Official Stage Legality Discussion: Stage Specific

[Akaku94]

^and then go through the stages and don't ban until PROVEN broken!

 

[Grim Tuesday]

I'd be happy with that.

 

[Life]

Assume everything unbanned. Immediately ban the stuff with which competition is obviously impossible (ie. circle camping stages, WarioWare, most items). Then ban stuff as overpowered strategies appear (but not without a couple months to see if a counterstrategy appears).

It's a bit late to do this with Brawl, but this should be the course in the future.

 

[KirbyandSonicrock14]

Sigh...at least I got Mute City as a CP for Kirby.

 

[ぱみゅ]

@InCom: I'd only point out Circle Camping as "stuff with which competition is obviously impossible". Everything else might as well be debatable.
Just sayin'

 

[Life]

I considered that, but some items are obviously bad (Bob-ombs). I have a much higher standard for what constitutes "obviously" than some people, I guess.

 

[Ghostbone]

Who's to say circle camping will be possible in the next smash...

 

[Grim Tuesday]

If item spawning worked like it did in Melee, but you could turn off containers like you could in Brawl, I think that items would be legit.

 

[Destiny Warrior]

I have been thinking of a ruleset involving all stages, but it's purely ideological so please don't shoot me with "too long to be tournament viable". I have an accompanying example.

Please assume Mushroomy Kingdom is 1 stage, and in the case that Mushroomy Kingdom is picked for a battle, the person with lower controller port priority(as in person whose controller port number is greater) gets to pick.

1. RPS to decide controller ports. The loser gets to ban first(hence known as P1).
2. P1 bans 10 stages.
3. The other player(P2) bans 15 stages.
4. P1 bans 5 stages.

This ends the banning portion, with 11 stages left.

5. P2 strikes 3 stages
6. P1 strikes 4 stages
6. P2 strikes 2 stages
7. P1 strikes 1 stage

This leaves us with the final stage, which is used for the game.

Now a bunch of text may be boring to you, so below I'll be covering an example.

1.P1 mains DeDeDe, while P2 mains Snake. Neither player has any pocket character.

Remaining stages: Battlefield, Final Destination, Delfino Plaza, Luigi's Mansion, Mushroomy Kingdom, Mario Circuit, Rumble Falls, Bridge of Eldin, Pirate Ship, Norfair, Frigate Orpheon, Yoshi's Island(Brawl), Halberd, Lylat Cruise, Pokemon Stadium 2, Spear Pillar, Port Town Aero Dive, Castle Siege, WarioWare, Distant Planet, Smashville, New Pork City, Summit, Skyworld, 75m, Mario Bros., Flat Zone 2, Pictochat, Hanenbow, Shadow Moses Island, Green Hill Zone, Temple, Yoshi's Island(Melee), Jungle Japes, Onett, Corneria, Rainbow Cruise, Green Greens, Big Blue, Brinstar, Pokemon Stadium

2. P1(D3) gets to ban first. He bans Rumble Falls, Norfair, Spear Pillar, WarioWare, New Pork City, 75m, Mario Bros., Temple, Jungle Japes, Rainbow Cruise.

Remaining stages: Battlefield, Final Destination, Delfino Plaza, Luigi's Mansion, Mushroomy Kingdom, Mario Circuit, Bridge of Eldin, Pirate Ship, Frigate Orpheon, Yoshi's Island(Brawl), Halberd, Lylat Cruise, Pokemon Stadium 2, Port Town Aero Dive, Castle Siege, Distant Planet, Smashville, Summit, Skyworld, Flat Zone 2, Pictochat, Hanenbow, Shadow Moses Island, Green Hill Zone, Yoshi's Island(Melee), Onett, Corneria, Green Greens, Big Blue, Brinstar, Pokemon Stadium

3. P2(Snake) then bans: Final Destination, Delfino Plaza, Mushroomy Kingdom, Mario CIrcuit, Bridge of Eldin, Pokemon Stadium 2, Port Town Aero Dive, Castle Siege, Distant Planet, Flat Zone 2, Shadow Moses Island, Green Hill Zone, Yoshi's Island(Melee), Onett, and Pokemon Stadium.

Remaining stages: Battlefield, Luigi's Mansion, Pirate Ship, Frigate Orpheon, Yoshi's Island(Brawl), Halberd, Lylat Cruise, Smashville, Summit, Skyworld, Pictochat, Hanenbow, Corneria, Green Greens, Big Blue, Brinstar

4. P1(D3) proceeds to ban Lylat Cruise, Summit, Skyworld, Hanenbow and Big Blue.

Remaining stages: Battlefield, Luigi's Mansion, Pirate Ship, Frigate Orpheon, Yoshi's Island(Brawl), Halberd, Smashville, Pictochat, Corneria, Green Greens, Brinstar

And the banning ends there. We move onto the stage striking for game 1.

