back MC/GG/JJ/PF/MK2/Corneria etc" (which I think are comparable to RC/BS/KJ64 in terms of the degree in which they are "non-neutral"). I realize there has to be some compromise.

 

[Divinokage]

1 small stage, 1 mid stage, 1 large stage.. mmm...