Official Stage Legality Discussion

[Morrigan]

cannonball hits have set knockback, so they can't KO.

Wait what? I'm pretty sure I've died from cannonballs more than once.

 

[fkacyan]

Honestly...?

Anyways, to anyone willing to have an actual discussion:

Is water camping an over powered strategy?

I'm starting to think it's on par with circling....

As fair as I consider Pirate Ship is, it would be much better to ban the stage then trying to ban the technique - if the technique is even that broken to begin with.

Yeah, pretty much. Stupidity is easier than logic when faced with armed stupidity.

 

[Nidtendofreak]

Nah, it's not OP'd. Some characters have trouble with it, yes, but anyone with half decent disjointed aerials and timing can beat it.....particularly the timing as I found out thanks to that Falco. >_< He's suppose to suck on Pirate Ship dang it!

And the stage does break it up on it's own to certain extents. As far as I can tell, it's on the same level as planking except with more risk and only 2 stages where it's usable (and only about 4/5 of the time at best on one stage, about 1/4 of the time at best on the other). Annoying as heck? Yes. Very boring to watch/use? Yes. Some characters have a very hard time countering it? Yes. Dangerous to the user as unlike planking there aren't any invincibility frames unless your Up B has them built in? Yes. Are you able to do it the whole match? No. It's not possible. You are forced onto land through-out the match.

EDIT: Dekuu: Those were apparently glancing blows, not the full hit. Like I said, I haven't tested it myself.

Thio: Get off you're false high-horse. This is a DEBATE. Counter it, otherwise I am simply correct on all points I have brought up. No, saying "lulz u r stupid" doesn't count. Say something intelligent, or frankly: get out of here.

 

[bobson]

Why should anyone put up with a stage with hazards when there's a stage much like it without said hazards?

I like hazards. They often give me an advantage because I'm used to playing with them and others aren't.

 

[AvaricePanda]

Yes, it is much better to ban the stage than trying to ban the technique. No, it's probably not on par with circling, but the statement, "You can beat it with right spacing," is so incredibly vague...lol.

As of now, it's probably not broken but still makes the stage banworthy, as people without projectiles that can actually reach the water-camping, people who can't fly, and people with bad aerials can't do much about it. It basically says, "G&W vs. Falco? Get *****, Falco."

Then again, more experimentation and stuff would probably be needed to make completely certain the extent it can do. However, it's still such a commanding situation to the point where the stage can be banworthy.

@Bobson, I worded that wrong. I meant in a competitive environment at a tournament. Outside influences in the stage shouldn't determine who wins a match or even make someone lose a stock. Hazards like WarioWare's are just arbitrary, some have a huge risk-low reward...

 

[JigglyZelda003]

are we going to discuss distant planet again? its still innocent i believe.

 

[bobson]

@Bobson, I worded that wrong. I meant in a competitive environment at a tournament. Outside influences in the stage shouldn't determine who wins a match or even make someone lose a stock.

Why?
Because that's how all the other fighting games do it? Why shouldn't the stage affect the match?

 

[deepseadiva]

Yeah, pretty much. Stupidity is easier than logic when faced with armed stupidity.

Then why are you even in this thread...?

Like every other questionable stage, I'm going to ask the same question. What does Pirate Ship has that other stages don't have? What new things does it bring? The only thing I can think of is the water, which, as you can tell with water-camping, isn't necessarily a good change. So really, why would this stage be necessary?

Really, this isn't a good question to ask when determining stage legality.

"What does this stage offer that others don't?"

Really, every stage brings something someone can use. The slanted ground, the several layers, the catapult, the low gravity sections, even personal preference - Pirate Ship has tons of stuff someone might find advantageous. What a stage offers is subjective, and because of that, you couldn't get a definite answer from simply asking "What does this stage bring to the table?"

 

[buenob]

"What does this stage offer that others don't?"

it's an excellent question to ask... if the only things it brings to the table are strong hazards, or a permanent wall, or a walk-off-ledge etc. should it really be considered??

yeah, each stage has something unique, but there's a point where you really have to say "will the competitive environment really be better if we include this?"

on the note of pirate ship, I played Linkshot's TINK on pirate ship, and I 3stocked him lolz... this is after he beat _everyone_ in the city... why is this? because I play rob and can gimp his water-camping pretty easily...

what does this mean? water camping is advantageous against certain characters, and not others... ie it's a valid conterpick...

after I beat him, everyone else just kept trying and eventually everyone could overcome the water-camping... all that was needed was a bit of real practice against the strat

imo. - after testing the level for like 4 hours with a fairly strong group of people - water camping is not a broken strategy, and should not be the reason for banning any level

 

[Amazing Ampharos]

Other fighting game communities have a very strong aversion to banning anything; I don't know where the myth that banning a bunch of stages would make Smash Bros more in line with them came from. If we want to mimic them, banning only the stages that are overwhelmingly obviously broken should be our policy.

