Official Stage Legality Discussion: Stage Specific

[Budget Player Cadet_]

I don't know what to define as a "vital skill", I'll think about it. It'd be a very long list >_>

I meant a stagelist.

 

[Grim Tuesday]

I meant a stagelist.

Oh, that's simple enough.
Pokemon Stadium 2
Smashville
Lylat Cruise
Battlefield
Castle Siege

That is the bare minimum as far as I can see.

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

Oh, that's simple enough.
Pokemon Stadium 2
Smashville
Lylat Cruise
Battlefield
Castle Siege

That is the bare minimum as far as I can see.

Dealing with stage hazards.

 

[Grim Tuesday]

Dealing with stage hazards.

Already addressed,

Spoiler

though I'm sure you knew this and just waiting to explain why I'm wrong xD

:

I'd consider avoiding damaging hazards to be almost identical to avoiding enemy attacks, which is a skill present on every stage.

If a player can avoid one opponent, they can also avoid a second, predictable opponent who only attacks in a specific position at a specific time. Hence: No variation of skill. It's the same skill, just tested slightly differently.

Let the record stand that I am playing devil's advocate, by the way.

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

It's not like dealing with your opponent's attacks, unless there is more than one opponent. In 1v1, you have to deal with your opponent's attacks. With stage hazards, it's suddenly 1v1v1. So no, it's a core skill that you're ignoring and should not ignore.

 

[Grim Tuesday]

Yes, it's like 1v1v1.

That's assuming the third player can only do one attack, which is very easy to see coming and follows a set timer (in most cases), of course.

I can play several matches on Halberd, pay little to no attention to the hazards, and still avoid them :/ And I'm terrible at this game.

You've reminded me of a skill which isn't really tested with those above stages though: Stage knowledge. I'd suggest Halberd or Frigate for that position. Possibly both.

 

[chaosmaster1991]

Yes, it's like 1v1v1.

That's assuming the third player can only do one attack, which is very easy to see coming and follows a set timer (in most cases), of course.

I can play several matches on Halberd, pay little to no attention to the hazards, and still avoid them :/ And I'm terrible at this game.

You've reminded me of a skill which isn't really tested with those above stages though: Stage knowledge. I'd suggest Halberd or Frigate for that position. Possibly both.

Even if the third source can only perform one attack and has a set pattern, the source opposing you can still use the third source to it's advantage by forcing you into a bad position etc.

That being said, stage knowledge is tested on every stage. The thing is that all stages require a slightly different knowledge, so in the end you'd have to include them all to truly test that skill.

 

[Grim Tuesday]

Even if the third source can only perform one attack and has a set pattern, the source opposing you can still use the third source to it's advantage by forcing you into a bad position etc.

That being said, stage knowledge is tested on every stage. The thing is that all stages require a slightly different knowledge, so in the end you'd have to include them all to truly test that skill.

I completely agree that the opponent can use the hazard to their advantage, but it takes no extra skills to avoid the hazard than it does to avoid the opponent. You would still air dodge out of the way, shield it, roll, etc... to avoid it. This calls for skills like reaction speed, character and stage knowledge and a slight bit of predicting what your opponent will do.

I was referring to in-depth stage skill, basically knowing the timing for things. In retrospect, CS probably already does that anyway. Hmmm... I'll have to think about it.

 

[Ghostbone]

There are unique traits in most stages though...
But anyway for that stagelist Grim.
Either Distant Planet or Green Greens needs to be included for item use (or Mario Bros. ).
Brinstar needs to be included for being able to attack the stage to change its layout. (plus lava)
I would swap Castle Siege with Delfino, as Delfino also has walls and water, and a floor you can pass through from below.
Also why exactly would Battlefield be needed? (I mean all that it has is platforms >.>)
Rainbow Cruise is probably needed due to its many unique traits (like the constant moving, the carpets and other stuff)
Most other stages have stuff specific to them, I guess it's just subjective for which ones are 'important' enough. Like no other stage has something similar to PS1's windmill, many of Pictochat's drawings are unique.

