Official Stage Legality Discussion

[infomon]

If you're so worried, then play a character with a good recovery

yes, this is a dumb answer but I don't know what else to say

 

[deepseadiva]

I have fallen through the stage and died twice myself during friendlies and it resulted in my loss both times, thankfully I have yet to be this unlucky in any tournaments or some other match with money on the line but I can say that although it is rare it only has to happen once to severely cripple your chances at winning.

In regards to tripping that will happen multiple times throughout a match and although its random it is expected and we are often aware of how to deal with tripping unlike instant deaths which nobody is prepared for.

Honestly, it's incredibly negligible. Tripping and even Smashville's balloon have an overall greater affect on matches than this glitch. Not to mention it would also be reckless to start banning stages on the basis they cause the fall-through glitch without fully understanding it's mechanics.

Plus a quick enough UpB would usually save you anyway.

 

[sunshade]

Honestly, it's incredibly negligible. Tripping and even Smashville's balloon have an overall greater affect on matches than this glitch. Not to mention it would also be reckless to start banning stages on the basis they cause the fall-through glitch without fully understanding it's mechanics.

Plus a quick enough UpB would usually save you anyway.

I suppose my bias is just so heavy that I hate the idea of falling to my death when money is on the line, and I agree that the glitch is not enough of a threat to ban a stage on its own however I do think it should be considered if a stage is borderline between being banned or legal.

 

[infomon]

hmmm, I think Meno got it. It may well be ban-worthy, but we don't understand it enough yet. We can't ban it before we understand it.... but we can't understand it if it barely ever shows up.

unless someone does know how it works fully, in which case my point is moot.

moot is a fun word.

moot.

 

[Linkshot]

infzy, are you high? XD

Spoiler

I love that word too, btw

EDIT: Something serious to discussion...hm...what to say..

Right. This falls under the same category as banning a stage before seeing how much it skews matchups at the highest level of [ghey] play.

 

[Kinzer]

I gotta ask.

Why is Yoshi's Island in most places a Counterpick.

I loved it as a neutral if only because Sonic is stupid broken there.

Ah but seriously, is there any reason it's not a neutral besides some MUs being too skewed in favor of some characters?

If that's the case, why isn't FD a CP?

 

[Linkshot]

Which Yoshi's?

I would support FD becoming CP. There is no balance to it. Brawl is a heavily defensive game, and FD has no approach options.

 

[Kinzer]

Excuse me, the Brawl version.

 

[Linkshot]

Yoshi's Island is quite a fair stage. Shifting platform, uneven terrain, and mild obstructions. One assists recovery, the other can be used to linger hitboxes and restore moves.

Just be prepared during recovery.

 

[Kinzer]

...That didn't quite explain to me why YI is starting to become a CP more often than it is a neutral. :/

It just told me things about the stage.

I don't understand if it suggests it be a neutral or a CP.

 

[Sucumbio]

YI(B) is less balanced than BF.
FD is less balanced than SV or BF or YI(B).
SV and YI(B) are less balanced than BF.

So in terms of fairness allowing stages... uh, yeah. in this order.

BF, SV/YI(B), FD

This would be why you are seeing YI(B) as a cp... BF i hate to say it will probably remain the most "neutral" stage with SV 2nd, YI(B) 3rd and FD 4th. and the less "neutral" a stage, the more likely it'll be used for cp.

 

[Linkshot]

I am not psychic, and thusly cannot figure out others' opinions.

If you think YI should be Starter, then make it starter when you host a tourney.

 

[Nidtendofreak]

YI(B) is a neutral here in Texas. :D

 

[Linkshot]

The Starters up here are:

Battlefield
Final Destination
Smashville
Yoshi's Island
Halberd
Castle Siege
Pokemon Stadium 1

 

[Amazing Ampharos]

Most regions are being really dumb and reducing the number of starters (and making the game overall less fair to more characters) under some misguided concept that it's somehow improving the game (though everyone is indeed totally apathetic to the nonsense that Final Destination can be in some matchups, not a bit less bad than Halberd in any matchup). I suggest making it an issue with your local TOs if you want it to be otherwise.

 

[Linkshot]

We need to form our own region, AA. XD

 

[Kinzer]

Most regions are being really dumb and reducing the number of starters (and making the game overall less fair to more characters) under some misguided concept that it's somehow improving the game (though everyone is indeed totally apathetic to the nonsense that Final Destination can be in some matchups, not a bit less bad than Halberd in any matchup). I suggest making it an issue with your local TOs if you want it to be otherwise.

I think I'm the reason Vegas no longer has YI as a neutral stage.

Halp?

 

[kingcobra9]

I think I'm the reason Vegas no longer has YI as a neutral stage.

Halp?

so way to go...you blew it for everyone

 

[sunshade]

I think I'm the reason Vegas no longer has YI as a neutral stage.

Halp?

What did you do that was so horrible that Yoshi's Island (B) needed to be moved out of starter?

Also if whatever tactic you used was degenerate enough to have Yoshi's moved from the starter list wouldn't the move while not a personal gain be an overall improvement to your local metagame?

 

[Kinzer]

It was a joke.

...Perhaps somewhat though.

Look up "iSDR Kojin" on Youtube. It's not ban-worthy or unstoppable/ but it makes a nice asset, and with such an advantageous tactic, it's best that it isn't neutral so it isn't a "guaranteed win" or close to it. So yes, while it isn't beneficial to me, the community definitely prefers it isn't a neutral. I don't think I'm even the real main reason, I just highlighted it further. A lot of people here locally usually banned that stage out of distaste.

If that doesn't move it to a CP, it might bet he Shy Guys getting in the way of projectiles (think Ness trying to recover with PKT2), and Helper Ghosts AFAIK being random saving/not saving people as they please.

