Official Stage Legality Discussion

[Barge]

Why exactly is Big Blue banned?

Some searching says it's because hitting the road means death. This is true near the left side, or further out if you hit the ground tumbling, eventually to a point where even if tumbled you can live. You can really only hit the road tumbling when spiked or sometimes pushed off a car, though there is a chance for teching. It really just seems like a stronger Jungle Japes river (Faster(?) and closer to the safe ground), but with teching options and no OHKO.

At some point some one said there are circling options, which occasionally occur (Falcon Flyer, black circle thing, and unusually high solo platforms), though the stage moves so these are never permanent.

Seems mostly like that it was banned in melee, and it's generally unliked, so it's stuck with banned. Or reasons I just stated, and overall it's not close enough to Jungle Japes/Rainbow Cruise to warrant legalization.

Because you can't FIGHT on it. It's basically trying to kill your opponent before the stage kills you.

 

[DuskMarthWater]

...Why do you people post in here? (This comment is not aimed at everyone. You know if you're good enough to ignore this.) You know NOTHING about the game, but you try to educate us, who know so much more than you...WTP, thank you for ASKING why Big Blue should be banned. Here, let me tell you in one sentence the answer to all of your questions on banned stages, and I hope ALL of you remember this sentence for your whole lives and take it to heart:

Just in case anyone in here didn't know, when you play a match you are actually, really, truly, fighting what's called THE OPPONENT, and what's more is this..."opponent" will, in fact, make your match HARDER to win.

Here's another one: There is no such thing as a cheap strategy in a game like Brawl, only the realization that you do whatever you have to to win.

That should explain why we ban stages or limit certain techniques, ja?

If that didn't clear it up...I hope this will. Most of you have no experience because you have nobody to play against that has experience. You will one day face someone who's BETTER than you(wow, what a concept!), and then you will realize what a FREAKING MORON you are for actually believing such a foolish notion as YOU will ALWAYS be the one in control of the match.

...There is no solid floor on Big Blue, it should be commonly referred to as Gimp City, etc. That's why they banned it. Now that you bring it up though, it's very similar to Japes or some other random stage, but...the floor just moves way too fast. Even if you tech the road, you will still die because you don't have time to get up and jump. Also, if you're playing someone who knows what they are doing, they'll simply control the match to be on the left side of the stage and keep you there, which means that one fall will result in your death, even if you are pushed onto the road out of your shield. It might even result in their own suicide. Either way, the result is the same...there is no skill involved in the win.

I agree with Barge. He said it well.

 

[deepseadiva]

I think it's safe to say that Onett will be banned. I mean it's almost as bad as Mario Circuit or GHZ. I hope they make the right calls with Skyworld (and less likely, PTAD). Unfortunately, I honestly think Green Greens could be left as the only Counter/Banned....

Onett has those buildings that get in the way of abusing the walkoffs. And the cars limit the amount of time one can use the walls.

I'd prefer Onett and Green Green stay legal.

Where did you hear this Hanenbow stuff? Is it really not possible to circle-camp on?

Hanenbow is just my own prediction. I mean really, circle camping on a stage of go-through platforms...?

 

[DuskMarthWater]

Mmmm, I don't mind Green Greens or Onett either. But Hanenbow? That stage is so...so weird. I don't think I'd ever play on it if it was legal. Circle camping is definitely really easy on that stage though, especially with Fox. Try it if you don't believe me.

 

[Deoxys]

Onett has those buildings that get in the way of abusing the walkoffs. And the cars limit the amount of time one can use the walls.

I'd prefer Onett and Green Green stay legal.



Hanenbow is just my own prediction. I mean really, circle camping on a stage of go-through platforms...?

I'm starting to see how Onett could be reasonable. If Hanenbow is ever unbanned, I will be very impressed by your prediction.

...There is no solid floor on Big Blue, it should be commonly referred to as Gimp City, etc. That's why they banned it. Now that you bring it up though, it's very similar to Japes or some other random stage, but...the floor just moves way too fast. Even if you tech the road, you will still die because you don't have time to get up and jump. Also, if you're playing someone who knows what they are doing, they'll simply control the match to be on the left side of the stage and keep you there, which means that one fall will result in your death, even if you are pushed onto the road out of your shield. It might even result in their own suicide. Either way, the result is the same...there is no skill involved in the win.

I agree with Barge. He said it well.

Besides, I'm not a fan of Super Footstool Jump Brothers.

Well, there's skill involved in being able to control the match, just not nearly as much as a match should involve.

 

[buenob]

in our area we've been really looking hard at the starter levels, and while I completely agree with the need for a distinction between "neutral/starter" and "counterpick", someone here raised a point that all of the current standard starters (you know the 5) are actually extremely similar, and lend themselves to the same style of play // characters...

after much debate I came to the conclusion that although the 5 starters themselves are the "most" neutral, when taken as a group they favour the 'top tier' characters' styles over others... currently, we're discussing removing lylat cruise and replacing it with delphino, halberd, and castle seige, expanding the 'neutral' set to 7...

is this kind of discussion happening anywhere else?