But anyway since every stage is unique, you really have to include as many as possible to properly test stage knowledge, which is a vital skill of brawl.

 

[Grim Tuesday]

See, that's the difference.

It's not a "vital skill" if it's only tested on one stage. So any unique traits like PS1's wind-mill don't really fit.

That's the difference between conservatives and liberals. Conservatives are aiming for the bare minimum when it comes to what skills the player needs, where as liberals aim to test as many skills as possible at the price of introducing some less competitive gameplay.

You're right about battlefield though. I'll re-do that list soon.

 

[Ghostbone]

See that's the thing.

You're trying to change the game to only test the skills you think are more important.
That's not the way to go about it :/

Edit: And you think most conservatives want to have the most deep competitive play?
Yea totally with banning PS2 (though that seems to be changing) and having FD as a starter.

 

[Grim Tuesday]

See that's the thing.

You're trying to change the game to only test the skills you think are more important.
That's not the way to go about it :/

Don't speak as if I support this GB, like I said, I'm playing devil's advocate here

And aren't liberals trying to do the same thing? I mean, what if I consider running away on Temple an important skill? They won't test that skill in their rulesets.

Edit: And you think most conservatives want to have the most deep competitive play?
Yea totally with banning PS2 (though that seems to be changing) and having FD as a starter.

Nope, but this is the only way I can see to make a competitively legitimate conservative stage list.

 

[Ghostbone]

Don't speak as if I support this GB, like I said, I'm playing devil's advocate here

And aren't liberals trying to do the same thing? I mean, what if I consider running away on Temple an important skill? They won't test that skill in their rulesets.



Nope, but this is the only way I can see to make a competitively legitimate conservative stage list.

lol sorry xD

Yes liberals are technically doing the same thing, but they're removing things they consider to be degenerate (not 'gay' or 'boring' like most conservatives), though there are exceptions.

And it wouldn't really be a conservative stage list xD
It would just be really small. (which isn't the same as conservative)

 

[Grim Tuesday]

lol sorry xD

You have been forgiven.

Yes liberals are technically doing the same thing, but they're removing things they consider to be degenerate (not 'gay' or 'boring' like most conservatives), though there are exceptions.

They consider degenerate skills un-important, just as the stage-list I was crafting considered certain skills un-important. Entirely subjective whether a skill is not important or not.

And it wouldn't really be a conservative stage list xD
It would just be really small. (which isn't the same as conservative)

If you can't call this a conservative rule-set, then the concept of crafting a stage-list conservatively is completely flawed and the liberals win (as BPC has been suggesting)

 

[Ghostbone]

If you can't call this a conservative rule-set, then the concept of crafting a stage-list conservatively is completely flawed and the liberals win (as BPC has been suggesting)

This is exactly it XD.

 

[#HBC | Red Ryu]

The reason that there are very few conservative people is a combination of all of the following elements:
-The people who are conservative are, for the most part, not thinking very logically. There are one or two (RR, sometimes Browny/DMG (they post here sometimes, not that they're only sometimes logical), SuSa before he got banned), but for the most part they come here, and leave very quickly after we destroy their arguments.
-We destroy their arguments again and again and again and again. If you can't argue logically, all you have left is ignoring the logical means, and that won't get you anywhere in this forum. We do a lot of theorysmash...
-Conservatives are not open to a different viewpoint, regardless of how logical it is; therefore they see this as pointless mental masturbation. Take people like Nappy and Etecoon, who see this whole forum as a huge waste of time (be it because "you can't change people's minds online" or because "it's never going to happen anyways")... You think they're going to make wall-of-text assertations/refutations? I doubt it. The sad part is that they're kinda right...

Sometimes logical?

Also why am I conservative? Because I want tier 3 stages gone?

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

Hmm? Perhaps I misread you.... Dunno lol. And you're pretty much always very logical.

@Grim: that entire way of thinking is seriously flawed and I'll get to explaining why later.

