Official Stage Legality Discussion

[Iron Man]

The course randomly changing kinda forces players to come up with a new strategy quickly, which may or may not help. On the plus side, it stops people from camping for long periods of time, but the minus side, it's a pain in the butt to try and develop another strategy every 13 seconds (or whatever it was). Unless you were willing to get pictures of every single mini-stage and study them closely.
However, I doubt having to change strategy sometimes is reason enough to ban a stage at all. Just my two cents.

 

[xxmaliciousxx]

Pictochat has on-stage hazards which give damage, give knockback, and clutter the stage (making several characters unable to maneuver around the stage well and also encourages camping). Some of the hazards are acceptable, while others are not, but the hazards are not optional. They are all random, meaning that luck alone could put a character in a disadvantage.

Pictochat is a well-designed stage which is enjoyable for casual play, but I believe that it is not adequate for competitive play and should not be legal for tournaments.

 

[deepseadiva]

it's incredibly easy for many characters to abuse a lead and camp underneath the level safely, making it almost impossible to come back from a % loss -> the match deteriorates to the person in the lead camping under the level -> single best strategy -> not legal

Can I get an example of this? It sounds like obvious stalling - which is out-right banned anyway.

Pictochat has on-stage hazards which give damage, give knockback, and clutter the stage (making several characters unable to maneuver around the stage well and also encourages camping). Some of the hazards are acceptable, while others are not, but the hazards are not optional. They are all random, meaning that luck alone could put a character in a disadvantage.

Pictochat is a well-designed stage which is enjoyable for casual play, but I believe that it is not adequate for competitive play and should not be legal for tournaments.

In my opinion, Pictochat is one of the victims of massive bias against anything the slightest bit "random". Yes, Pictochat's transformations are not predictable, and thus produce a somewhat luck-based situation - but the degree of which that situation affects a match is negligible. NONE of the hazards kill past 100%, and even then, it's less than a handful out of 27 that even have the potential to KO.

And even then, there are "safety zones" that can be fled to in-case the fear of being hit is that terrifying - making the transformations "100% avoidable".
http://i429.photobucket.com/albums/qq19/MenoUnderwater/PictochatSafetyZone.png?t=1230964617

Pictochat is again, a victim of bias.

 

[buenob]

lol ya, that 'safety zone' thing really helped me (seriously, we need to stop repeating ourselves from the last thread lol)

erm, as far as I can tell, absolutely 0 matches have been decreed 'stalling' by a TO and forced a forefit... I watch incredible air-planking, and such, and of course it's not outright stalling... if you are under the level on GGs, its _very_ easy to grab a ledge (if they aren't going under to chace) and then position yourself to attack, then back off...

-> since the level is rediculously defensively biased, who's to say which party is stalling... the one with a percent lead hanging out near the edge, or the one who's not approaching because it's a disadvantageous situation?

 

[JigglyZelda003]

Pictochat is again, a victim of bias.

just like distant planet D:

 

[xxmaliciousxx]

In my opinion, Pictochat is one of the victims of massive bias against anything the slightest bit "random". Yes, Pictochat's transformations are not predictable, and thus produce a somewhat luck-based situation - but the degree of which that situation affects a match is negligible. NONE of the hazards kill past 100%, and even then, it's less than a handful out of 27 that even have the potential to KO.

And even then, there are "safety zones" that can be fled to in-case the fear of being hit is that terrifying - making the transformations "100% avoidable".
http://i429.photobucket.com/albums/qq19/MenoUnderwater/PictochatSafetyZone.png?t=1230964617

Pictochat is again, a victim of bias.

Pictochat is still somehow legal, so I wouldn't deem it a "victim" in any respect.

The effects of the hazards are not negligible. I was not only referring to the hazards which cause damage, but I was referring to the hazards which clutter the stage, impeding the progress of the game and encouraging camping. It does not matter if a stage has only a small chance out of 27 to meet the qualities that many banned stages have. If it forces random and hazardous conditions on the players, it should not belong in competitive play.

 

[Linkshot]

You know what else forces random and hazardous conditions on players?