Calling PictoChat a Final Destination with hazards is not fair to it. PictoChat has a few hazards that are really extremely minor to the stage overall. It also has a plethora of drawings that enhance its fairness by making character advantages non-static; I think it would be a worse stage if it didn't draw. It's very rarely picked around here where it's pretty much always legal, but that's simply because the stage is too ridiculously fair. When it does get picked, it never causes any problems other than making the person who picked it frustrated at having wasted a counterpick.

I wish you'd recorded your matches on Luigi's Mansion; it would make it possible for other people to draw something from your recent experiences there. For my experiences, I just didn't find Meta Knight spamming Mach Tornado there particularly deadly, but of course I was using Mr. Game & Watch and not Diddy Kong. Then again, my counter tactic at its core was the really simple "just shield Mach Tornado" so it seems like it should be universal enough...

As per Jigglypuff on Norfair, I'm really just plain doubtful that she's even the best character in the game on that stage. Her having something to abuse doesn't really seem worrysome. I should point out a lot of the objection to this stage comes from the "planking is broken" crowd. If they can't handle two ledges, obviously they can't handle six, but it's not the fault of the ledges. I think people learning how to actually deal with planking will also teach them how to play successfully on Norfair; it's really a logical extension.

About the competitive environment, "better" is really subjective. You will find someone who finds merit in every stage. You will find people who find merit in almost no stages, even stages that are obviously alright. I don't think invoking the word "competition" somehow changes things; competition is just one person trying to win over another. The only real problems a stage could bring in terms of "competition" would be making results inconsistent, but that's only along the lines of something like WarioWare. It's one thing to say "X stage shouldn't be allowed because I just plain don't like how the game is with it in", but it's silly to say wide plethoras of things are "better" or "worse" as though that's anything but subjective.

 

[~Peachy~]

Pardon me,I'm just curious.... but may someone test/infer/explain/etc. how well Snake and Metaknight fare on Rumble Falls?

Spoiler

(Btw....I think people mistake Rumble for "Brumble" Because of "Bramble Blast", the song that plays on the stage...if anyone was wondering..)

I would test it out myself....but I'm not in any position to play my Wii at the moment.^__^;

Any information would be appreciated!

 

[Ryusuta]

Pardon me,I'm just curious.... but may someone test/infer/explain/etc. how well Snake and Metaknight fare on Rumble Falls?

I've been doing extensive testing with a lot of characters against different opponents both online and offline (mostly online, admittedly), and I've indeed compiled a lot of data, including potentially overpowered techniques and stage usages. I've been extremely preoccupied [spoilers]depressed and brooding[/spoilers] and my Dazzle is recording off-sync, but I'll get to posting the information and vids ASAP.

In the meantime, check out Linkshot's posts on the subject. He's got some good information (though seemingly in omission of necessary requisite details).

 

[Linkshot]

I actually haven't gotten the chance to "break the stage" yet. This Friday, I'll force Ottawa to dedicate themselves to that. (Last Friday we broke Pirate Ship, as buenob said before)

 

[Ryusuta]

There are some potential directions you can go with stage breaking. I'll do my best to share those with you all ASAP.

 

[infomon]

Wow, thanks Nidtendofreak and others for all the hard work studying the lesser-known stages!

You're welcome to see first-hand by playing me, like AvaricePanda did - Or do you think he just magically decided to completely 180 his opinion on two stages randomly?

Because a handful of WiFi matches can prove that a tactic is unbeatable

Well, actually that is legitimate in some circumstances... but when we're talking about something like water-camping whose "brokenness" relies on subtle spacing issues and frame advantages in unique situations for a multitude of matchups? I just worry you're jumping to conclusions.....

Yes, it is much better to ban the stage than trying to ban the technique. No, it's probably not on par with circling, but the statement, "You can beat it with right spacing," is so incredibly vague...lol.

