Official Stage Legality Discussion

[Xona]

By the way, I was not trying to ban CG'ing recently, I was stating that we shouldn't ban stages because of it. I'm saying that if "Don't get grabbed" is reasonable on fd, then it's reasonable on bridge of eldin and any walk-off stage or wall-stage. I may hate bridge of eldin, but I do understand that it should be a CP, and fd shouldn't be a starter because it's on the extreme of one end of the spectrum, in addition to being Bowser's worst stage. wario ware should still be banned, but what about Big Blue and Rumble Falls?

Rumble Falls: First off, Rumble Falls is NOT Icicle Mountain. Now, let's assume it is as many are doing, is Icicle Mountain even that bad? Random stage movement, kind of true, but it has many "phases" that it can only move up 1 or down 1. In other words, it can't be going maximum speed up and then immediately maximum speed down, if it could, then it should definitely be banned. The "random movement" of Rumble Falls is not as "unfair" as Icicle Mountain's. It can only speed up and slow down, which it gives 10 seconds of warning what with the big flashing "SPEED UP" in front of the screen. Now that arguably obscures the view, but it doesn't that much. The speed up lasts about 10 seconds, it's not random except for when it starts with the warning.

Big Blue: It moves, it moves swiftly. Yes, that's true, and the Car-Placement is random, but one doesn't need to rely on it. The stage could theoretically give a win to someone who doesn't deserve it, but the stage can't give a loss to someone who doesn't deserve it in any ways but tripping, which needs to be adressed first. Big Blue's randomization is not as unfair as tripping. Back-throws onto the track could OHKO someone, but that person deserved it, they could tech, he or she could easily wait for the opening provided by the movement, he or she could use the track to do arials against the opponent, the possibilities are nearly endless. I often jump onto the track intentionally for the purpose of cutting space nearly instantly, I even dash to the left to move even faster, without SD'ing.

Now to adress the problem of tripping, I'd actually suggest an impressively large series of 1-stock games, so that tripping is less likely to happen in each game and so that a game may be repeated in the event of a game-deciding random trip (Game-deciding means that it actually set you up into an inescapable KO, Ex. you got grabbed by Ice Climbers and then infinited). That set-up is the one I will use for my banned stages tourney (I made a release of it). Or we can always hack it away, but it'd better stop there, nothing else should be hacked (except maybe debug menu to play debug stages and 1-p stages).

 

[LUVTOY77-ROGUE WIREFRAME]

Tripping, while dumb and kinda-sorta useless and random--is a part of the game you can't avoid, and no legit tourny should be using a hacked game no matter what!!! Even if it just eliminates tripping! If you trip, yea, that blows, but that's part of the game. I think we should just put up with it, seeing as it's basically unavoidable.. unless (don't run/walk, just jump every where!! Lol!!)..

 

[Vect0r]

Tripping, while dumb and kinda-sorta useless and random--is a part of the game you can't avoid, and no legit tourny should be using a hacked game no matter what!!! Even if it just eliminates tripping! If you trip, yea, that blows, but that's part of the game. I think we should just put up with it, seeing as it's basically unavoidable.. unless (don't run/walk, just jump every where!! Lol!!)..

Yeah, you're right. Brawl shouldn't be hacked for tourneys.

 

[Xona]

Tripping, while dumb and kinda-sorta useless and random--is a part of the game you can't avoid, and no legit tourny should be using a hacked game no matter what!!! Even if it just eliminates tripping! If you trip, yea, that blows, but that's part of the game. I think we should just put up with it, seeing as it's basically unavoidable.. unless (don't run/walk, just jump every where!! Lol!!)..

Hacking it isn't the only option, we can play 1-stock games and in the event of a game-deciding trip, replay that game in the set. Obviously the set of 1-stock games would have to be longer, no problem. We can just play a longer set of 1-stock games, and then reset that one game every time a game-deciding trip happens. Also, jumping everywhere does work since arials are the best offensive method of attack for many characters. Another thing to note is that if we do nothing about tripping, we should unban Big Blue, and Rumble Falls because their "randomness" is nowhere near as unfair as tripping. (We should unban them anyways, but that's not my point of this post)

 

[MorphedChaos]

I'd like to ask, Why isn't Haliberd a neutral stage? The only things to worry about are it taking off, which you'd have to be stupid to be caught in, and the Tri-Cannon, which gives plenty of warning before it does anything, otherwise its like Smashvile with a static platform, but thats my point of view.

As for tripping, Maybe make a tally of all stocks that someone lost by a trip, and redo those stocks and just those stocks, keeping a tally until someone manages to get 3 legit kills? The 1 stock thing sounds very nice though.