5. P2(Snake) strikes Pictochat, Corneria and Green Greens.

Remaining stages: Battlefield, Luigi's Mansion, Pirate Ship, Frigate Orpheon, Yoshi's Island(Brawl), Halberd, Smashville, Brinstar

6. P1(D3) then strikes Battlefield, Luigi's Mansion, Frigate Orpheon, and Brinstar.

Remaining stages: Pirate Ship, Yoshi's Island(Brawl), Halberd, Smashville

7. P2(Snake) then strikes Halberd and Pirate Ship.

Remaining stages: Yoshi's Island(Brawl), Smashville

8. P1(D3) then strikes Yoshi's Island(Brawl).

So the first game is played on Smashville.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The problem with it(as anybody can see) is that it is relatively time consuming, but ideologically, I think it's a nice idea. It pretty much implements the "Gentleman's Agreement" into its whole system, because if both players are interested in playing on, say, Rumble Falls, they can proceed to ban/strike every other stage.

The CP system works normally, with players able to CP one of hte 10 stages that were struck. I'm not sure if DSR should be in place or not, considering there are 11 stages.

Oh, and just to cover for the large stages 75m, Hanenbow, New Pork City and Temple which have large camping issues, Smash Balls are turned on on these stages(with rarity Medium). If you're interested in knowing why I say so, read http://www.smashboards.com/showthread.php?t=312283 .

 

[Grim Tuesday]

Hate to tell you this chief, but InCom came up with the same thing ageeeeees ago.

 

[Destiny Warrior]

Hate to tell you this chief, but InCom came up with the same thing ageeeeees ago.

I had a vague feeling this was going to happen <_<

But I'm sure the part about Final Smashes is new....

 

[Grim Tuesday]

The part about the final smashes is new.

Characters like Sonic could hypothetically camp until the smash ball comes and then get to it first 99% of the time. If they don't get to it first, chances are they can avoid the final smash.

 

[Ghostbone]

You should count Mushroomy Kingdom 1-1 and 1-2 as different stages for a system like that, to make the number odd again, just ban Wario Ware.

 

[DMG]

Im gonna save people time on this.

Legalizing Smash Balls as a counter balance to Hyrule and similar banned stages is an incredibly bad idea because it doesn't address the stage problems. Hyrule is still a ****ty stage, even IF you get Mario's Final Smash or DK's thunderous Bongo jams.

Legalizing any item frankly would not stop it. Not even food/invincible.

As far as striking from the entire stage list, that is a garbage idea because legalizing broken stages in any manner is not a competitively good idea. Allowing Hyrule, while giving an extra stage ban, doesn't change the fundamental underlying fact that Hyrule is a competitive sinkhole and should NOT be legal. If a stage is fundamentally broken, there is no need to legalize it. Period. No what's, if's, or but's. Striking from the whole stage list therefore is a bad idea, regardless of your intentions.

 

[Grim Tuesday]

Striking from the entire stage list prevents any possible mistakes when it comes to legality.

Sure, Temple is obviously broken, but when you have borderline stages like Onett flossing is a really effective method of stage selection.

 

[Akaku94]

^Thank you!

I'm still not sure why "starter lists" are the norm in the first place. The alleged time saved is negligible at best, and it guarantees the most fair stage for the matchup in every case!

 

[DMG]

No it's not at all lol.

1. Is Hyrule broken? Yes

2. Should it be selected as a stage under any circumstances BESIDES both players explicitly agreeing to play on it? no



IF you want to strike from a "whole" list, weed out the banned stages and strike from CP and starters only. There's no point in striking from banned stages because banned stages are broken and there is NO justification for allowing them. Period. You can make whatever argument for "borderline" stuff, but for 100% broken stages there is no valid argument or reason for having them allowed ever besides both players explicitly wanting it.

 

[Grim Tuesday]

You're nitpicking, DMG.

The majority of stages are borderline, the stages that are broken in every single match-up are in the vast minority.

 

[DMG]

What happens when you have a MU that it IS broken? Are you REALLY gonna tell the samus player to eat a **** because she sucks balls on Skyworld? Are you really prepared to go down that route?

If a stage is broken or uncompetitive enough to the point that is banned, how is that not the end of discussion? There is no "well Onett might be ok if the characters aren't that gay". What happens if two charcters that clearly break Onett, now have it legal?


Take banned stages completely out of the loop. Don't be ******** and say "well it might be acceptable in certain MU's" because our goal isn't to try and justify something that is broken with "well if you don't abuse it like this, it's fine". That's basically what it would amount to. And it's not good for stage legality.

 

[Grim Tuesday]

Um... what?

Lets assume that Stage X is broken in matchup Y, but legitimate in matchup Z.