 

[highandmightyjoe]

I am a pretty big fan of Onett and hope it stays counter. It has some shenanigans sure, but the walkoffs just don't seem to be too big of a problem, and as mentioned the cars can disturb wall infinites, though they don't come often enough to do it reliably of course.

 

[Deoxys]

in our area we've been really looking hard at the starter levels, and while I completely agree with the need for a distinction between "neutral/starter" and "counterpick", someone here raised a point that all of the current standard starters (you know the 5) are actually extremely similar, and lend themselves to the same style of play // characters...

after much debate I came to the conclusion that although the 5 starters themselves are the "most" neutral, when taken as a group they favour the 'top tier' characters' styles over others... currently, we're discussing removing lylat cruise and replacing it with delphino, halberd, and castle seige, expanding the 'neutral' set to 7...

is this kind of discussion happening anywhere else?

Is it just me or would that just make MK, Falco, and DDD even better game 1? Furthermore, PS1 is more fair than Lylat IMO.

 

[buenob]

with the stage striking system, as opposed to randomly choosing one of the levels, if you're playing against falco / D3 you're never going to play the first round on lylat against them, and I find that PS1 causes camping during most of the transformations... it's a better idea to just sit and wait out the part than to attempt to approach over the walls

you'd have to elaborate more about the pro mk/falco/d3 if it wasn't just the tilty aspects of it...

 

[Deoxys]

with the stage striking system, as opposed to randomly choosing one of the levels, if you're playing against falco / D3 you're never going to play the first round on lylat against them, and I find that PS1 causes camping during most of the transformations... it's a better idea to just sit and wait out the part than to attempt to approach over the walls

you'd have to elaborate more about the pro mk/falco/d3 if it wasn't just the tilty aspects of it...

Do you mean totally random starters, without striking? That's ********, but not the starters' fault at all. Just do SV, BF, FD, YI, 1 stage strike each, then random between the two remaining, or use stage striking.

 

[buenob]

lol no i was referring to before stage striking, when it was set to random on the starter stages lol

 

[XxBlackxX]

with the stage striking system, as opposed to randomly choosing one of the levels, if you're playing against falco / D3 you're never going to play the first round on lylat against them, and I find that PS1 causes camping during most of the transformations... it's a better idea to just sit and wait out the part than to attempt to approach over the walls

you'd have to elaborate more about the pro mk/falco/d3 if it wasn't just the tilty aspects of it...

why wouldn't you play lylat against falco o_o?

 

[Deoxys]

lol no i was referring to before stage striking, when it was set to random on the starter stages lol

Uhh, when was that? Before SBR ruleset #1? That sounds terrible.

Anyway, the point is a SV BF FD YI PS1 set up is fine with stage striking.

why wouldn't you play lylat against falco o_o?

IDK, I guess he misunderstands the matchup.

 

[buenob]

why wouldn't you play lylat against falco o_o?

because the falco player would strike it?? i don't know really, I was trying to respond to the previous post and couldn't follow his logic, but basically Lylat got it's origins in the neutral list because it made chaingrabs harder to do (and back then when we all sucked it made a big difference lol), and there's no "need" for it to be in there now

Uhh, when was that? Before SBR ruleset #1? That sounds terrible.

Anyway, the point is a SV BF FD YI PS1 set up is fine with stage striking.

yeah it is before the SBR ruleset #1, and even then it took a while for those rules to completely catch on...

as for the level list, again that really doesn't add variety to the list... taken as a group, they're all the same... whether or not they are all "neutral" is undisputed (except ps1, which I would 100% never include in neutral because of the campy-nature of the level changes, which force you to play around the level, instead of with it... but it is extremely "neutral") but the fact is when you analyze the levels' influence on the style of play, they all lean towards slightly benefiting the "top tier" characters

 

[XxBlackxX]

because the falco player would strike it?? i don't know really, I was trying to respond to the previous post and couldn't follow his logic, but basically Lylat got it's origins in the neutral list because it made chaingrabs harder to do (and back then when we all sucked it made a big difference lol), and there's no "need" for it to be in there now

OHH
in that case, yeah you're right. i thought you meant you wouldn't WANT to play lylat against falcos.

 

[clowsui]

Delfino BLOWS massive balls for Falco, I don't know why any sane Falco wouldn't just switch on that stage >_>

Halberd is kinda bad too -___-

Siege is decent as well, but that's a personal preference, it's probably bad for Failco

The chance that you will get an opponent to respawn during the walkoffs for a CG is hard enough; landing the CG at that percent is even HARDER. Laser camping doesn't work on any of these three because they're too small.

I'd MUCH rather go Lylat than Siege or Halberd or DP

 

[buenob]

Laser camping doesn't work on any of these three because they're too small.