 

[Al_Di_Medola]

...so i dont have time to look through all 190 pages of this, but i want to know what people are saying about hanenbow?

why is it banned, not counterpick?

 

[Oracle]

By the way, I was not trying to ban CG'ing recently, I was stating that we shouldn't ban stages because of it. I'm saying that if "Don't get grabbed" is reasonable on fd, then it's reasonable on bridge of eldin and any walk-off stage or wall-stage.

.....No. A D3 CG on FD means some damage, on moses and elden it means stock loss.

I may hate bridge of eldin, but I do understand that it should be a CP, and fd shouldn't be a starter because it's on the extreme of one end of the spectrum, in addition to being Bowser's worst stage.

If I recall correctly, you hate FD because of the camping. HOW THE HELL IS A GIANT FLAT STAGE ANY BETTER? Regardless, camping is not a valid reason to ban a stage. At all. Ever. Besides, camping is pretty easy to get around, other than with a few guys (Hello, toon link and snake), but they have other weaknesses.

Rumble Falls: First off, Rumble Falls is NOT Icicle Mountain. Now, let's assume it is as many are doing, is Icicle Mountain even that bad? Random stage movement, kind of true, but it has many "phases" that it can only move up 1 or down 1. In other words, it can't be going maximum speed up and then immediately maximum speed down, if it could, then it should definitely be banned. The "random movement" of Rumble Falls is not as "unfair" as Icicle Mountain's. It can only speed up and slow down, which it gives 10 seconds of warning what with the big flashing "SPEED UP" in front of the screen. Now that arguably obscures the view, but it doesn't that much. The speed up lasts about 10 seconds, it's not random except for when it starts with the warning.

I must have brought this up a hundred times already. It's not the randomness, it's the fact that the goal is no longer to KO your opponent, it is to KO your opponent AND to follow the stage movement while avoiding various hazards.

more nub talk

We're not unbanning big blue. End of story.

The stage could theoretically give a win to someone who doesn't deserve it

Basic criteria for a ban.

Now to adress the problem of tripping, I'd actually suggest an impressively large series of 1-stock games, so that tripping is less likely to happen in each game and so that a game may be repeated in the event of a game-deciding random trip (Game-deciding means that it actually set you up into an inescapable KO, Ex. you got grabbed by Ice Climbers and then infinited). That set-up is the one I will use for my banned stages tourney (I made a release of it). Or we can always hack it away, but it'd better stop there, nothing else should be hacked (except maybe debug menu to play debug stages and 1-p stages).

First off, hacking will never be tourney standard. Stop talking about it.
Second, your 1 stock match idea kind of makes sense, but not really. It's gonna get rejected.

To the other people

...so i dont have time to look through all 190 pages of this, but i want to know what people are saying about hanenbow?

why is it banned, not counterpick?

*facepalm* The announcements have the official ruleset, check there.

 

[MysticKenji]

@Al_Di
Hanenbow is Banned in Singles for stalling issues, but is CP in doubles.

 

[Al_Di_Medola]

thank you mystickenji

 

[NinjaFoxX]

Hacking it isn't the only option, we can play 1-stock games and in the event of a game-deciding trip, replay that game in the set. Obviously the set of 1-stock games would have to be longer, no problem. We can just play a longer set of 1-stock games, and then reset that one game every time a game-deciding trip happens. Also, jumping everywhere does work since arials are the best offensive method of attack for many characters. Another thing to note is that if we do nothing about tripping, we should unban Big Blue, and Rumble Falls because their "randomness" is nowhere near as unfair as tripping. (We should unban them anyways, but that's not my point of this post)

lol it wont happen

no johns >.>

 

[Charizard92]

Weird, the legal list has been revealed and yet this thread is still alive. Cosmic isn't it? I wounder if a lightning rod will work?

 

[Oracle]

The legal list is still under some debate, according to overswarm a few pages back.

 

[x After Dawn x]

Yeah, it kind of sucks.

 

[Mic_128]

The legal list is still under some debate, according to overswarm a few pages back.

Not so much as 'in debate' as a guided list that will be adjusted later if need be, and stages that might be bumped down can be used to see if there is anything worth changing about them.

 

[Serris]

It seems that Hanenbow is still tournament-legal in Massachusetts singles.

 

[cjrocker]

It seems that Hanenbow is still tournament-legal in Massachusetts singles.

I would love to meet the TOs there.

 

[AlcyoNite]

I dont know if this has been posted by the original players, but I saw this in my regional thread:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5IiSlE-Xmus

as a counter stage, FO's controversy does not stand around any selective advantages but around randomness that can (and does) inhibit competitive play in its ideal state (having relinquished as much randomness as possible yet reasonable)

please consider it

 

[x After Dawn x]

There's no randomness in Frigate Orpheon. It's closer to being a neutral than a banned stage.