Not really. If the opponent is capable of causing damage to the camper, during the camping, then it's not clear at all that it's broken. If it's possible and feasible for the camper to execute the camping "perfectly" so that there's no chance he can receive damage (ex. like circle-camping), then I'd assert it's broken. For water-camping, it is not known which scenario exists across the roster of characters.

As of now, it's probably not broken but still makes the stage banworthy, as people without projectiles that can actually reach the water-camping, people who can't fly, and people with bad aerials can't do much about it. It basically says, "G&W vs. Falco? Get *****, Falco."

If a tactic is not broken, then I don't see how it can make the stage ban-worthy.

FD with D3 vs. DK says "Get *****, DK." Unless you're into banning infinites too, in which case I'd be curious about the ban criteria you're using (so I can look for holes ).

It needs to be known which matchups water-camping is be broken on, before water-camping can be mentioned as a reason for banning the stage.

I guess I just don't like the way you use the word "ban-worthy"....... TO's shouldn't be banning stuff that isn't broken

it's an excellent question to ask... if the only things it brings to the table are strong hazards, or a permanent wall, or a walk-off-ledge etc. should it really be considered??

If having a permanent wall alone makes the stage ban-worthy, then the stage should not be considered. If a wall doesn't allow for a broken degenerate strategy, then who's to say what it does or doesn't add to the game? I have a real distaste for that argument, because each stage is radically unique. "What does FD add to the game? It's just a long Battlefield with less platforms!" The gameplay difference between FD and BF is less severe, IMO, then the gameplay would be between RC and Rumble Falls. Even little things can change the way some matchups might play on a level (like the little slope on YI:B lets my Sonic invincible-spindash). Rumble Falls adds to the game because you can fight for control of the spike! Unique, interesting, not overpowered. I could argue this for every stage property that I wouldn't consider broken.

yeah, each stage has something unique, but there's a point where you really have to say "will the competitive environment really be better if we include this?"

But how do we tackle that question, at all? Why can't I argue that the competitive environment is better off, the more different types of situations can manifest in battle; and we get this coverage by including all stages that don't have ban-worthy tactics? In which case we're using the "leave stages in until something's actually proven broken" mindset

 

[buenob]

The gameplay difference between FD and BF is less severe, IMO, then the gameplay would be between RC and Rumble Falls

I actually really don't agree with that... my play on bf and fd is very, very different, in that I choose to spam different moves and space for different options... Rumbles, imo, doesn't offer enough variation of play to really make a great comparison, but I'd put it even concerning the given comparison...

RF starts, you FIGHT for stage control of center/right, and then you FIGHT for top/mid... there's no variation, you HAVE to, because if you concede those areas you have less options than your opponent... after the 'squeeze' i mentioned before, there is a bit more available, but when the plane comes I feel that again due to the random "you can't get up through here" areas (i know they're not random but I don't know why they're there) the match is forced into a specific location again

what i mean about RC doing it better, is that there's always another option... if someone is camping on the carpets, you can challenge them OR go around them... standing near a blast-zone? stay away or approach... the only portion where you're semi-forced is at the very end where it scrolls down to complete the loop, and even then I've started using the donut blocks on the left to fall IF i'm worried about a gimp ko // taking extra damage

edit:

Other fighting game communities have a very strong aversion to banning anything; I don't know where the myth that banning a bunch of stages would make Smash Bros more in line with them came from

as someone who has played SC2, counter-strike, and Street-fighter at the competitive level, STAGES ARE HUGE!!

soul-calibur 2 had a tonne of levels, yet none were banned... mostly, all the levels struck a balance between strategies and none had specific areas which would dominate a player... sure, if you were pressured into a corner or near a ledge you had less options, but it is your fault for being there for sure...

counter-strike (got to cal-m) has a TONNE of maps that are banned... infact, the "legal" levels are minute in comparison to the rest, but even if you just take the officially released maps, there's not that many maps to play on... the tiniest of differences would mean making the cut or just being another map played exclusively on random pubs... I remember spending hours with my clan going to various spots and listening for footsteps from across a map, due to the way you can hear through walls on some of the maps you can get a good 4-5 second advanced warning... those maps didn't say in the competitive circuit for long...

and Street fighter, (to a lesser extent CvS:2 but I'm not that great at it), and pretty much most other 2d fighers (Scarlet Weather Rhapsody excluded) are designed in a way such that the levels are just eye candy, and have absolutely no effect on gameplay... Smash is extremely unique in that the levels play a very large part in how the match plays out (SWR excluded lolz) for a fighter...

to my knowledge, which I think is accurate but I absolutely could be wrong in making this generalization, any competitive game in which the level being played on effects the match in the slightest has some sort of ban in place

 

[ShadowLink84]

as someone who has played SC2, counter-strike, and Street-fighter at the competitive level, STAGES ARE HUGE!!