Not trying to explain anything, just trying to see if I may be able to clear some things up. I may be wrong.

 

[infomon]

But that's not a matter of the stage being unbalanced. It's just quirky in a way that rebalances different matchups differently than usual. In this case, it's a good candidate for being stricken by your opponent..... but we're not talking about it being unbalanced with respect to character matchups all across the board.

Then again, we should try and determine... what are the criteria for starter stages? Are they supposed to be just "non-quirky"? Or should they be as "fair as possible" in the sense of giving low-tiers advantages over high-tiers, for example (lolwut)? So Sonic has a cool feature about YI:B, that doesn't seem like a reason for it to not be in the starter set. You could just as well remove SV because its platform is "unique". idk

 

[Kinzer]

I don't hear or see anything about any character gaining a significant advantage on stages like BattleField (although this is IMO more debatable) or SmashVille, whereas people complain about how FD has no platforms and is therefore in favor of characters with projectiles/being able to force approaches.

The problem with this is now that we only have two starter stages to work, and the striking system needs us to use n odd-number.

 

[Amazing Ampharos]

Smashville is still pretty pro-ICs (it's their second best stage!), and Battlefield is Marthfield. You get worse and worse results the more stages you remove from stage striking; you really do get a radically more fair result from 7 than you could ever get from 3 or 5.

 

[sunshade]

radically more fair result from 7 than you could ever get from 3 or 5.

This statement right here made me wonder why the first match is not decided by doing stage striking for every legal stage. I cannot personally cannot think of any better way of finding the most "fair" stage possible than the aforementioned method.

 

[buenob]

^because it would freaking take forever...

 

[Linkshot]

It would take only 10 more seconds at high level play.

I support "No Starters".

Stage Strike all legal stages.

 

[Kinzer]

It would take only 10 more seconds at high level play.

I support "No Starters".

Stage Strike all legal stages.

We need Final Destination though once we consider Fox only and no items though.

 

[sunshade]

^because it would freaking take forever...

I don't see this taking more than 5-6 minutes on average but I am going to start doing this during all my friendlies and recording the time it takes for a match to start and stage to be chosen. For the sake of more accurate data I think it would be a good idea for others to take up a similar tactic so we can see if this will "freaking take forever" in a tournament.

 

[Kinzer]

To be honest, most I've ever seen a stage selection go for was a minute, take or leave some. I don't think anybody takes any longer than that unless they're really indecisive/ are really thorough in considering their options against the opponent and/or his character on which stages.

 

[sunshade]

. I don't think anybody takes any longer than that unless they're really indecisive/ are really thorough

I tried to factor in all kinds of people and their total time needed to stage strike. I for example spend about 2-3 minutes on the average counter pick if not longer simply because I want to make sure I am picking the right stage for the fight. So I figured if you had other people who were even slower than me it could take a while (but still not a time long enough for it to cause any real issue to a TO).

 

[infomon]

I always thought I was slow, but I don't think I ever surpass a full minute. That's a huge amount of time to wait between matches. You spend multiple minutes just to decide a counterpick?

geez as much as I like striking / fairness, I might actually have to side with buenob on this one.

strike from 7 starters ftw?

 

[Linkshot]

Stage Striking takes far less than counterpicking, IMO.

 

[deepseadiva]

This statement right here made me wonder why the first match is not decided by doing stage striking for every legal stage. I cannot personally cannot think of any better way of finding the most "fair" stage possible than the aforementioned method.

That would be ideal, but unfortunately we don't play out tournaments in Hyperbolic Time Chambers. It's simply too much trouble for too little improvement. Seven starters is sufficient.

Not to mention it would also give away your counterpicks when it comes to ban time.

 

[sunshade]

Not to mention it would also give away your counterpicks when it comes to ban time.

I don't quite understand how it would give away your counter picks. If anything it opens more options for counter picking due to you being able to get an idea of how your opponent feels about certain stages based on how they stage struck than pick a stage that while not the best counter pick on paper could be a stage your opponent knows less about or has a particular vendetta for.

(I also agree with Linkshot on counter picking taking longer than stage striking, or at least I spend much less time stage striking than counter picking.)

 

[deepseadiva]

I don't quite understand how it would give away your counter picks. If anything it opens more options for counter picking due to you being able to get an idea of how your opponent feels about certain stages based on how they stage struck than pick a stage that while not the best counter pick on paper could be a stage your opponent knows less about or has a particular vendetta for.

Exactly, it works both ways.

 

[sunshade]

Exactly, it works both ways.

Working both ways in this case rewards the player that is better at reading his opponent's none battle tactics and Imo would add an interesting new layer to brawl strategy.

*edit for spelling*

 

[infomon]

I don't see a reason to push for more of the competition to take place outside of the game rather than simply within it.

 

[deepseadiva]

Working both ways in this case rewards the player that is better at reading his opponent's none battle tactics and Imo would add an interesting new layer to brawl strategy.

We could also play hop-scotch to decide port conflicts.

Overall, stage striking using all the legal stages wonderfully solves a non-existent problem. Seven starters works well enough.

 

[infomon]

We could also play hop-scotch to decide port conflicts.

Someday I will face you in tournament, and this is how it will go down.

You better practice up; because I will.

 

[sunshade]

I don't see a reason to push for more of the competition to take place outside of the game rather than simply within it.

I don't think stage striking would be a competition outside of the game. It would not be fighting I will give you that but it is still a battle of wits between both players where they weigh their options based on their opponents moves/tells using their knowledge of brawl to assist them.

Overall, stage striking using all the legal stages wonderfully solves a non-existent problem. Seven starters works well enough.

As much as I love trying to make a system perfect this is the reality of the mater .

We could also play hop-scotch to decide port conflicts.

The thought of M2K playing hop-scotch for port 4 made my day.