 

[LUVTOY77-ROGUE WIREFRAME]

All frigate orpheon does is turn the background dark for a bit, and flips you upside down... and it warns you before both of those doesn't it? Or is it just the lights..?

 

[x After Dawn x]

All frigate orpheon does is turn the background dark for a bit, and flips you upside down... and it warns you before both of those doesn't it? Or is it just the lights..?

The lights = doesn't matter. The stage would be neutral if all it did was change lights. What makes it a counterpick is the fact that it rolls around, but it gives you enough warning to avoid dying from it.

 

[Mic_128]

There was serious discussion about making FO neutral but the fact that one of the sides can't tether on top of the flip bumped it to CP.

It seems that Hanenbow is still tournament-legal in Massachusetts singles.

That's pretty cool. I'd be interested to see any vids if it's used.

 

[LUVTOY77-ROGUE WIREFRAME]

^^ Exactly!!!
The lights don't change gameplay at all, and it gives off a siren or somehting before it switches doesn't it?

 

[AlcyoNite]

I dont know if this has been posted by the original players, but I saw this in my regional thread:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5IiSlE-Xmus

as a counter stage, FO's controversy does not stand around any selective advantages but around randomness that can (and does) inhibit competitive play in its ideal state (having relinquished as much randomness as possible yet reasonable)

please consider it

im sorry, i should have told u all to fast forward to the last few seconds of the match. sorry for any confusion about making my point.

 

[x After Dawn x]

im sorry, i should have told u all to fast forward to the last few seconds of the match. sorry for any confusion about making my point.

I watched the entire video, it proves nothing.

 

[AlcyoNite]

I watched the entire video, it proves nothing.

Controversy over this stage could potentially come from the way in which the stage itself made the kill and it could not be attributed to player skill or counter-pick savvy. I never said that it PROVED anything.

 

[cjrocker]

im sorry, i should have told u all to fast forward to the last few seconds of the match. sorry for any confusion about making my point.

LMAO. Poor guy.

 

[Mic_128]

Controversy over this stage could potentially come from the way in which the stage itself made the kill and it could not be attributed to player skill or counter-pick savvy.

That could be said about any stage with a damaging hazard.

 

[ph00tbag]

im sorry, i should have told u all to fast forward to the last few seconds of the match. sorry for any confusion about making my point.

It comes to a lack of savvy on Toast's part. Don't be too far off the stage when it flips, otherwise you will be KO'd.

 

[Vect0r]

why is Skyworld so hated? It's still pretty even TBH.

 

[Xona]

.....No. A D3 CG on FD means some damage, on moses and elden it means stock loss. If I recall correctly, you hate FD because of the camping. HOW THE HELL IS A GIANT FLAT STAGE ANY BETTER? Regardless, camping is not a valid reason to ban a stage. At all. Ever. Besides, camping is pretty easy to get around, other than with a few guys (Hello, toon link and snake), but they have other weaknesses.

Dedede CG'ing on fd will result in a stock loss if you are using Bowser, DK, Samus, Mario, and 1 or 2 others.

I think bridge of eldin is just as terrible as fd (it's in my top 3 least favorite stages alongside wario ware inc. and fd), but I'm no longer for banning fd, I think CP is appropriate, not ban. Charizard 92 proved to me that fd wasn't quite ban-worthy, so I no longer think it should be banned. But I still disagree with making it a starter. I hate bridge as much as I hate fd, it's just I think that the "don't get grabbed" line should apply to every stage if it applies to fd. A better reason for banning bridge would be banana-locking, as it's done out of a projectile. I'm saying that we need to add a better reason for banning bridge than Dedede CG'ing or even walk-off camping.

I must have brought this up a hundred times already. It's not the randomness, it's the fact that the goal is no longer to KO your opponent, it is to KO your opponent AND to follow the stage movement while avoiding various hazards.

That's just adding to the gameplay, not removing depth. It modifies the methods of KO'ing your opponent, if it moved slower like Mushroomy Kingdom then you have a reason, (walk-offs, extremely close sides) but it doesn't. As for following stage movement, what about Pokefloats (Melee) and Rainbow Cruise? No, do not ban those, that's not what I mean. I mean that Pokefloats and Rainbow Cruise move too, but they aren't ban-worthy.

We're not unbanning big blue. End of story.