I think right there best illustrates what I'm trying to say... the 'neutral' levels should be looked at as a group instead of individually... My initial post was asking if anyone else around was doing this because honestly it's impossible to test this kind of thing by yourself...

to simplify the scenario, imagine a tournament with only 3 'neutral' levels, FD, YI, and BF... if this was a standard, the character wario would be instantly lowered on a 'tier' list because two of the three levels restrict downwards aerial approaches, so no matter who goes first, the wario player would strike YI, the other would more than likely strike FD (obviously if they feel at home on that level they will choose it), and the match would be played on BF... BF isn't _bad_ for wario, but it certainly does restrict his options, and a smart opponent can take advantage of that

now, lets change BF for smashville... all of a sudden, 2 of the 3 allow for almost unrestricted aerial movement, and wario as a character would move 'up'... judging solely on wario, i would choose to play on FD over smashville, due to his recovery being gimpable, and he hits quite hard and doesn't gimp easily, so I would preffer having the larger side blast-zones of FD (this is just my opinion obviously)

so it is easy to see that even in this extremely simplified model, things get complicated... I really think that when you take the current 'standard' 5 neutrals, it runs into this scenario, where 3/5 of them will flat out benefit some characters over others, and this definitely correlates to the 'tier' list

 

[nick_phizz]

Sorry I didn't get back to you yet. My life has been really stressful lately and I haven't had nearly as much time for SWF as I would like.

All is well. That shows you actually have one.

 

[Kage Me]

in our area we've been really looking hard at the starter levels, and while I completely agree with the need for a distinction between "neutral/starter" and "counterpick", someone here raised a point that all of the current standard starters (you know the 5) are actually extremely similar, and lend themselves to the same style of play // characters...

after much debate I came to the conclusion that although the 5 starters themselves are the "most" neutral, when taken as a group they favour the 'top tier' characters' styles over others... currently, we're discussing removing lylat cruise and replacing it with delphino, halberd, and castle seige, expanding the 'neutral' set to 7...

is this kind of discussion happening anywhere else?

Halberd, neutral? Surely you're joking... If anything, it should be moved to the Counterpick position.

 

[buenob]

why would I be joking about halberd? it has slight variation in height and it's got one large platform, with one semi-large second platform above, it's got ledges on both sides for both transitions, the 'hazards' are extremely predictable and lend to playing with the level instead of against it, the first part has close kill-zones while the second is large...

i think the most 'unfair' part of the level is that there's a single abnormally large platform instead of multiple smaller platforms on both the transitions

why do you think it's not neutral?

 

[Mr. Game and Pichu]

Why is Lylat Cruise in the counter area?

 

[Kage Me]

why would I be joking about halberd? it has slight variation in height and it's got one large platform, with one semi-large second platform above, it's got ledges on both sides for both transitions, the 'hazards' are extremely predictable and lend to playing with the level instead of against it, the first part has close kill-zones while the second is large...

i think the most 'unfair' part of the level is that there's a single abnormally large platform instead of multiple smaller platforms on both the transitions

why do you think it's not neutral?

The stage hazards. Predictable as they are, they can still very well kill you. You could be thrown into the combo cannon, the combo cannon can be used to guard the ledge (edgehog while it's aimed at you, then once it's stops moving get out of there), the claw is a source of extra damage and can interrupt your combos, the bomb limits the amount of space you have, which limits projectile use...

It's theoretically possible to be killed in the hangar, too.

 

[Pierce7d]

Halberd is counter-pick. There is a giant explosive bomb that can kill some characters at less than 60%, and when it occurs, the entire point of the match becomes "Gimp your opponent with the bomb." The laser CAN be smash DIed out of, but can still do some awesome things if the person NOT caught in the laser knows what their doing. The claw generally INTERRUPTS the fight.

No other argument is actually a good one for the stage not being neutral imo. But three damaging hazards with significant knockback don't targeting opponents at random doesn't sound like a stage I want to random, especially with the low death-line, making this a popular counter-pick stage for characters like Snake and Olimar.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Now, onto Pictochat:

For those of you who haven't seen my "Stage's kill us?" Topic, here's a link. It may give some insight to what I'm trying to say here.
http://www.smashboards.com/showthread.php?t=210766

Why ban the stage? The hazards aren't that hazardish, right? Well, it's not the hazards themselves that concern me, but how they appear.
They come out of nowhere without warning. If they came out with a warning of some sort, things would be understandible. but they don't. I said in the other topic that it's your fault for getting stage killed, but it's hard to post it on something like this, since even though they appear at certain times, you don't know what's coming next which can unbalance the game a lot.
Let's say you have spikes on the side about to appear. You don't know they're coming, cause a whole lot of hazards may appear. Let's say you have high damage, and you're thrown of the edge, but you have potential to recover. But then, the spikes appear, and you die. If there was a spike warning, this would be justified as your fault. But there is none. Is that randomness fair?
Yes, I figure that goes back to my whole "You shouldn't have gotten grabbed" saying, but must of the hazard counters have nothing that unpredictable that will severely punish for that little mistake.
It's not just spikes either, any immobile object to appear can screw you over without warning. I remember matches where my opponent got trapped under that blowing head, and due to my attacks, he couldn't escape a situation that should have normally been okay for his part.

In short, the hazards themselves aren't bad. It's how they spawn that bothers me. That is why I believe Pictochat should be moved to the Counter/Banned if not Banned stage list.

OP of this thread: http://www.smashboards.com/showthread.php?t=213074

A) I don't approve of Random damage. I also think Norfair should be counterpick/banned, but I'll save that for another topic.