I am sorry SC2 and Street Fighter?
O_o

soul-calibur 2 had a tonne of levels, yet none were banned... mostly, all the levels struck a balance between strategies and none had specific areas which would dominate a player... sure, if you were pressured into a corner or near a ledge you had less options, but it is your fault for being there for sure...

The stages did not behave like smash in which they caused forceful interaction.
While you still dealt with corner **** and ring outs, it was very hard to do so considering the size of the stages, as well as the requires to win by a ringout.
Can yo say that the stages in SC2 was ont he same level of intereaction as in smash?
Especially when you take into account the mobility of the characters in smash.

and Street fighter, (to a lesser extent CvS:2 but I'm not that great at it), and pretty much most other 2d fighers (Scarlet Weather Rhapsody excluded) are designed in a way such that the levels are just eye candy, and have absolutely no effect on gameplay... Smash is extremely unique in that the levels play a very large part in how the match plays out (SWR excluded lolz) for a fighter...

I cannot fathom as to why you included this example.
Primarily because if you are arguing that stages played an important part in these respective games, then your point is moot for these examples where the background is equivalent to just a picture in the back.

There was no interaction at all so I am confused why you brought it up

to my knowledge, which I think is accurate but I absolutely could be wrong in making this generalization, any competitive game in which the level being played on effects the match in the slightest has some sort of ban in place

No they don't.
SC2 no stages were banned at all.
Same reason for why we don't ban stages like FD and BF.
The interaction between player and stage is minimal.

The criteria for a ban for those stages is, at the core the same.
The amount of interaction between player and stage.
Just because a stage SLIGHTLY interacts with a sage doesn't mean a ban will happen.

Like your example in CS where you could hear the footsteps of your opponent. That isn't slight interaction thats HUGE.

The amount of of interactions is not as important as the degree of interaction.
If you can hear your opponent running around that gives you an immense advantage because you know their position and know what hey plan to do.
While its only 1 thing its a major interaction.

 

[bobson]

Other fighting game communities have a very strong aversion to banning anything; I don't know where the myth that banning a bunch of stages would make Smash Bros more in line with them came from. If we want to mimic them, banning only the stages that are overwhelmingly obviously broken should be our policy.

It stems from the idea that because other competitive fighters simply don't have a lot of the stuff that makes Smash unique, getting rid of it would somehow make the game more competitive.

 

[Ryusuta]

The criteria for a ban for those stages is, at the core the same.
The amount of interaction between player and stage.
Just because a stage SLIGHTLY interacts with a sage doesn't mean a ban will happen.

Stage interaction isn't why stages are banned. Stages are banned for one of two reasons:

One, they create an environment in which a certain character and/or style of play simply can't be realistically beaten under any competitive circumstances.

Or two, the introduce a factor of randomness/luck that adversely affects the outcome of a match-up.

Stage interaction has (almost) nothing to do with it.

 

[buenob]

Other fighting game communities have a very strong aversion to banning anything; I don't know where the myth that banning a bunch of stages would make Smash Bros more in line with them came from

this sentence from AA I absolutely 100% disagree with, and the rest of my post was giving examples...

 

[ShadowLink84]

Stage interaction isn't why stages are banned. Stages are banned for one of two reasons:

One, they create an environment in which a certain character and/or style of play simply can't be realistically beaten under any competitive circumstances.

Or two, the introduce a factor of randomness/luck that adversely affects the outcome of a match-up.

Stage interaction has (almost) nothing to do with it.

Its the same as I was thinking earlier i am just not as clear.
Its not just interaction it was the type of it.
Look at my above post where concerning CS.
As in the type of interaction, like knowing where your opponent was, or yur character exploding randomly (happens in Halo 1)

 

[Kamikaze*]

are we going to discuss distant planet again? its still innocent i believe.

Ban it. There's a giant waterfall that comes out of the left side of the stage plummeting you to doom. Plus, someone can throw you into that fat red thingy's mouth. No it's horrible. \Perma ban it immediately.