 

[Grim Tuesday]

@Grim: that entire way of thinking is seriously flawed and I'll get to explaining why later.

I look forward to it.

 

[#HBC | Red Ryu]

I don't take sides on conservative or liberal, even if I argue with liberals more since they are more vocal on these forums.

If someone was saying do japanese stagelist, I would be against it.

The guess for me I was perfectly fine with the BBR ruleset committees stagelist was because it had every stage on it except one I thought was fine being legal, japes.

When I think conservative, I think it's people who want to cut down the stagelist a lot more than that.

 

[Browny]

wait what

Thats not entirely clear what you mean when referring me BPC... also I dont know why I got a mention lol, I rarely post here and never made my position on stages clear to anyone >_>

For the record though the only stage I think should ever be a starter is smashville... I consider FD/Yoshis/Battlefield to be just as polarizing towards certain playstles as the likes of brinstar in certain matchups (like marth vs ddd on yoshis is just as polarised as wario vs anyone on brinstar). I dont see ANYWHERE NEAR a large enough distinction between these so called 'neutrals' and counterpicks since you cant just ignore the fact that the stage is only 1/3 of the issue, the other 2 characters make up the rest.

That said however I dont have a problem with a wide range of CP stages since characters who are not great on all stages should most definitely be allowed to have this weakness exploited. I draw the line however on stages where certain characters have near unbeatable matchups on no matter who they are against, as such RC and brinstar I'd like to see gone.

For a compromise... My ideal list would be

Starter:
Smashville
PS1 (**** the stage transformations causing stalling but this stage has enough forced variety to not allow skewed matchups, Id just strike this every more often than not lol)
Battlefield

CP:
FD
Frigate
Yoshi's Island
Pictochat
Castle Siege
Delfino
Halberd

 

[Grim Tuesday]

Why PS1 rather than PS2, Browny?

 

[Browny]

I think PS2 just messes up too many core gameplay mechanics. I use sonic a lot and 3/4 transformations mess up my **** COMPLETELY. Suddenly certain unsafe attacks are completely unpunishable, approaches are messed up and you have to rethink your strategies often. Inbe4 'bawww a good player should learn and adapt' to which I ask, why, and where do you draw the line? I could make the same argument for a whole bunch of stages like PTAD and GGs.

I dont see what possible advantage there is to competition in allowing a stage like PS2 when the vast majority of matches that ever matter wont be played on there because no one is willing to pick it. Top players dont spend countless hours perfecting their style only to have all their precise tech skill etc rendered void coz of one stage. I put PS2 in the same category as 'requires you to play differently from 95% of other matches' with brinstar, norfair, RC.

 

[Grim Tuesday]

Let me just find a post by Amazing Ampharos which is relevant here.

EDIT:

As much as some people want to stick their heads in the sand and pretend it's not true, a major part of Brawl's design is that every stage is substantially different from the others. The fundamental way you approach gameplay has to be deeply informed by what stage you are on. Let's take the match-up Mr. Game & Watch vs Ice Climbers:

On Battlefield I'm going to focus on mobility between the three platforms when I have a lead as G&W. ICs basically have to run after me with uairs and Blizzards, but they have to be really careful since I can reverse direction and nail them with an aerial if they get sloppy. If ICs have a lead, they're going to just pick a side platform to sit under and uair if I get on it, making them very hard to approach.

On Smashville I'm going to be riding the moving platform around a lot. ICs are going to wait for me to pass over them and try to snipe with uair. I'm going to try to use Fire to punish sloppy uairs on shield to pop them up into position for a nair. If they get a lead, I more or less have to give up the platform play entirely which makes it extremely hard to fight them.