Running.

Now stop johning and play on PictoChat.

 

[fkacyan]

Meno, how many times am I gonna have to say this - The presence of a safety zone is irrelevant. You can't realistically expect the entirety of the fight to happen in that small zone. It's also not hard to abuse any of the stage hazards here; those aside, many of the stage hazards can be easily abused to stall a match (i.e. the giant diaginol wall).

Even with that it's still borderline, but I would prefer to have it off. You shouldn't get punished for jumping when a stage hazard decides to spawn on you.

ETA: The last sentence of the poster two spots above me is what I would like to convey.

 

[xxmaliciousxx]

To clear any misconceptions, it is not the on-stage knockback and damage which justifies banning the stage. It's the fact that it is incredibly hard to play on Pictochat when there is a tall solid object engulfing 2/3 of the stage which warrants a ban.

 

[bobson]

those aside, many of the stage hazards can be easily abused to stall a match (i.e. the giant diaginol wall).

The boat, the whale, the diagonal wall and the bricks are the only transformations that make it easy to stall. 4 out of 27 is not "many."

Even with that it's still borderline, but I would prefer to have it off. You shouldn't get punished for jumping when a stage hazard decides to spawn on you.

They spawn exactly 13 seconds apart. You should get punished if you knew a stage hazard could come and weren't prepared for it.

 

[xxmaliciousxx]

The boat, the whale, the diagonal wall and the bricks are the only transformations that make it easy to stall. 4 out of 27 is not "many."

4/27 is about 1 out of every 7 hazards, which means you are bound to get 2-6 of them in each game.

They spawn exactly 13 seconds apart. You should get punished if you knew a stage hazard could come and weren't prepared for it.

But you would not know which one would come at you. If both characters are at a high percentages, the hazard may tip the balance randomly in one's favor. A player can end up with a win or loss for using the same move.

 

[fkacyan]

They spawn exactly 13 seconds apart. You should get punished if you knew a stage hazard could come and weren't prepared for it.

This is the same argument you use for JJ, and is fundamentally wrong. At this point you are fighting against the stage, and that is a ridiculous notion.

Tourneys are, at a fundamental level, contests of skill between you and the other players. At no point should you be fighting a third party that has no stake in the results.

 

[zeldspazz]

Do the hazards on Pictochat follow a specific cycle (as in, you know what hazard will come next by seeing the first one?)

 

[bobson]

4/27 is about 1 out of every 7 hazards, which means you are bound to get 2-6 of them in each game.

All the transformations cycle through before any of them repeat and all of them together take longer than 8 minutes to cycle through, so the maximum you can get per standard game is 4. They last for 13 seconds, which leaves you with a maximum total of 52 seconds out of the match, which is 8 to 38 seconds less than the amount of time spent on the similarly "easy to abuse" transformations on Pokemon Stadium 1.

But you would not know which one would come at you.

****, you're right! If only there was some kind of area where you're safe from all the hazardous transformations, so it wouldn't matter if you didn't know which one was coming.

This is the same argument you use for JJ, and is fundamentally wrong. At this point you are fighting against the stage, and that is a ridiculous notion.

Tourneys are, at a fundamental level, contests of skill between you and the other players. At no point should you be fighting a third party that has no stake in the results.

Knowing what not to do and then not doing it is not fighting against the stage. It's playing intelligently. I will not leave the safety zone around transformation time on Pictochat like I will not use Mario's up-B into the side corners on Final Destination like I will not try to play with a broken controller. In none of these cases am I "fighting" something that I shouldn't have to; I'm making a basic observation and using my knowledge of the game to avoid a bad outcome.

 

[fkacyan]

Knowing what not to do and then not doing it is not fighting against the stage. It's playing intelligently. I will not leave the safety zone around transformation time on Pictochat like I will not use Mario's up-B into the side corners on Final Destination like I will not try to play with a broken controller. In none of these cases am I "fighting" something that I shouldn't have to; I'm making a basic observation and using my knowledge of the game to avoid a bad outcome.