I've already posted my SSBB banned stages tournament rules, while many agree with the ban-list and some even want it enlarged, many also disagree with it and think that many bans are unreasonable. That's the entire reason I'm starting the SSB Banned Stages Tournaments. The SBR won't change its mind, and many here won't change their minds either. If you check the Tournament discussion, you'll notice that there are even item tournaments, "ISP" stands for item-standard-play, it even got "official" status. If there can be an official ruleset for item tournaments not counting EVO what with allowing Golden Hammers and Pokeballs, then why can't there be an official ruleset for a banned stages tournament, a tournament that only plays the banned stages (including customs)? We need more tournament leagues with entirely different rulesets to represent a larger portion of the Smash Community.

Basic criteria for a ban.

I said it can't give a loss to a player who doesn't deserve it. Here's an example... 2 players are playing eachother, Player -2 and Player -1, (the numbers are their skill levels). Player -1 is totally unfamiliar with Big Blue and also is too "scrubby" to adapt, but so is player -2. They both deserve to lose, but player -2 could get "lucky" (although player -1 can easily prevent it by adapting to the stage, but player -1 is also trapped in the "scrub mental prison"), that loss is still nearly entirely player -1's fault. Player -2 deserved to lose, but so did player -1, that's when luck actually came in, if either managed to adapt, he or she would have a near 100% chance of winning that match unless both adapt or that player gets an unfair trip, leading to getting KO'ed. Nothing at the stage's fault there, it's the players and the game.

First off, hacking will never be tourney standard. Stop talking about it.
Second, your 1 stock match idea kind of makes sense, but not really. It's gonna get rejected.

Those are just 2 options, there's still a 3rd (accept tripping), there are also many that I don't know of, I was just stating multiple options, I'm not for making hacking a tourney standard either. The reason is I know that the hacking most likely wouldn't stop there and that people would then hack-in hitstun, hack-the airdodge system into Melee's and hack-in L-Cancelling. Hacking it probably isn't a wise idea for that very reason.


It's ultimately up to the TO to decide the rules for his or her tournament, my only problem is that with one "official" ruleset then nobody would go to any tournaments with different rulesets and the banned stages tournaments would never get the recognition they deserve. That's why we need multiple different "official" rulesets for different types of tournaments, so that the different types of smashers (not competitive vs. non-competitive, but item vs. non-item) all have a competitive tournament scene as they deserve one instead of there just being one that only really represents one section of the competitive smash community.

 

[Oracle]

Dedede CG'ing on fd will result in a stock loss if you are using Bowser, DK, Samus, Mario, and 1 or 2 others.

I think bridge of eldin is just as terrible as fd (it's in my top 3 least favorite stages alongside wario ware inc. and fd), but I'm no longer for banning fd, I think CP is appropriate, not ban. Charizard 92 proved to me that fd wasn't quite ban-worthy, so I no longer think it should be banned. But I still disagree with making it a starter. I hate bridge as much as I hate fd, it's just I think that the "don't get grabbed" line should apply to every stage if it applies to fd. A better reason for banning bridge would be banana-locking, as it's done out of a projectile. I'm saying that we need to add a better reason for banning bridge than Dedede CG'ing or even walk-off camping.
No. On FD 4 characters lose a stock by getting grabbed by DDD, and that applies on EVERY STAGE. On bridge of elden it is a stock loss for all characters except for ice climbers.
And walk off camping isn't a good reason either.

That's just adding to the gameplay, not removing depth. What? It changes the goals of the gameplay. It's no longer a fighting game, but a run-away-and-maybe-fight-a-little game. It modifies the methods of KO'ing your opponentYou mean makes it nearly impossible for a vertical KO when one camps at the bottom?, if it moved slower like Mushroomy Kingdom then you have a reason, (walk-offs, extremely close sides) but it doesn't. As for following stage movement, what about Pokefloats (Melee) and Rainbow Cruise? No, do not ban those, that's not what I mean. I mean that Pokefloats and Rainbow Cruise move too, but they aren't ban-worthy.
Pokefloats and rainbow cruise were less like the moving stages and more like, "heres a stage, and 20 seconds later, we move to a new stage.



I've already posted my SSBB banned stages tournament rules, while many agree with the ban-list and some even want it enlarged, many also disagree with it and think that many bans are unreasonable. That's the entire reason I'm starting the SSB Banned Stages Tournaments. The SBR won't change its mind, and many here won't change their minds either. If you check the Tournament discussion, you'll notice that there are even item tournaments, "ISP" stands for item-standard-play, it even got "official" status. If there can be an official ruleset for item tournaments not counting EVO what with allowing Golden Hammers and Pokeballs, then why can't there be an official ruleset for a banned stages tournament, a tournament that only plays the banned stages (including customs)? We need more tournament leagues with entirely different rulesets to represent a larger portion of the Smash Community. For the same reason that evo's tournament sucks. You're forgetting that these stages are banned because they discourage competetive play with stalling, looping, randomness, unfair kills, etc.