On Rainbow Cruise I'm going to focus on mobility and evasiveness on the ship and try to tag them with aerials if they try to chase. I may try to take a defensive position on the back of the boat and try to parry approaches. When the ship moves to the carpet section, I'm going to try to stay low and see if I can really get at them with nairs. If I can force them into real danger, I'll try to start chasing from the right to see if I can get an early fair kill which can really seal the deal for me. On the third section, I'm going to definitely focus on keeping to the right of ICs, staying on the platforms a lot, and seeing if I can snipe at them with fairs that will be hard to respond to. It's far in my interest to create trap situations when the stage is about to move downward since they have twice as many things that could go wrong as I do, and even if I don't gimp outright, I can land some good hits in the air as they come down under pressure. ICs, on the other hand, are going to try to corner me on the ship, try to just avoid combat completely on the carpets since that section is so wildly bad for them, and try to stay close to me during the third section since that's a pretty good time to cg me.

On Frigate Orpheon I'm going to stay to the right of the stage on the first form and try to "hold" the seam between the main stage and the part that moves. The vertical differences that frequently arise here make it much harder than usual for ICs to move in, and if I get in a situation that's too dangerous, I can use Fire and then drift to the left platform. On the second form, I'm going to hang in the center and try to counter approaches as best I can; it's a hard position to approach if played right. If ICs take the lead and start holding positions far from the good positions for G&W on this stage, I'm going to try to get on the ledges and fight back from those. If ICs move away from the effective attack range of ledge play, they move into areas where G&W has a lot of strong counter-play with geography on both forms.

Yeah, there are a lot of common elements, but it doesn't change that from the start to finish everything I do in the match is focused on the geography. I'm trying to create advantageous positions and avoid disadvantageous ones. I may very well be trying to run the clock and looking for ways to make hitting me hard either through stationary defense or by mobility based running. Geography dictates what positions are advantageous and disadvantageous, and it also dictates what the options are to hold defenses or approach a defense. The natural design of stages in Brawl only serves to make this more prevalent as only three of them are non-interactive (all three of which are geographically strongly different from each other) and many stages have completely unique elements to them relative to all the other stages (stuff like Distant Planet's rain effect that just has no analogue on any other stage).The amount of competitive depth this adds to Brawl is insane. Brawl already had 666 character-character match-ups. Using a different stage in many ways makes it a new match-up so if you were to include all 42 stages uniquely you would be looking at a game with 27972 match-ups. If more people looked at banning a stage as banning 666 match-ups, maybe things would be looked at differently... No one would argue stuff like how X stage changes the game too much; that's just not a reasonable position. Changes it from what exactly? You can't find me two stages that are the same or even really all that similar in the first place so a stage being an "outlier" should hardly bother us.

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

wait what

Thats not entirely clear what you mean when referring me BPC... also I dont know why I got a mention lol, I rarely post here and never made my position on stages clear to anyone >_>

For the record though the only stage I think should ever be a starter is smashville... I consider FD/Yoshis/Battlefield to be just as polarizing towards certain playstles as the likes of brinstar in certain matchups (like marth vs ddd on yoshis is just as polarised as wario vs anyone on brinstar). I dont see ANYWHERE NEAR a large enough distinction between these so called 'neutrals' and counterpicks since you cant just ignore the fact that the stage is only 1/3 of the issue, the other 2 characters make up the rest.

Why is SV balanced? Would you call SV balanced, even in a matchup where it's one of the best stages for a certain character, and one of the worst for the other (ICs-G&W, for example)? What makes it so balanced as a stage?

Now, get this. We know that some stages favor certain playstyles. But so does smashville. Hell, the fact that MK can scrooge most of the cast on it means it's even an amazing starter for him. To exempt SV from that due to any preconceived notion of balance is simply faulty. There is no default/balanced/median stage. We've been over this-smashville isn't bad (Brinstar, for example, is bad; same with FD), but placing it as the only starter is still inflating people who like it there. So how do we solve the problem? We make the starter list as large as the stagelist is. And all of a sudden, the most fair stage for the matchup is picked automatically. Sure, Marth-DDD may be seriously polarized on YI. But guess what-you can strike it. Same with MK-ICs on Brinstar or on FD. In fact, if you can't strike all the polarizing stages, then it's safe to say that the matchup really sucks for you (to be clear: you gain a serious disadvantage on over half of the legal stages!) or the stagelist is ridiculously unbalanced (for example, when the whole stagelist is RC/Brinstar/Norfair/Frigate/Delfino, it's obviously going to spit out busted counterpicks all the time because the list itself is broken).

