New stageset proposal

[GunPunch]

i like the current stage set. i understand that all the current legal stages aren't 100% fair, but i like that as part of the game. sry. but i love salty runbacks and beating that ****ing fox on pokemon stadium!

but yea, i agree that bf is probly the most fair stage. i usually hate FD. yoshi's can skem matchup because all the screen edges are so close and the short platforms. that my opinion. i mean, marth can just destroy ppl on that stage. its just too small i think, which gives an advantage to chars who fight well in close quarters and disadvantages chars who do better with space. my opnions.

 

[Bones0]

yoshi's can skem matchup because all the screen edges are so close and the short platforms.

BF skews matchups because the top plat is really high, there are no walls to sweetspot recoveries, the gaps between platforms are really small, and the bottom blastzone is extremely low.


Every stage "skews" matchups. Otherwise there'd be no point in playing different stages.

 

[Kink-Link5]

Dreamland blastzones effect matches way more than any version of PS ever could.

 

[DerfMidWest]

Marth ***** on yoshi's, but thats balanced by dreamland.

Tiny stage, medium stage, big stage.
I feel like it works really well.

 

[S1 The God]

oh my god smashers are so whiny

If you're better than someone then the one stage you may or may not lose on shouldn't effect the outcome of your set. we can't keep banning **** just because it gives another character any semblance of an advantage. man the **** up and stop trying to get rid of everything that inconveniences you

 

[Construct]

This might actually make sense if I were the one arguing with those reasons...

I know it isn't really applicable, but the idea of House saying those lines in a FD only comic amused me. Plus I've just sat around and done nothing today, lol. No offense was intended, just a lighthearted MS painting.

@vanir: I wasn't saying the battlefield edges were constantly janky, I said they were a constant jank. The difference being that they are always there and always must be taken into account when recovering, just like Randall. Neither randomly decide to play god, they act in a predetermined manner.

 

[-ACE-]

Why not........

HAVE A STAGELIST (neutral/cp wouldn't exist anymore)

stage strike 1 map, player 1 gets a map, player 2 gets a map.

This would work well for a 5 stage list.



+1 for this list overall, I think its a step in the right direction definitely.



Also, I don't know why this hasn't been done yet, but force players to spawn in neutral spots for each stage. The spawn places are known but never really cared about. Make players spawn either equidistant from the center of the stage, or whatever would be deemed the most fair. Something can be implemented for teams also. Spawn actually means a lot at high level play and the ruleset shouldn't cater to scrubs.

 

[DerfMidWest]

Thats called neutral start.
Its already a thing.

 

[ShrieK1295]

I think the current rules are pretty good for tournament, but I hope someday FD isn't played, not because it's unfair or unbalanced but just because it's a damn boring stage =/

 

[DerfMidWest]

I STRONGLY support only having the three stages (BF, YS, and DL).
It works so well.
Small, medium, large.
First stage is striked (each player gets 1 ban)

I mean, even as a spacey player, I can agree that PS should be removed. I love the stage, but the transformations interfere with play. It disrupts the game and people end up being forced to camp during the rock and tree (and sometimes the windmill) phases.

FD is really bad too, imo. Maybe even worse. People have less options when recovering due to lack of platforms. Chaingrabs go for days. Lack of platforms make avoiding projectiles a lot harder and characters like ganon can get crapped on even harder than normal.

FoD isn't as bad as the other two, but the platforms make a lot of MUs stupid.

If anything, FoD should be cp, but as I said earlier, I want cp stages to disappear. The idea of having them off first round is to have a fair first game. So why are
Less fair stages aloud for the second game? It doesn't make them any more fair...

DL, YS, and BF just balance each other out really well.

 

[ShroudedOne]

In the interest of competitive play, I think that, bias aside, YS should be switched out for FoD.

 

[DerfMidWest]

High ceiling.

 

[stabbedbyanipple]

Current rule set of 6 is fine. Don't now why people keep trying to whittle down the stage list (Okay, I DO know but there's a big difference between what's legal now and RC/Brinstar/Kongo/other wack stages).

 

[Zero_Saber]

I hate the reasons people are coming up with for getting rid of stages now. It used to be that if a stage interfered with game play to much it was gotten rid of. Now if a stage affects match-ups allot (like FD) it's gotten rid of despite the fact there's nothing on the stage inherently interfering with game play. All of the annoying parts of FD are there because of your opponent not because of the stage itself.

 

[-ACE-]

Thats called neutral start.
Its already a thing.

I think it should be forced though.