With Full Stage List Striking, Stage X would be banned in the event of matchup Y by the player with the disadvantage but would not be banned in matchup Z.

 

[Life]

Some stages break every MU though, e.g. Temple. Should be banned under any circumstance.

 

[Destiny Warrior]

I think 15 bans for each person easily covers for any broken stages, while also leaving that option open if players want to try it out. If you're a slow character, youc an easily remove the overlarge stages that put you at a crippling disadvantage, and retain a good number of bans. Flossing is just a way to have everything available for use should 2 players want it(like say a Sonic ditto on Hanenbow), while also ensuring you don't get ridiculous stuff like D3 vs MK on 75m. It gives you the option of every stage, but you're only not going to ban a stage if you can use it to your advantage/it doesn't **** you. With 15 bans for each player, I think they can deal with any issues that crop up for their chars, while also having fun if they want to.

 

[Grim Tuesday]

^intelligent words

It also has the advantage of not favouring characters arbitrarily. Characters who are bad on stages are punished for it because they have to use up more of their stage bans just to survive, where as characters who are good on multiple stages are rewarded.

Contrast to the current ruleset where Ice Climbers have all of their best stages as starters and all of their bad stages are either banned or counterpicks.

 

[DMG]

At the same time, it's not our job or our goal to allow "You can pick from any stage, even stages deemed competitively broken if abused in this/these manners". We are not here to try and find suitable MU's on bad stages so that we can find some niche where maybe they can be played without being broken. If Peach vs Sonic isn't that bad on Skyworld, that's not justification for legalizing it and saying "if you have a problem ban it".

 

[Grim Tuesday]

...Because...?

 

[DMG]

Because there is nothing to gain competitively from Skyworld being legal on the offchance that a non broken MU will occur on it. And even if there was, the only possible way you COULD gain something from that scenario is if you know beforehand that specific MU would be played. If Sonic vs Peach is fine on Skyworld but sucks for everyone else, the only way having skyworld legal is beneficial is if it's only legal when the MU is Sonic vs Peach.

If you want to make a MU chart for every stage and have it's legality based off that, be my guest. Looooooo

 

[Ghostbone]

Because there is nothing to gain competitively from Skyworld being legal on the offchance that a non broken MU will occur on it. And even if there was, the only possible way you COULD gain something from that scenario is if you know beforehand that specific MU would be played. If Sonic vs Peach is fine on Skyworld but sucks for everyone else, the only way having skyworld legal is beneficial is if it's only legal when the MU is Sonic vs Peach.

If you want to make a MU chart for every stage and have it's legality based off that, be my guest. Looooooo

Well the point of FLSSing is that players strike all the stages that give a massive advantage to the opponent so they end up on the most even stage in the end.

 

[DMG]

But that's not even close to guaranteed.

If the most even stage in the game is YI, and my opponent strikes that but now skyworld is open, I'm not happy lol. Adding banned stages to the list would shift FURTHER away from "even" or "fair".

A better system would be striking from starters and CP's. Not banned. Ever. Like really that system would certainly be plausible if you'd be willing to drop the whole banned stage thing. Banned stages are not good for competitive play. End of discussion, drop it, there's no/not enough merit to them for allowing them, even under specific circumstances.

 

[Ghostbone]

But that's not even close to guaranteed.

If the most even stage in the game is YI, and my opponent strikes that but now skyworld is open, I'm not happy lol. Adding banned stages to the list would shift FURTHER away from "even" or "fair".

A better system would be striking from starters and CP's. Not banned. Ever. Like really that system would certainly be plausible if you'd be willing to drop the whole banned stage thing. Banned stages are not good for competitive play. End of discussion, drop it, there's no/not enough merit to them for allowing them, even under specific circumstances.

I'm not the one arguing for FLSSing, but technically if neither of you felt the need to strike Skyworld over any other stages it's even.

 

[Grim Tuesday]

What Ghost said.

If Skyworld wasn't striked at all by either player, it means that neither of you believed that you needed to strike it.

 

[Destiny Warrior]

What Ghost said.

If Skyworld wasn't striked at all by either player, it means that neither of you believed that you needed to strike it.

This is the whole point behind flossing. If you can't care enough to ban 75m when you main D3, you suffer for it. If you don't care enough to ban Green Hill Zone when you main Donkey Kong, you suffer for it. If you're smart enough to ban as many walkoff stages as possible against a D3, and avoid banning stuff like Rumble Falls and 75m, you're taking advantage of your knowledge of the stages.

IMO flossing also involves risk management, because if you want to skip banning Temple to try and get your opponent to ban it for you, it can backfire when he pulls out a pocket Fox, but if he was a Bowser main only, you've successfuly forced his hand to ban a stage.