If SV really is the most balanced stage in most matchups, then guess what-it's going to come out on its own with this procedure!

That said however I dont have a problem with a wide range of CP stages since characters who are not great on all stages should most definitely be allowed to have this weakness exploited. I draw the line however on stages where certain characters have near unbeatable matchups on no matter who they are against, as such RC and brinstar I'd like to see gone.

Ganon has nearly unbeatable matchups almost everywhere (short of, like, Brinstar and Norfair). This reasoning is ridiculous, because you're unfairly giving certain characters senseless and unneeded nerfs! If MK-ICs is unwinnable for ICs on Brinstar, oh well-you have a stage ban. If it's also unwinnable on RC... well, the matchup may just flat-out suck for ICs then. That, or you offer more bans, a solution which is a perfect compromise and which I have described in depth, with its advantages, here. Worth a look.

FD

Love how you ban the most polar stages for the mobile chars, but leave one of the very most polar stages in. Your bias is showing.

Trust me, this is all stuff we've been over already.

 

[#HBC | Red Ryu]

I already made a thread about characters on FD, can you make one for Cruise that would show it to be as polar or better better?

 

[Ghostbone]

I think PS2 just messes up too many core gameplay mechanics. I use sonic a lot and 3/4 transformations mess up my **** COMPLETELY. Suddenly certain unsafe attacks are completely unpunishable, approaches are messed up and you have to rethink your strategies often. Inbe4 'bawww a good player should learn and adapt' to which I ask, why, and where do you draw the line? I could make the same argument for a whole bunch of stages like PTAD and GGs.

I dont see what possible advantage there is to competition in allowing a stage like PS2 when the vast majority of matches that ever matter wont be played on there because no one is willing to pick it. Top players dont spend countless hours perfecting their style only to have all their precise tech skill etc rendered void coz of one stage. I put PS2 in the same category as 'requires you to play differently from 95% of other matches' with brinstar, norfair, RC.

Well that's your fault for not learning how to play on them, it's really not hard to learn to play on them, just because you can't be bothered to learn the stage doesn't mean it should be banned.

We don't draw the line anywhere? (Mario Bros. maybe?) PTAD and GGs shouldn't be banned because people don't know how to play on them.
Otherwise I want a bunch of characters banned because I don't know how to play against them. If those stages are banned it should be for other reasons (like polarized matchups, or randomness, though with Picto legal GG should always be legal)

I don't see what possible advantage there is to competition in allowing a character like Ganon when the vast majority of matches that ever matter won't be played with him because no one is willing to pick him.

Just because something is rarely picked doesn't mean it should be banned...that's terrible logic.

Brawl really doesn't require you to have much tech skill, so that point is void, and the player should be expected to know how to play on the stage, since it is a part of brawl.
Again if you want to ban the stage because you don't want to learn to play on it then I want a bunch of characters banned so I don't have to learn to play against them.

None of those stages require you to play 95% differently from other stages, they still test the same skills as other stages.
And that's only different to what you consider the norm.
A neutral or default stage doesn't exist, so you can't compare them to anything really.

Edit: Not to mention for the majority of time you're playing on a slightly larger PS1, and I hope you're not saying that requires you to play completely differently.

 

[Browny]

gg BPC, you seem to be under the impression im trying to argue a point here, I didn't argue anything lol.

I dont care if some of the stages I think are neutral, are polarized and vice versa, thats just my list, compiled from an imaginary histogram of how many times ive said to myself '**** this ******** stage I'm never playing this matchup on this stage again'. Of course im biased ugh you COMPLETELY misenterpreted the point of my post. Whether a stage is technically a starter or not through extensive analysis, im not going to suddenly feel any different about it.