 

[Linkshot]

Kamikaze.

That was, indeed, the most horrible and false argument ever.

The waterfall in no way at all kills you. In fact, it snaps you onto the ledge.
Nobody throws at a low enough angle to put you in the mouth of the Bulborb.

Please leave this thread as you aren't actually discussing anything. You're simply spewing out garbage in an attempt to poison us to the point we can't think rationally.

 

[deepseadiva]

You honestly have to drop your controller to ever be affected by those two "hazards."

 

[Kamikaze*]

Please leave this thread as you aren't actually discussing anything. You're simply spewing out garbage in an attempt to poison us to the point we can't think rationally.

EVER THOUGHT YOU MAY BE THINKING TOO RATIONALLY?

You guys consistently try to find methods of trying to throw appalling stages in the mix of competitive brawl because you can't win using pure combat.

Starter

FD
BF
SV

CP

Lylat
Yoshi's
PS1
Castle siege

And RC should be permabanned because you can be killed at stupidly low percents. There I said it. RC sucks.

 

[Linkshot]

Looool.

Lylat is so much worse than Delfino Plaza and even Halberd.

Lylat has those edges that Charlie Brown you.

Delfino has nothing in the stage that gimps you, and you have to be a complete fool to get chaingrabbed there.

Halberd has choreographed hazards that are avoidable by shielding.

I'm sorry. If you enjoy the concept of hitting your opponent off a field more than beating down stamina, then you have to put up with the different stage concepts.

 

[bobson]

Castle siege

Walkoff segment. Instant win for chaingrabbers; ban.

PS1

Can you say wall infinites? Drastic advantage for characters who have them. Ban.

Yoshi's

Your opponent wins purely because he gets lucky and the platform ghost saves him. Plus, the middle platform moves. Ban.

Lylat

This stage is ALWAYS MOVING. You can get gimped by the ledges just because they moved out of your range. Ban.

SV

Giant moving platform that can save your opponent just because they got lucky and it was there when they were recovering? No thank you, sir. Ban.

FD

Drastic advantage to characters who can abuse the length and pure flatness of the stage. Plus, gimpy edges. Ban.

BF

A platform game? REAL fighting games don't have platform games. Ban.


There, now we have the perfect stagelist.

 

[Linkshot]

BF: Snake sets traps and suddenly controls the entire stage. Ban.

EDIT: Smash Bros was intended to be unbalanced. Sakurai created it to be non-competitive :O BAN SAKURAI AND SMASH BROS

If you love your FD so much, ban everybody with a projectile.

 

[Nidtendofreak]

Distant Planet is perfectly fine for a CP.

But I shall add to the reasons why Yoshi Island's should banned! It's unfair to Ike, as the blast-off glitch can occur there on the left slant. Aether onstage + opponent shielding = Ike dies.

But yes, obviously by Kami's standards BF, SV, and FD simply must go. Snake's to OP'd on BF and SV, thus it's not even. And FD has the ledges, not even, must go.

 

[Kamikaze*]

If you love your FD so much, ban everybody with a projectile.

I don't have to. I can just jump over them and shield. So can any other character.

Only noobs get ***** by FD's ledges.

 

[Morrigan]

I don't have to. I can just jump over them and shield. So can any other character.

Try that against Falco lol

 

[bobson]

Only noobs get ***** by FD's ledges.

Only noobs get ***** by Distant Planet's "hazards." QED.

 

[Kamikaze*]

Try that against Falco lol

I have tried that against him and have succeeded.

 

[Kamikaze*]

And FD has the ledges, not even, must go.

*facepalm*

 

[Linkshot]

Please stop double-posting. You are honestly coming off as just a big troll.

 

[bigman40]

Why don't you people just ignore him and continue with the discussion?

 

[Kamikaze*]

This thread needs some conservative backup

 

[Linkshot]

Can you at least pose a valid argument why you would ban Delfino Plaza? I am completely offended by that decision as I find it to be one of the most balanced stages in the game.

 

[bobson]

Why don't you people just ignore him and continue with the discussion?

It's convenient to keep making a show of him because it gives the implied message of "See? This is what people who want conservative stagelists are like."

 

[Kamikaze*]

Can you at least pose a valid argument why you would ban Delfino Plaza? I am completely offended by that decision as I find it to be one of the most balanced stages in the game.

Walk off

thinking about it, I'll ban CS too.