FD's neutrality is always so controversial. I think the 3 stages in the OP's proposal are more neutral than FD but I really don't see how FD is so ****ing bad. Complaints about chaingrabs are funny, don't get grabbed, most chaingrabs actually take some skill and it's still nothing like wobbling which can be used on any stage. A lack of plarforms does change the game, no doubt, but I still have a hard time calling FD non-neutral. Idk. I'd never swap it for YS, DL or BF though.

 

[DerfMidWest]

At most tournaments that I've been to, neutral start may be elected by the players...

 

[oliman]

Just because the stages are more neutral does not make play more neutral. the bad part about dwindling down the stage list, imo, is that certain characters may have a way easier time on all of the few stages than another character. I believe that the beauty of a large stagelist is that the first stage is the most neutral as possible, the second stage has a disadvantage for the winner of game 1, and the third game is opposite that, thus being very balanced.

Plus more stages = cool

EDIT: there is nothing terribly imbalanced about FoD. It doesn't "skew" matchups, the celing isn't THAT high, its just pretty small.

 

[DerfMidWest]

By "high ceiling" i meant it doesn't contrast to dreamland as much as YS does, making characters overall harder to kill off the top.

While having more stages is fun, its not necessarily the most fair/neutral thing in the world.
And it works best with these three.

Lets say its a set between a floaty gimp based character with a good recovery and a heavier hard hitting character with a bad recovery. Hypothetical MU is 50/50.

Game 1 will likely be BF (as it normally is already). Stage is very neutral, the better player is most likely to win.

Lets say the floaty character lost, so they cp Dreamland, where they can live longer and have a better chance of winning. Now since the players are of about equal skill in this scenario, game two goes to the floaty.

Finally, the heavy cps Yoshi's for game 3, where he can kill faster and the floaty's superior recovery doesn't matter as much. He probably wins.

Set goes to the player who played the best.
The cp method is still effective.
The stages balance each other out perfectly.

 

[Hax]

hope you guys realize that the natural progression if you support this stagelist is to support BF only in a few years

stage diversity is already almost nonexistent with these 3 stages. lol if you're actually having more fun cause of stages that are just magnified versions of battlefield [with stage sizes that strongly favor certain characters] with stage hazards that have no place in competitive play. makes 0 sense to support this but not BF only

 

[-ACE-]

someone should have just hacked melee long ago

remove randall, shy guys, and wind. THEN these 3 stages would make a good system, but as it stands Hax has a good point.

 

[oliman]

The entire basis of the counterpicking scheme here (for the 3 stage thingy) seems to me as though it is assuming BF is neutral in every matchup, which it isn't.

also for characters like peach n jigglypuff, dreamland helps them way, way more than yoshi's hurts them. i would say especially for peach

 

[DerfMidWest]

Well, tbh, I just like dreamland.
But I'm not opposed to BF only.
I prefer having the three stages, but BF is just the most neutral stage.

 

[-ACE-]

HOW DO YOU KNOW WHICH CHARACTERS TO CATER THE RULESET TO?

God damn I'm a Ganon main and I think FD is pretty damn neutral (even though if often blows for ganon). Seriously people need to leave their character bias aside here...

Neutral, to me, is based off symmetry and a lack of moving objects/obstructions. And the possession of stage qualities that don't give 1 or 2 characters in particular a huge advantage (this is what rainbow cruise does). As long as it meets that criteria it shouldn't be a big problem imo

edit: Agreed, BF for most neutral. FD with BF platforms would be close to perfect.

 

[DerfMidWest]

Fd with BF platforms would be incredible.
It might be a bit too big though, favoring like.. Fox a lot.
There would be a lot of room to run.

 

[-ACE-]

True, but... it's hard not to favor fox (not to mention room to run also helps characters against fox)... it would be a great stage to do tests on, although i'll admit, theory bros. is not all that ********... at this point the players that know the game have a good idea as to what would happen lol.

BF, YS (no randall, no shy guys), FD (BF platforms), DL64 (no wind), and PS only first version w/no transormations.

5 stages and perfect? lol

 

[Bones0]

Can anyone define neutral?

 

[DerfMidWest]

I guess it would be best described as the stage that benefits both characters the least in any given matchup.

But thats not really the best definition.

 

[-ACE-]

That's actually a pretty good definition imo...

 

[Bones0]

Benefitting relative to what? Does FD benefit Marth too much vs. spacies, or do platform stages benefit spacies too much vs. Marth? Everyone seems to be making up their mind how matchups should be, and are just backwards rationalizing the stages they banned so the stage list makes their image of the game a reality.

I may disagree with Hax, but at least his reasoning isn't convoluted. He thinks Shy Guys, Randall, FoD's low platforms, chaingrabs on FD, and DLs... wind? are factors that are negatively affecting the fairness of matches. Other people just seem to be going "hey, I don't like FoD or FD, let's get rid of it!"