I dont care if you think my list is bad, the same way I dont care about your list. Its purely how I feel about stages. If people want to attempt to disect these stages down to the pixel, go right ahead but dont drag me into it.

as for AA's post, again, that just the way he sees it and it doesnt affect me. The only reason I posted that before was coz BPC tried to put me in a category but I never stated what my opinions on stages were.

---

Ugh same deal for ghostbone. I dont care about PS2, argue it all you want. at the end of the day I'm never going to pick it myself, I will never see a youtube or stream video of top players using it and if I ever do play it, it will be for fun or ill just pick a character who doesnt get forced to change their style completely to play on the stage. Im not going to try and convince anyone its banworthy coz I dont believe that stage will have any effect on the brawl metagame ever.

Seriously this isnt a debate about ps2 just ignore me rofl if I wanted to make an argument I'd write a 2000+ word essay like I've done for a wide variety of topics on swf.

 

[Ghostbone]

gg BPC, you seem to be under the impression im trying to argue a point here, I didn't argue anything lol.

I dont care if some of the stages I think are neutral, are polarized and vice versa, thats just my list, compiled from an imaginary histogram of how many times ive said to myself '**** this ******** stage I'm never playing this matchup on this stage again'. Of course im biased ugh you COMPLETELY misenterpreted the point of my post.

I dont care if you think my list is bad, the same way I dont care about your list. Its purely how I feel about stages. If people want to attempt to disect these stages down to the pixel, go right ahead but dont drag me into it.

as for AA's post, again, that just the way he sees it and it doesnt affect me. The only reason I posted that before was coz BPC tried to put me in a category but I never stated what my opinions on stages were.

---

Ugh same deal for ghostbone. I dont care about PS2, argue it all you want. at the end of the day I'm never going to pick it myself, I will never see a youtube or stream video of top players using it and if I ever do play it, it will be for fun or ill just pick a character who doesnt get forced to change their style completely to play on the stage. Im not going to try and convince anyone its banworthy coz I dont believe that stage will have any effect on the brawl metagame ever.

So why make a post in the first place?
If you don't care about stages why even go into the stage forums?

Also you're admitting that you're purposely creating a stage list that is less competitive than one with stages like PS2 legal.

You realize when creating a stagelist we should try to remove as much bias as possible right?

 

[Grim Tuesday]

Erm, GB, I think he was just using a very elaborate way of saying to BPC "I don't care", because BPC listed him before among the people who support liberal or something like that.

 

[#HBC | Red Ryu]

Conservative actually.

 

[Grim Tuesday]

tomAto, tomato. I couldn't care less.

 

[Browny]

Yeah, I only posted here coz BPC singled me out in his post lol.

Please understand the difference between trying to create an argument for a fair, unbiased, balanced stage list and what I posted, my opinion of stages which are neutral/non-neutral lol.

God its not different to me posting my opinion of the tier list in the tier thread once every few months rofl.

 

[Ghostbone]

Yeah, I only posted here coz BPC singled me out in his post lol.

Please understand the difference between trying to create an argument for a fair, unbiased, balanced stage list and what I posted, my opinion of stages which are neutral/non-neutral lol.

God its not different to me posting my opinion of the tier list in the tier thread once every few months rofl.

Well generally here we like to have reasoning for our opinions...but whatever :/

 

[#HBC | Red Ryu]

My personal stagelist would only be stages I like to play on, Rumble falls and Temple would be legal lol.

My objective on is what I stated earlier.

 

[Ghostbone]

So Red Ryu did you want someone to make a thread on how different characters do on RC?
I'd be willing to do that I guess if someone else doesn't want to.

 

[#HBC | Red Ryu]

Go for it.

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

gg BPC, you seem to be under the impression im trying to argue a point here, I didn't argue anything lol.

I dont care if some of the stages I think are neutral, are polarized and vice versa, thats just my list, compiled from an imaginary histogram of how many times ive said to myself '**** this ******** stage I'm never playing this matchup on this stage again'. Of course im biased ugh you COMPLETELY misenterpreted the point of my post. Whether a stage is technically a starter or not through extensive analysis, im not going to suddenly feel any different about it.