B) I'm sorry, but the don't get hit concept doesn't cut it here. This is a fighting game, we are going to be hitting each other. There is a chance of additional reward for hitting your opponent that is somewhat random based. This is unfair. I have been hit and the missle was drawn around my character sprite as I was Fairing to DI, and therefore could not do anything in time to dodge. Furthermore, the additional hit put me in a worse POSITION, then I would've otherwise been in.

C) Camping on this stage is actually dumber than you realize. I'm not talking about the hugeness of the stage; that's perfectly acceptable. I'm talking about MK. One time, my brother and I were playing around and we hit Pictochat instead of random one time (you know how one player hits start, and the other player starts heading for a neutral toward the top, so it ends up on Pictochat). So I was like "wth, we should just play it for fun!"
Did you know after acquiring height from some stage transformation, he can glide across the tremendous length of the stage, the reverse SL, and then glide to the OTHER end of the stage. If jumps are used properly, this can last far longer than 13 seconds, and something awesome will spawn, and give MK amazing landing options. Essentially, it encourages stalling. The MK player can simply say that it's in his best interest to avoid the opponent during transformations that are not beneficial to him, or lackthereof, and who can deny this logic? Tornado also sets your opponent stupidly into every imaginable hazard. Pit can follow a similar strategy with his UpB, and he has arrows! Fortuantely, Charizard isn't really an issue here. Though he glides slow, he lacks a use-able projectile, and suffers from fatigue. However, I wonder what Fox might be capable of here.
Though camping is encouraged in Brawl, most stages do not have options which allow your opponent to effectively completely evade you simply by running away.

C) Alright, perhaps most of the hazards that damage you cannot kill you directly, however this doesn't mean the stage can't gimp you. I HAVE tried to upB, to sweet spot a ledge that was replaced with a platform, or blocked. I have been blocked by the blowing face from returning to the stage. This stage is just gimmicky in it's whole nature, and I can't see why anyone would opt to play here EXCEPT to absue GIMMICKS which helps remove the victory from the MORE TALENTED PLAYER. Don't tell me player A is better than player B, because player A hit player B, and a missile happened to spawn and deal additional damage, and player A got a lucky kill off the follow up. I was under the impression that the SBR things that stages should be banned on the premises that Super Smash Bros. Brawl is changed into a game of "Use the stage to gimp your opponent" because this detracts from the natural competative play of the game, and incorrectly rewards players.

Hell, why don't we just turn Ray Guns on? Rayguns can't kill you, unless the better player uses them better? What does it matter if a Raygun spawns at my feet as my opponent is across the stage, giving me a temporary projectile advantage? It doesn't kill unless I'm skilled, and the other player shouldn't have been far away from me ever, because Ray Guns might spawn near me and not him. Plz turn them on in tourney.

EDIT: I wasn't even going to TALK about how broken D3 is here. He has OMG so much space to chaingrab. Now, ordinarily, you can't really get killed by D3's chaingrab, but if you're at, say 80%, D3 can pummel safely once. This means he can take LARGE periods of time chaingrabbing players across the stage. Oh well if a wall spawns in front of you while you're already in the chaingrab. That's D3's fault for being good and getting a grab. Let's reward him with a random infinate, which will cost you 13 seconds of additional damage, into the end of the chaingrab, into an fthrow off the stage. That's fair, isn't it? If the spikes appear, that's an infinite into a kill hazard right there! Oh, some fire spawned in the middle of the stage? When we're done, why not just toss our opponent into the flames? What? A missile has been sighted you say? AWESOME! More free damage because of my awesome skill.

Also Falco, Rob, and Pit get stupid ways to completely evade their opponent completely while camping them. In New Jersey, there is no stage currently legal, where I would be completely unable to REACH a character with Marth for over half a minute. It might not be advisable to do so on Pokemon Stadium, but it's possible. Here, it could be certifiably impossible, depending on the picture spawns. Would my opponent be wrong for evading me when they could combat me at a later time with a distinct stage advantage? That's the point of a counter pick after all, to use the stage advantages.

Pictochat is so dumb.

My post. Thread is only 3 pages long atm. Discuss please.

 

[Deoxys]

Halberd is counter-pick. There is a giant explosive bomb that can kill some characters at less than 60%, and when it occurs, the entire point of the match becomes "Gimp your opponent with the bomb." The laser CAN be smash DIed out of, but can still do some awesome things if the person NOT caught in the laser knows what their doing. The claw generally INTERRUPTS the fight.

No other argument is actually a good one for the stage not being neutral imo. But three damaging hazards with significant knockback don't targeting opponents at random doesn't sound like a stage I want to random, especially with the low death-line, making this a popular counter-pick stage for characters like Snake and Olimar.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Now, onto Pictochat:



OP of this thread: http://www.smashboards.com/showthread.php?t=213074



My post. Thread is only 3 pages long atm. Discuss please.

Very interesting points... they're starting to make me see why Pictochat and Norfair (and Port Town Aero Drive) might be better banned, although I still haven't changed my opinion yet.

Doesn't Jungle Japes change Smash "into a game of 'Use the stage to gimp your opponent?'" Do you propose it be banned as well, or does the fact that it isn't random make it fine? Where do you stand on Onnet? I'm guessing you think Green Greens should be banned.

 

[Pierce7d]

Very interesting points... they're starting to make me see why Pictochat and Norfair (and Port Town Aero Drive) might be better banned, although I still haven't changed my opinion yet.