You are not forced to upB in a bad position or use a bad controller in the same way you are forced to dodge an oncoming attack. There is the possibility that you will be punished for dodging on Pictochat, but not by your opponent, and said punishment can not be avoided consistently.

As I've already said, you can't realistically expect yourself to always be in the safe zone. If it's that reliable, winning on that stage would be simple as camping that one safe spot, and that would be degenerate and stupid.

 

[zeldspazz]

As I've already said, you can't realistically expect yourself to always be in the safe zone. If it's that reliable, winning on that stage would be simple as camping that one safe spot, and that would be degenerate and stupid.

I agree with this statement more than any other I have read about Pictochat.

 

[bobson]

There is the possibility that you will be punished for dodging on Pictochat, but not by your opponent, and said punishment can not be avoided consistently.

As I've already said, you can't realistically expect yourself to always be in the safe zone.

Yes it can and yes you can, at least when you know the stage is about to transform. This isn't Street Fighter; you are not at liberty to freely ignore the stage.

If it's that reliable, winning on that stage would be simple as camping that one safe spot, and that would be degenerate and stupid.

You and your opponent attempting to occupy the same space is degenerate and stupid?
You must hate this game.

 

[fkacyan]

Yes it can and yes you can, at least when you know the stage is about to transform. This isn't Street Fighter; you are not at liberty to freely ignore the stage.


You and your opponent attempting to occupy the same space is degenerate and stupid?
You must hate this game.

I am so utterly sick of your conflation. I did not say you can freely ignore the stage, but at the same time, you should never have to divert your attention exclusively to the stage.

No, what is stupid and degenerate is that a spot on the stage becomes the method of winning, as opposed to beating your opponent.

 

[Linkshot]

I'm sorry, Thio, but you're just TERRIBLE at multitasking with your brain.

I can EASILY keep track of the timer, my opponent, and my stage position all at once.

 

[fkacyan]

I'm sorry, Thio, but you're just TERRIBLE at multitasking with your brain.

I can EASILY keep track of the timer, my opponent, and my stage position all at once.

When did this become personal? I never said "I have a problem playing on this stage! It makes me lose baaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaw."

You're not even reading what I'm saying at this point.

It's not the ease of use, etc. The issue here is that camping the safe zone and keeping your opponent in the unsafe zone is a safer bet than learning the matchup / your character. You can reliably depend on having one hazard or another do some of your work for you using this strategy. At this point, your opponent is fighting you and the stage. This is degenerate: it promotes not having to learn what we generally take as givens to win in Smash.

Take your ad hominem and conflation bull**** the hell out of the thread.

 

[Kinzer]

Glad to see discussion in this thread, even if it is rather heated.

So let me give y'all a break from Picto and ask this:

In smash 64, they have a specific ruling on Saffron city that if the stage comes up, then the Ness player is given an accommodation. Why have I yet to see any other ruling in any of the three smash games directly?

I know some stages are banned specifically because of (perhaps the fear?) over-centralization of a strategy, but how about this idea I'm throwing out?

 

[fkacyan]

Glad to see discussion in this thread, even if it is rather heated.

So let me give y'all a break from Picto and ask this:

In smash 64, they have a specific ruling on Saffron city that if the stage comes up, then the Ness player is given an accommodation. Why have I yet to see any other ruling in any of the three smash games directly?

I know some stages are banned specifically because of (perhaps the fear?) over-centralization of a strategy, but how about this idea I'm throwing out?

Explain? Admittedly I don't know much about 64 past pika dair upsmahs thunder lawls.

 

[Kinzer]

http://super-smash-bros.wikia.com/wiki/Smash_64

Skip to "Tournament play," you should be able to see it as the 7b bullet.

 

[fkacyan]

http://super-smash-bros.wikia.com/wiki/Smash_64

Skip to "Tournament play," you should be able to see it as the 7b bullet.

Does is make it impossible for Ness to recover or something? it doesn't explain the rule.

 

[Kinzer]

I won't be able to post any further, I'm leaving to a friends house.

Anyway yes, if Ness gets caught inbetween teh buildings, he can't recover.