I dont care if you think my list is bad, the same way I dont care about your list. Its purely how I feel about stages. If people want to attempt to disect these stages down to the pixel, go right ahead but dont drag me into it.

as for AA's post, again, that just the way he sees it and it doesnt affect me. The only reason I posted that before was coz BPC tried to put me in a category but I never stated what my opinions on stages were.

---

Ugh same deal for ghostbone. I dont care about PS2, argue it all you want. at the end of the day I'm never going to pick it myself, I will never see a youtube or stream video of top players using it and if I ever do play it, it will be for fun or ill just pick a character who doesnt get forced to change their style completely to play on the stage. Im not going to try and convince anyone its banworthy coz I dont believe that stage will have any effect on the brawl metagame ever.

Seriously this isnt a debate about ps2 just ignore me rofl if I wanted to make an argument I'd write a 2000+ word essay like I've done for a wide variety of topics on swf.

...So in short, you've come in here offering the kind of opinional rhetoric that we get all the time, and when we present you with reasons that your "opinion" is objectively less competitive than what we've built up and logically senseless for competitive brawl, you choose not to revise it, and instead hide behind "it's just an opinion"? Furthermore, you place this opinion as if it was a fact?

"Opinions" as to what is right regarding stages (for the most part; in some cases there is a gray area, but these cases are few and far between) are like opinions regarding evolution or the heliocentric solar system-unnecessary nonsense that does not help us further.

 

[Browny]

Why the hell do you care lol and how many times to I have to tell you im not here to argue anything. If you tear apart my post which was NOT an argument to the point everything I said is wrong, I'm still going to like playing on SV and hate brinstar. If your stagelist is the most perfectly balanced and unbiased list in the history of the world, I'm still going to think YI:B is not-neutral and that RC is not a good tournament stage.

WHY DO YOU CARE.

Go and search general brawl forums, I'm sure someone there once said they like spear pillar, waste your time arguing with them about why they are wrong.

 

[DMG]

Actually, I left this thread because my other 1200+ subscriptions kept this pushed down.

I would somewhat reject the label of conservative. I don't specifically advocate a large or narrow stage list: I believe in having stages legal until they pass the point of being unfit for competitive play like most of you here. The areas I have disagreements with others in, are:

1. What defines being acceptable for competitive play?

and

2. Individual Stage "ratings" on how "strong" of a CP it is.


Concerning stages for example, take a stage like Luigi's Mansion. Regardless of what criteria anyone lays out, I probably see the stage in a different light than another person. I personally see a few problems it has for competitive play. Maybe you agree with me, maybe you don't see them or you disagree. Now, let's say you agree in the general sense "Ok circle camping, yes that is a negative aspect." But here you might not even agree to the extent that it is an issue. I might see it as a huge problem, you might see it as something that prevents the stage from being labeled a starter, but not an issue that puts it over the ban worthy line. Already, something like that will noticeably impact on how we individually label stages.


That's the major thing between people. When I look at Rumble Falls, Big Blue, Mansion, Distant Planet, Skyworld, Hanenbow, etc and they look completely unfit for competitive play, and another person spins around and says "Are you crazy, these stages are fine! You're overplaying the qualities of the stage", I think realistically it be impossible to reconcile opinions in situations like that. (I didn't outline those stages as the "generic" view of people wanting more stages legal. I mentioned them because they are all stages I would comfortably say No to, while also knowing there are at least a few people out there advocating Yes for them.)

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

Why the hell do you care lol and how many times to I have to tell you im not here to argue anything. If you tear apart my post which was NOT an argument to the point everything I said is wrong, I'm still going to like playing on SV and hate brinstar. If your stagelist is the most perfectly balanced and unbiased list in the history of the world, I'm still going to think YI:B is not-neutral and that RC is not a good tournament stage.

WHY DO YOU CARE.

Go and search general brawl forums, I'm sure someone there once said they like spear pillar, waste your time arguing with them about why they are wrong.

Why are you willing to remain wrong?