Doesn't Jungle Japes change Smash "into a game of 'Use the stage to gimp your opponent?'" Do you propose it be banned as well, or does the fact that it isn't random make it fine? Where do you stand on Onnet? I'm guessing you think Green Greens should be banned.

I am very appreciative of the very harsh stage list in my regions. We really don't put up with shenanigans, and all those stages are banned.

There are MORE reasons to ban Onett than there are to ban Bridge of Eldin. Let's get serious. Walls, walk offs, cars. The better player will win, but that doesn't mean the stage isn't detrimental to the fight. I'll win against inferior players on Warioware (my favorite stage) but that's not saying much, when it comes to legality.

Green greens is eh. I really don't have enough experience on that stage, but I don't really think random falling bombs and stupidly close deathlines are advisable. Compiled with apples that I think can explode . . . ew. Also, I don't know if the apples have the same kill potential as they did in Melee, but if they do, it provides some characters with a somewhat random item weapon. It's like a player saying "Please, turn on Deku Nuts. It nullifies my difficulty in killing." The healing factor can also be unfair.

Port Town is a definite no. I believe that players should get punished for mistakes. I don't think players should lose a stock instantly for very slight mistakes. Those cars are just stupidly strong. In addition to the other hazards on the stage, and the COMPLETE lack of ledges, it's like Rainbow Cruise with hazards. It really takes away from the natural flow of a fight. You should never have to enter a fight with the estimation of the stage dealing you at least 30%. When I play on Port Town, I EXPECT to take some kind of damage from the stage. When the floor is a hazard the majority of the time, we have a problem. Would Brinstar be a realistic stage if the acid was always at the top level?

You can do broken, broken stuff on Japes, and it's another stage where it can be technically impossible to corner your opponent, which is bad. I don't mind water in stages, but the Klap traps, though not random, are TOO strong of a hazard, especially while Falco is in this game, lol. I'm not super against this stage, especially compared to the others, but I don't mind it being off, and prefer it there. (Mind you, I'm Marth. I do well here)

 

[deepseadiva]

I disagree with you on a number of things Pierce.

There are MORE reasons to ban Onett than there are to ban Bridge of Eldin. Let's get serious. Walls, walk offs, cars.

Actually, due to the last aspect you mention, the cars, Onett is very viable.

Before screaming "OMG BAN" anytime a stage with walls or walkoffs comes up, I'd like to point out why exactly their banned. Chaingrabs more or less.

What if there was a constant threatening interruption to chaingrabs that made them rather risky, much less even reliable? Wouldn't that warrant saving the stage?

The cars are that interruption. They're constant, coming in every 12 seconds or so, have zero killing potential, and have a huge warning; both visable and audible. The 30% damage is negligible with everything considered.

I think Onett is quite the counterpick.

Green greens is eh. I really don't have enough experience on that stage

I would agree.

but I don't really think random falling bombs and stupidly close deathlines are advisable. Compiled with apples that I think can explode . . . ew. Also, I don't know if the apples have the same kill potential as they did in Melee, but if they do, it provides some characters with a somewhat random item weapon. It's like a player saying "Please, turn on Deku Nuts. It nullifies my difficulty in killing." The healing factor can also be unfair.

First off - the apples don't explode... The kill around 100%, which I think is reasonable. They always spawn in the center of the stage, always in at least a trio. The only "random" aspect is when they do so actually appear. I consider them predictable enough to be a complete non-issue. This also concerns the "unfair" healing of 7%.

Also, as I've explained before in this thread, blastzones are never an issue, no matter how small or large they are. The argument I hear is "Oh, but characters can KO earlier!"

I reply with that being the point of Smash Bros. To KO your opponent as early as possible.

The only points debatable on Green Greens are the walls and the bomb blocks.

The walls are destructible - and that's all I'll say due to the whole chaingrab thing.

The bomb blocks are hard to defend. While they only really KO at reasonable percents, the explosions themselves happen really whenever one just happens to fall atop you. They are in a designated area though.

While I prefer Green Greens be counterpick, the walls and bombs are certainly very viable counterpoints.

Port Town is a definite no.

Agreed.

You can do broken, broken stuff on Japes, and it's another stage where it can be technically impossible to corner your opponent, which is bad. I don't mind water in stages, but the Klap traps, though not random, are TOO strong of a hazard, especially while Falco is in this game, lol. I'm not super against this stage, especially compared to the others, but I don't mind it being off, and prefer it there. (Mind you, I'm Marth. I do well here)

I've argued many many times concerning Japes. It's soooo legal.

The klaptraps, while powerful, are very predictable and appear in only specific places - not to mention those places are off stage.

All this talk about banning everything is very wrong in my opinion. There is a distinction between something broken and an advantage. Advantages shouldn't be banned.

 

[Deoxys]

When I play on Port Town, I EXPECT to take some kind of damage from the stage. When the floor is a hazard the majority of the time, we have a problem. Would Brinstar be a realistic stage if the acid was always at the top level?

I never get damaged by Port Town unless my opponent has forced me into the hazard. In addition, saying that the floor is a hazard the majority of the time is a gross hyperbole. On every stop but one there are parts of the floor that aren't ever hazardous. Between the stops, the main platform is reasonable in length.