 

[Linkshot]

Except you need to learn the matchup to:

A) Acquire the safe zone (which is large enough to even have a standoff, I'll add)
B) Get the safe zone back.

You aren't fighting the stage during the 6:02 (m:ss) with no hazards.

EDIT: That shouldn't even be an issue. Nobody can recover in 64, lawl.

 

[Eternal Yoshi]

^^Not true. Everyone but Link(unless you have mastered bomb recovery) can recover in 64.

Back on topic.

My only issue with Pictochat it that your foe can grab release, inhale, or spit out you into the hazards. As much as I don't like the stage much since the ceiling is kinda high and the reason stated above, I think it should stay legal for the sake of variety.

 

[Ninja Kirby Nick!]

+1 Spam (Muhahahahhahaha)
Just kidding.

I would like to talk about why Luigi's Mansion isn't banned, it should be due to the fact that expert brawl players are able to survive at insane percentages .

 

[GwJ]

Experts live to insane percentages on other stages too. But it's not as bad as Rainbow Cruise IMO. There's no stage fighting except when you literally want to to free the stage up. Just ban it/don't counterpick it against characters like Meta-Knight.

 

[xxmaliciousxx]

You know what else forces random and hazardous conditions on players?

Running.

Now stop johning and play on PictoChat.

Tripping is unavoidable. Stage choice is not.

 

[GwJ]

Actually, there's a simple code to remove tripping and I've yet to hear of a TO that bans the no-trip code.

And like Linkshot said, stop johning and play on Pictochat.

 

[xxmaliciousxx]

I would not have any problem with a code which removes tripping, but since when did one wrong justify another?

 

[Linkshot]

If I was hosting a vBrawl tourney, I would ban the no-tripping code, simply because it would make one or a handful of the Wiis superior to others.

 

[GwJ]

That's why you ask participants to bring an SD card since you can use codes without a hacked wii. There's no excuse.

 

[Linkshot]

There are people out there that are strictly against using hacks on their Wii due to paranoiaworrying about being bricked.

 

[bobson]

I am so utterly sick of your conflation. I did not say you can freely ignore the stage, but at the same time, you should never have to divert your attention exclusively to the stage.

Well, you clearly don't have to do that, so I'm glad we agree.

No, what is stupid and degenerate is that a spot on the stage becomes the method of winning, as opposed to beating your opponent.

Being in the safety zone is not the sole factor for a win or a loss, and I'm not even going to bother to try and figure out what line of thought brought you to this conclusion. Even if you're oblivious or refuse to focus on anything except your opponent like you seem to do, the hazards aren't a big deal anyway.

 

[xxmaliciousxx]

That's why you ask participants to bring an SD card since you can use codes without a hacked wii. There's no excuse.

But how would you know if their SD card contains anything more than a no-tripping code.

 

[GwJ]

You check the codes.

 

[fkacyan]

Being in the safety zone is not the sole factor for a win or a loss

I've seen people lose to hazards spawning on them, so in those cases it was, which means that this is an invalid statement. Is it always? No. Can it be? Yes. I think we can all agree that you'd have a much easier time winning if you could be in the safety zone the entire match and force your opponent to have to worry about the hazards.

 

[bobson]

I've seen people lose to hazards spawning on them, so in those cases it was, which means that this is an invalid statement.

No, they died because a combination of: A) not being in the safety zone, B) not reacting to the hazard upon drawing, C) letting themselves get within kill percents (or not DI-ing properly), and possibly D) letting their opponent move them in the general direction of a hazard. It's not the sole factor of a win and it never is, unless your opponent isn't playing.

I think we can all agree that you'd have a much easier time winning if you could be in the safety zone the entire match and force your opponent to have to worry about the hazards.

Not really. You'd have an easier time, certainly, but it's still only a minor disadvantage if you choose to ignore it. There are only three transformations that can actually kill you (not counting the fireballs which only kill at ridiculous percentages like 600) and three more that can damage you, and if you've played on the stage enough you can dodge most of them on reaction anyway.