I said it can't give a loss to a player who doesn't deserve it. Here's an example... 2 players are playing eachother, Player -2 and Player -1, (the numbers are their skill levels). Player -1 is totally unfamiliar with Big Blue and also is too "scrubby" to adapt, but so is player -2. They both deserve to lose, but player -2 could get "lucky" (although player -1 can easily prevent it by adapting to the stage, but player -1 is also trapped in the "scrub mental prison"), that loss is still nearly entirely player -1's fault. Player -2 deserved to lose, but so did player -1, that's when luck actually came in, if either managed to adapt, he or she would have a near 100% chance of winning that match unless both adapt or that player gets an unfair trip, leading to getting KO'ed. Nothing at the stage's fault there, it's the players and the game.
Luck should never come in. Thats all i'm going to say.



Those are just 2 options, there's still a 3rd (accept tripping)Which is what we'll do., there are also many that I don't know of, I was just stating multiple options, I'm not for making hacking a tourney standard either. The reason is I know that the hacking most likely wouldn't stop there and that people would then hack-in hitstun, hack-the airdodge system into Melee's and hack-in L-Cancelling. Hacking it probably isn't a wise idea for that very reason.There's nothing wrong with that. That would make it better. Except for wavedashing.


It's ultimately up to the TO to decide the rules for his or her tournament, my only problem is that with one "official" ruleset then nobody would go to any tournaments with different rulesets and the banned stages tournaments would never get the recognition they deserve. That's why we need multiple different "official" rulesets for different types of tournaments, so that the different types of smashers (not competitive vs. non-competitive, but item vs. non-item) all have a competitive tournament scene as they deserve one instead of there just being one that only really represents one section of the competitive smash community.

The official tourney rules are the most fair, and that's what this thread is about. Fairness.

 

[Ace55]

Someone wants FD banned/counterpick o_0.

Now I as a Wario main would be all for it, but it's a rediculous thought.

 

[x After Dawn x]

Someone wants FD banned/counterpick o_0.

Now I as a Wario main would be all for it, but it's a rediculous thought.

It's a joke...they also said New Pork City should be starter and Battlefield should be banned. Just jokes, that's all.

 

[AlexX]

Question: Is it possible for a banned stage to get unbanned? I'm not saying one of the banned ones should get unbanned, I'm just curious since I recall Mic stating it was possible before, but people keep telling me it's not.

 

[cjrocker]

Question: Is it possible for a banned stage to get unbanned? I'm not saying one of the banned ones should get unbanned, I'm just curious since I recall Mic stating it was possible before, but people keep telling me it's not.

A banned stage probably won't become a starter, but some banned stages have the potential for counterpicks in the future. The current official stage list is not permanent.

 

[Lawlb0t]

luigis mansion = Neo Hyrule. Nuff said.

Corneria needs to be banned. Fox can inf reflector you against the wall, rob can d-tilt you until killable percent.

 

[Sunstar]

I think that there is a problem with FO... you can't grab the edges... for some characters it is really hard to recover on FO (especially for Olimar and Ivysaur)
characters like R.O.B. and Pit may have absoloutly no problems with FO, but for some characters this stage is not fair I think... I am not sure if it is enough for a banning, but it is defenetly not fair enough to be a neutral stage...

(and... can we have an actual stage neutral/CP/banned list? O.O)

 

[Mic_128]

Stages can go from Banned to Counterpick, but it's hard to show when people stop playing it.

I think that there is a problem with FO... you can't grab the edges... for some characters it is really hard to recover on FO (especially for Olimar and Ivysaur)
characters like R.O.B. and Pit may have absoloutly no problems with FO, but for some characters this stage is not fair I think... I am not sure if it is enough for a banning, but it is defenetly not fair enough to be a neutral stage...

that's why it's Counterpick and not banned. also it's only 1 of the 4 edges that aren't teatherable.

(and... can we have an actual stage neutral/CP/banned list? O.O)

Check the first post.

 

[MorphedChaos]

Hm. About Shadow Moses, Why is that banned? For Inf Tech off the walls and walk off edges? The walls are destructible, but for the edges, I dunno about them.

 

[Oracle]

Hm. About Shadow Moses, Why is that banned? For Inf Tech off the walls and walk off edges? The walls are destructible, but for the edges, I dunno about them.

*facepalm* Please, don't ask stupid questions here. Go do some research.

Spoiler

D3 chaingrab inf. on wall