The cars are that interruption. They're constant, coming in every 12 seconds or so, have zero killing potential, and have a huge warning; both visable and audible. The 30% damage is negligible with everything considered.
[...]
I would agree.



First off - the apples don't explode... The kill around 100%, which I think is reasonable. They always spawn in the center of the stage, always in at least a trio. The only "random" aspect is when they do so actually appear. I consider them predictable enough to be a complete non-issue. This also concerns the "unfair" healing of 7%.
[...]
The only points debatable on Green Greens are the walls and the bomb blocks.
[...]
Agreed.
[...]
All this talk about banning everything is very wrong in my opinion. There is a distinction between something broken and an advantage. Advantages shouldn't be banned.

The cars really have zero killing potential‽

It is totally debatable whether or not a stage that is capable of healing one player ~28% should be legal!

If Pictochat and Castle Seige are legal, Port Town Aero Drive should be, too.

 

[deepseadiva]

The cars really have zero killing potential‽

Is that an interrobang? Too cool Deoxys. Too cool.

Anyways, on Onett? Yea. They're so lame.

It is totally debatable whether or not a stage that is capable of healing one player ~28% should be legal!

Theoretically, yes.

But healing apples are pretty rare. I've never encountered more than two.

If Pictochat and Castle Seige are legal, Port Town Aero Drive should be, too.

I'd consider this a stretch.

Pictochat has weak hazards with little warning - which I consider bordering, but fine.

Port Town has powerful hazards with little warning - which I consider too much.

You can't group them like that.

Castle Siege...? Where'd that come from?

 

[Deoxys]

Is that an interrobang? Too cool Deoxys. Too cool.
[...]
Theoretically, yes.

But healing apples are pretty rare. I've never encountered more than two.



I'd consider this a stretch.

Pictochat has weak hazards with little warning - which I consider bordering, but fine.

Port Town has powerful hazards with little warning - which I consider too much.

You can't group them like that.

Castle Siege...? Where'd that come from?

That is indeed an interrobang! I'm glad someone noticed!

I've encountered 3 healing and 1 throwing before. Also, I could swear I've seen only two apples appear but I could be mistaken.

The vertical spikes on Pictochat are powerful, though. Castle Seige because PTAD has walkoffs. Basically it has hazards of the calibur of Pictochat's worst, with infrequent walkoffs, and often no edges.

 

[Pierce7d]

I disagree with you on a number of things Pierce

That's good. I was waiting quite a while for someone to come and disagree, and bonus! it's someone intelligent.

Actually, due to the last aspect you mention, the cars, Onett is very viable.

Before screaming "OMG BAN" anytime a stage with walls or walkoffs comes up, I'd like to point out why exactly their banned. Chaingrabs more or less.

What if there was a constant threatening interruption to chaingrabs that made them rather risky, much less even reliable? Wouldn't that warrant saving the stage?

The cars are that interruption. They're constant, coming in every 12 seconds or so, have zero killing potential, and have a huge warning; both visable and audible. The 30% damage is negligible with everything considered.

I think Onett is quite the counterpick.

Okay, so basically, it's alright for D3 to chaingrab you until a car comes, and then you have to eat 30% on top of that? D3 is put in significant advantage. It's very unlikely a car will save you from a walk off K.O., though I'll agree that you shouldn't get grabbed going that direction on the stage. D3 is a pretty heavy guy. Trading 30% with him is going to be in his favor. Sorry, but broken wall chaingrab is still broken even if it's ended in 10 seconds and D3 plays 30%, but you also recieve that damage. Plus, I'm guessing a perfectly timed bthrow will still resent in you connecting with the car, which means +16% as well.

Even outside the D3 topic, the cars are disruptive to general gameplay. They reward player positioning every 13 seconds, and while this isn't random, positioning should not be rewarded at regular intervals, as it detracts from the fight.

First off - the apples don't explode... The kill around 100%, which I think is reasonable. They always spawn in the center of the stage, always in at least a trio. The only "random" aspect is when they do so actually appear. I consider them predictable enough to be a complete non-issue. This also concerns the "unfair" healing of 7%.

Also, as I've explained before in this thread, blastzones are never an issue, no matter how small or large they are. The argument I hear is "Oh, but characters can KO earlier!"

I reply with that being the point of Smash Bros. To KO your opponent as early as possible.

The only points debatable on Green Greens are the walls and the bomb blocks.

The walls are destructible - and that's all I'll say due to the whole chaingrab thing.

The bomb blocks are hard to defend. While they only really KO at reasonable percents, the explosions themselves happen really whenever one just happens to fall atop you. They are in a designated area though.

While I prefer Green Greens be counterpick, the walls and bombs are certainly very viable counterpoints.

I recall exploding apples in Melee, but I really don't know how much this stage has changed. I'll play it some tomorrow (or rather later today when I wake up, lol.) and have a real discussion.

I've argued many many times concerning Japes. It's soooo legal.

The klaptraps, while powerful, are very predictable and appear in only specific places - not to mention those places are off stage.

All this talk about banning everything is very wrong in my opinion. There is a distinction between something broken and an advantage. Advantages shouldn't be banned.