Much as I hate to make statements about "how the game was meant to be played" etc., I think flossing comes closest to prevent "metagaming", as in characters that prosper *because of the stageset* and not necessarily because of having a good *skillset*. It's just an alternative setup to allow all stages to play a role(and in flossing, bans are very generously provided, if you can't get all the stuff your character is rocked hard by in 15 bans, I don't think your character is that good enough to "deserve" anything), while not necessarily always leading to runaway fests.

 

[Akaku94]

I'm strongly in favor of Legal Flossing with at least 19 legal stages, only banning the outright broken/over-centralizing stages (so Hyrule is gone; distant planet, not so much). This is because if I'm a character that abuses several broken stages (like Sonic) then my opponent has to ban them, and then I get much more influence on which stage we play on. Within legal stages, flossing is perfect, but when you throw in broken stages, the system will over-centralize toward characters that can abuse the most banned stages (Stages that aren't fit for competitive play in the first place).

 

[DMG]

I'm not the one arguing for FLSSing, but technically if neither of you felt the need to strike Skyworld over any other stages it's even.

Basically this is what would happen:

Banned stages allowed and my character sucks on them: I have to waste my bans on them (or suffer the wrath of Temple because you were so ****ing ******** to make it legal) while my opponent gets to shift through all the starters and CP's to pick whatever one he likes best. Even if I have a few "more" stage bans after I'm done banning banned stages, my influence on where the game will start is heavily diminished and wasted on stages that SHOULDN'T have been legal in the first place. If I DON'T ban Skyworld to try and gain more influence over where to go out of reasonable stages, my opponent can leave it open and beat the **** out of me.

You can make the argument "well your character sucks on stages then, boo hoo" but BANNED stages? Really? Broken pieces of **** and you want to judge people on them? That's ********.

What Ghost said.

If Skyworld wasn't striked at all by either player, it means that neither of you believed that you needed to strike it.

Or I had to waste my bans on other stuff. If I have to ban nearly every additional banned stage, and have little room left for starters and CP's, who REALLY gets influence over where the match goes? Me or my opponent? I don't think making 1 person strike Skyworld and Temple while the other one gets to sit on his *** and worry about whether "BF or SV" is more concerning is what you want.

I'm strongly in favor of Legal Flossing with at least 19 legal stages, only banning the outright broken/over-centralizing stages (so Hyrule is gone; distant planet, not so much). This is because if I'm a character that abuses several broken stages (like Sonic) then my opponent has to ban them, and then I get much more influence on which stage we play on. Within legal stages, flossing is perfect, but when you throw in broken stages, the system will over-centralize toward characters that can abuse the most banned stages (Stages that aren't fit for competitive play in the first place).

Exactly. I would not mind seeing this system in place IF the stage list is starters and CP's. I do not want to see banned stages legal on any kind of list or system ever. Period. I don't know how much stronger I can put it besides "IT'S A REALLY BAD IDEA GUYS". If you're striking from RC Brinstar Frigate Delfino SV BF etc instead of 75M Temple Moses Bridge of Elden etc that's 500% better.

 

[Destiny Warrior]

I don't mind flossing from neutrals and counterpicks either(then again, I don't mind anything because I don't have to follow any ruleset lol).

Like in my original post about this, complete flossing is an ideal I like, but I'm not inflexible.

I feel borderline stages like Onett and PTAD should be allowed in the "floss", but that's a different story for a different day.

 

[Tesh]

I support full LEGAL stage striking. Imo if the stage is legal at all, we are saying "ok this stage is a legit place to compete". Finding neutral fighting ground for 2 players, 2 styles, 2 characters should be up to those players. Striking and banning the right stages to minimize your risk and maximize your rewards is a skill too.

There are some stages I wouldn't expect anyone to ever strike to in any matchup tho. FD and RC I think.

 

[Ghostbone]

There are some stages I wouldn't expect anyone to ever strike to in any matchup tho. FD and RC I think.

I could see FD and RC being struck to in certain match-ups.

 

[Life]

Matchups in which both characters like said stage and therefore it's almost certainly okay for the matchup.

 

[#HBC | Red Ryu]

I've had second thoughts and can see full stages striking working, but I wouldn't wanna add the full stage list for it. :/

 

[Life]

Wonder whatever happened to the ruleset I proposed.

One-stock, food on medium, 21-23 starters (wasn't sure whether to add Picto/Mario Circuit--food makes walkoff camping unproblematic btw, so Circuit's viable in OSF), no counterpicks... I'm sure I left it around the social thread somewhere...

 

[zmx]

So why exactly are stages like RC legal? Can someone explain the rationale behind making such polarizing stages legal? You see it happen all the time. Players that got bodied game 1somehow end up winning games they shouldn't Game 2 because of such stages. I suppose it makes sets more intense but I'm not sure if it is fair.

And it is interesting to note that regions like Japan apparently don't have such stages legal.