 

[DerfMidWest]

But I agree with that also lol, I believe I said that already.
Mostly in regard to FD and FoD.
The wind on DL is an interference, but a minor one.
Randal isn't random and is easy to compensate for, but shyguys do create random interference, however I feel as though its not enough to deem the stage ban worthy.
FoD's platforms do create random interference and frequently disrupt play.

 

[Battlecow]

battlefield only FTW

 

[-ACE-]

I guess it would be best described as the stage that benefits both characters the least in any given matchup.

Benefitting relative to what? Does FD benefit Marth too much vs. spacies, or do platform stages benefit spacies too much vs. Marth? Everyone seems to be making up their mind how matchups should be, and are just backwards rationalizing the stages they banned so the stage list makes their image of the game a reality.

I believe you know what he meant here bones. He was referring to stages that give the least amount of characters a seemingly unfair matchup.

There are plenty of stages with platforms that are complete bull**** when considering potential for competitive gameplay. But we say the one stage without platforms is not neutral. In many ways, it is the most neutral stage.

Lets look at who gets chaingrabbed really bad... Fox and Falco. Wow, we should really eliminate any stages that make it harder for those two characters to excel... they have it bad enough as it is! lmao. Am I saying we should cater to non-high tier characters? Hell no, but you certainly shouldn't make it easier for the undisputed top characters.


EDIT: honestly BF only is not that bad lol

 

[DerfMidWest]

Fox falco falcon, obv.
But also a BUNCH of poor low tiers.

 

[Varist]

battlefield only is really bad

Battlefield for first match 100% of the time then cp to YS/DL/FD/FoD/PS afterwards would be kewl with one ban per player.

 

[-ACE-]

Fox falco falcon, obv.
But also a BUNCH of poor low tiers.

Yeah a bunch of semi-floaties are chaingrabbed by sheik... Hell ganon chaingrabs half the cast to dangerous percent... Falcon doesn't get chaingrabbed like fox or falco at all... his weight helps him escape on throws that are lagged by weight, and he is able to DI farther out of most throws that cg spacies. This is a legitimate part of the game that a lot of people want to dismiss, seemingly because they don't like getting chaingrabbed. At high level a grab is pretty close to death anyway, should just let FD be neutral and wobbling always legal imo, if you get grabbed it's no one's fault but your own.

edit: not saying FD is more neutral than BF, YS, DL... but.... close.

 

[DerfMidWest]

Keep in mind, while I try to eliminate bias from my posts, I do have a Pichu perspective.
And I chaingrab falcon all the way accross FD. Its easier than fox/falco.
Then he ***** me because I'm pichu.

Aaaanyway, While it is harder to get a grab at high level, good players force them with ease. Look at M2k or PP (although, its falco's lolzy grab game) or Armada.
Grabs still happen a lot.

But, chaingrabing isn't the reason I think it should be banned (or at least cp).
Lack of platforms really changes the neutral game and gives projectile heavy characters a sizable advantage.
Without platforms, many characters (boozer) get shut down, or seriously hindered, by projectiles.

 

[-ACE-]

You can powershield projectiles, good movement gets rewarded for being able to dodge them also... Sure it changes the neutral game a bit but I just don't see it as non-neutral. Techchasing on Fd is pretty fun too, it actually requires a decent read unlike many platform techchases that are guaranteed.

 

[DerfMidWest]

It isn't practicle to assume you can powershield every projectile.
If it were, Falcos wouldn't laser.
But they do, because it gives them control of the neutralgame.

If you want to go all theory bros, you could powershield everything, but they could just powershield it right back.

 

[-ACE-]

It actually is practical to assume that with practice one can become good enough at powershielding projectiles to prevent themselves from being helpless on FD. Have you seen Axe or overtriforce play? There are so many good powershielders... All the top players are capable of this essentially. Europe is a lot better at it than we are. You should think more outside the box lol. It's 2012.

 

[Beat!]

It isn't practicle to assume you can powershield every projectile.
If it were, Falcos wouldn't laser.
But they do, because it gives them control of the neutralgame.

If you want to go all theory bros, you could powershield everything, but they could just powershield it right back.

Powershielding Falco's lasers isn't very difficult. Not with Marth, at least (it's not that hard with other characters either, but it's particularly easy with Marth because of the way his dash-->shield works). Dash back PS is absolutely free and easy to execute. It doesn't make Falco completely helpless, because there are a couple of ways to deal with it, but it still significantly weakens his neutral game. It's certainly not theory bros or impractical, I'll tell you that much.