Eh, can't quite a few characters easily set up a chaingrab into a klap-trap? Also, isn't Falco's camping utterly broken here, because he has an island platform to camp from, meaning you HAVE to jump at him, and lose the option of shielding on appraoching, making Falco virtually unapproachable, and then he has that Dair?

I'll play here tomorrow as well, sometimes with Falco, and see what all the hype is about.

 

[Titanium Dragon]

Even outside the D3 topic, the cars are disruptive to general gameplay. They reward player positioning every 13 seconds, and while this isn't random, positioning should not be rewarded at regular intervals, as it detracts from the fight.

I disagree strongly.

I think that stages which make positioning more important are a vital part of preserving game balance. This was true in melee and is true in brawl as well. It helps even out characters who benefit from always forcing their opponent to attack them, by forcing them to approach sometimes.

When the dangers are perfectly predictable, you shouldn't have trouble avoiding them unless your opponent is forcing you into them, in which case they're taking advantage of the stage better than you are and should be rewarded for doing so. It is true that if the punishment is too out of line it can cause problems, but I don't think Onett qualifies.

 

[deepseadiva]

I've encountered 3 healing and 1 throwing before. Also, I could swear I've seen only two apples appear but I could be mistaken.

It might be an average of two - one for each player at least.

Either way, they're very predictable as I've said and only appear in the center of the stage. If you want some apples, stay there and avoid getting knocked around.

The vertical spikes on Pictochat are powerful, though.

I think I'd like to know the kill percents. *is testing*

The cars on PTAD kill at 45 - 60%. (WTF)

The spikes on Pictochat kill at 100%.

I think Picotchat is fine.

Castle Seige because PTAD has walkoffs. Basically it has hazards of the calibur of Pictochat's worst, with infrequent walkoffs, and often no edges.

I wouldn't consider the temporary walkoffs and lack of edges an issue.

Okay, so basically, it's alright for D3 to chaingrab you until a car comes, and then you have to eat 30% on top of that? D3 is put in significant advantage

It's no longer a free stock.

While the stage would give Dedede an advantage, it's no longer broken and deserving of a ban.

Even outside the D3 topic, the cars are disruptive to general gameplay. They reward player positioning every 13 seconds, and while this isn't random, positioning should not be rewarded at regular intervals, as it detracts from the fight.

I would agree with the below quote. A constant hazard, especially a very predictable and relatively harmless one, shouldn't equal a ban - despite how it affects player position. Think Rainbow Cruise, Jungle Japes, or Norfair: perfectly legal stages.

When the dangers are perfectly predictable, you shouldn't have trouble avoiding them unless your opponent is forcing you into them, in which case they're taking advantage of the stage better than you are and should be rewarded for doing so. It is true that if the punishment is too out of line it can cause problems, but I don't think Onett qualifies.

Eh, can't quite a few characters easily set up a chaingrab into a klap-trap? Also, isn't Falco's camping utterly broken here, because he has an island platform to camp from, meaning you HAVE to jump at him, and lose the option of shielding on appraoching, making Falco virtually unapproachable, and then he has that Dair?

Every advantage Falco has requires him to hit you off the stage. Hitting players off the stage is a basic Smash principle. Players being rewarded for this by the stage seems incredibly, incredibly logical.

Besides, if a player can time his chaingrab-spike to a klaptrap - more power to him. Less power to the victim who failed to see that coming.

Concerning banning a stage due to camping: If it were ever an issue, we'd ban FD.

 

[Nidtendofreak]

It's no longer a free stock.

While the stage would give Dedede an advantage, it's no longer broken and deserving of a ban.

Has this been tested? As in: A D3 hopped down right after a car went by, infinite'd someone as long as possible, and see if he can get a KO out of it before the car came and interrupted it. It wouldn't surprise me if it was still a free stock against certain, lighter characters. I would test this, but my sister is playing right now. -_-

 

[Amazing Ampharos]

Halberd should be a starter because you shouldn't use random stages. Really, this goes back to the fact that random stages suck and stage striking is awesome. I see no real argument not to have the most fair 7/9 stages as starters regardless of things like hazards since, if you feel those things hurt you, you can avoid them. I think the Halberd is a pretty good candidate for that group. I'm definitely "biased" in the sense that the Final Destination/Smashville/Battlefield/Yoshi's Island all on random way of handling the first match in the set is literally the worst possible reasonable option for Mr. Game & Watch (So I have a 50/50 of playing on one of my worst stages in the first match? That sounds fair to me...). That's also really heavily biased in favor of the Ice Climbers since they have a 3/4 of getting their best stages.

Anyway, I get a sense this thread has long gone in circles, and I think it's mostly ignored by everyone because the arguments are all over the place. If it's not too disruptive, I propose we narrow our focus to a small number of stages that are at a real risk of being banned in the near future in a lot of places that we might be able to "save". Here's my list.

Distant Planet
Jungle Japes
Green Greens

I think most of us who really have a lot of experience on these stages agree they are fair... but they're "under attack" regardless. I'll inevitably wall of text about them soon, but maybe some strategy would be in order first. How should we go about trying to convince TOs to not ban them or, in some cases, unban them? My experience shows a stubbornness in talking about stages and a terrifying trend toward ban, ban, ban... I think well presented arguments for legality designed to appeal to multiple stage philosophies might be the best bet, but does anyone else have anything to add about the strategy for defending them?

About Distant Planet in particular, I think it's losing because no one cares about it. I think "heating up" the argument on that stage would probably cause it to be generally legal instead of the current trend toward generally banned.

 

[Kage Me]

About Distant Planet in particular, I think it's losing because no one cares about it.

*gasp* So it's come down to me, then?
Very well.

Distant Planet has three main hazards. The Bulborb on the right, the slope on the left, and the platforms in the middle.

The Bulborb is pretty much the Support Ghost from Yoshi's Island, except he's easier to see coming, not always a guaranteed save, and can eat you. Its function as a saviour seems reasonable enough: if its mouth is opened, you should expect your opponent to hang from its bottom lip to get their jumps back. If you can't stop it, it's your own fault for not seeing it coming or having picked the wrong character.
Its tendency to snack on you is only relevant when you land in its mouth or stand on its back for a long time. Solution: don't do either. Yeah, your opponent could knock you in there, but that'd be your own fault. You know the Bulborb is there, so avoid being put in a position where you're vulnerable to it.

The slope on the left seems to be the main problem people have with this stage, due to it being a walk-off. Solution: avoid it when fighting chaingrab characters. There's plenty of room in the stage, and you are anything but limited to that part. The slope also makes it harder to chaingrab, but I'm not sure if that applies to Dedede as well. As for the rain: grab the ledge on your way down. If you get edgehogged, nice work from your opponent. In fact, the slope makes this an excellent counterpick for tethering characters, since it reduces the efficiency of edgehogging the main platform.

Finally, the platforms that lower themselves when you stand on them. It's common knowledge that they do, it's a predictable motion, and it's your responsibility to know about it and know that your opponent might use that to his advantage (I love using Ice Climbers on this stage because of the platforms - Blizzard gains a few unpredictable points).

Incidentally, it also has the best music. That's pretty much my main motivation for writing this post in the first place :3

 

[Denzi]

The slope on the left seems to be the main problem people have with this stage, due to it being a walk-off. Solution: avoid it when fighting chaingrab characters. There's plenty of room in the stage, and you are anything but limited to that part. The slope also makes it harder to chaingrab, but I'm not sure if that applies to Dedede as well.

With Falco:
The slope definately does not always make it harder to chian grab. It does going down the slope, but going up the slope actually makes it easier and because of the angle, certain characters who are not normally chain grabbable become susceptable to the CG.

There are two arguements to this: Don't go on the left side of Falco, or don't go on the slope at all. The latter is extremely difficult (if not impossible for some characters) to do, because Falco can just sit on the slope and camp with lasers. The former arguement, don't put yourself to the left of Falco, is combated by one simple tech: the reverse boost pivot grab.by doing this, it is a much easier task for the Falco to get a grab on the right side of you, making that argument a poor one as well.

 

[Nicole]

My experience shows a stubbornness in talking about stages and a terrifying trend toward ban, ban, ban... I think well presented arguments for legality designed to appeal to multiple stage philosophies might be the best bet, but does anyone else have anything to add about the strategy for defending them?

^This.

I can't believe that Green Greens and Japes are even under question. They are COUNTERPICKS, which means that of course they are gong to give advantages to certain characters, and disadvantages to others. So Falco ***** on Japes - that is NOT grounds for a ban. There is nothing broken about that level, or Green Greens, or Distant Planet. These 3 levels DO kill players on a fairly regular basis, there's no doubt of that, between the water on Japes, the bombs on Green Greens, and the walkoff/giant slug on Distant Planet. But that does NOT mean they should be banned. We as a community can't keep allowing stages to change from counterpicks to banned.

The major reason for this trend of banning that I can see is that people simply don't like alot of the counterpicks, or that certain stages aren't good for their character (for example, most Olimar mains are going to want, or at least not argue, with Japes being banned, while most Falco players are going to want it to stay a legal counterpick). I can understand this, as I have several stage biases as well. But we have to look past our likes and dislikes and look at the stage from an unbiased point of view and measure whether it is truly worthy of a ban.

 

[camstar57]

just outof curiosity why is hyrule banned

 

[infomon]

just outof curiosity why is hyrule banned

Circle camping. You put a little damage on the enemy, then just run the heck away for the remaining 6 minutes. They go one way, you go the other... it's like kids playing tag around a car; an easy stalemate.

 

[Kage Me]

With Falco:
The slope definately does not always make it harder to chian grab. It does going down the slope, but going up the slope actually makes it easier and because of the angle, certain characters who are not normally chain grabbable become susceptable to the CG.

There are two arguements to this: Don't go on the left side of Falco, or don't go on the slope at all. The latter is extremely difficult (if not impossible for some characters) to do, because Falco can just sit on the slope and camp with lasers. The former arguement, don't put yourself to the left of Falco, is combated by one simple tech: the reverse boost pivot grab.by doing this, it is a much easier task for the Falco to get a grab on the right side of you, making that argument a poor one as well.

Well then, don't play Falco on Distant Planet. It's a counterpick for a reason ;D