Official Stage Legality Discussion

[Blacknight99923]

I've gotta head to a biweekly tournament, so this will be my last on the matter until later tonight, but I don't really think encouraging camping is a reason to ban, considering the nature of the game Brawl is.

Now, if it was proven that camping was an unbeatable strategy where you either had to camp or you lost, then I'd be more inclined to accept the reasoning, but as Ran stated, it isn't unbeatable, it's just really difficult.

No worse than non-invincible planking (Marth, Pit, GW, ROB, etc) as far as I'm concerned.

I can see why MLG left it out, because they don't want to see really campy matches, but they're a company, so they're allowed to be a little scrubby in the interest of business.

On that note, MikeHaze vs. Ook was pretty hyped, from what I could tell on the video, so Green Greens was a good business decision for them. xD

If they didn't want to see campy matches Green Greens would be banned

 

[ADHD]

As far as I'm concerned, this discussion shouldn't include things like, "We just don't like it, waahhhh", because that's not competitively sound logic.

Why? We are the only competitive community that plays the game that we prefer--without items. Some items aren't gamebreaking or that edgy, and yet we choose to continue to leave them out of the competitive picture. We consider banning a character despite him not being foolproof ubeatable or entirely dominant, but because we don't like him and his presence. Just because the stages are not yet proven to be broken, we do not have to be stage nazis and claim that they should stay--because we overall don't like them.

 

[Deleted member]

Besides the fact that Norfair is probably my favorite stage, I think it's fine as a counterpick. The biggest problem with it is the fire plumes, but at the same time, they're not that difficult to deal with.

 

[Linkshot]

What makes MK so unbeatable on Green Greens? I could stand on top of the stack of blocks and shield. He then risks blowing himself up.
Yes, you can shield the explosion.

If he wants to plank the middle crevaces, he again risks a bomb dropping onto his sword.
If MK's Shuttle Loop planking is truly invincible, why haven't we banned ledges the same way we've banned walls and walkoffs for D3?

...I honestly don't have a clue why. We CAN limit D3's grabs (Hint: There's a counter for that too) but choose to ban the offensive stages instead.

 

[AlphaZealot]

While I disagree with ADHD bringing up MK because considering and actually acting on something are very different things; he is right that banning all items is more about preference than anything else.

Linkshot: FYI, MKs near invulnerable planking involves no use of shuttle loop-it's more about just using the up air successfully.

 

[Linkshot]

That sounds even more punishable on Green Greens, heh.

 

[AlphaZealot]

MK is not unbeatable on green greens. Heck it's one of the few stages that provides an anti planking item with the Apples.

 

[ADHD]

What makes MK so unbeatable on Green Greens? I could stand on top of the stack of blocks and shield. He then risks blowing himself up.
Yes, you can shield the explosion.

If he wants to plank the middle crevaces, he again risks a bomb dropping onto his sword.

I just want to establish that this isn't a discussion about my five-year-old nephew's mk (although he has the ADHD genes). If you stand shielding on top of the blocks expecting him to attack bombs and blow himself up then you should probably use your ban here. Planking does take skill--yes I admitted it. Someone who has the ability to plank will know to themselves to be cautious of up-air'ing a bomb inside a block.
@ alphazealot, assuming the apple does not explode and kill you when you pick it up (LOL), then he can easily DI away from the throw and use his jumps with an up air to get back to the ledge, or as an emergency tornado. Smaert plankers will not let themselves be prone to obvious tactics such as throwing items down directly at them.

 

[Linkshot]

ADHD, apples only explode on landing in Melee.
In Brawl, they have no hitboxes until you throw them.

 

[AlphaZealot]

ADHD: everything you said about planking applies to every stage in the game, not just Green Greens, so I fail how to see it makes any difference. What makes green greens special is the use of extra projectiles to help bother plankers. Smashville is the biggest offender for planking/scrooging-apply your argument universally.

 

[ADHD]

ADHD, apples only explode on landing in Melee.
In Brawl, they have no hitboxes until you throw them.

....No. As to alphazealot, I don't care about his planking ability as much as his other strengths there, I was stating how ridiculous it is to say the apples "stop" metaknight's planking.

 

[Nefarious B]

I think the stagelist that is typically used right now is pretty good (the usual stages, brinstar/RC legal, no japes). Adding questionable stages is... questionable.

It'd be much more beneficial to the metagame in my opinion to allow all the stages on the "typical" stage list to be struck in the first game. Allowing a much more diverse first game would allow for character flexibility to shine through in a reasonable manner.

 

[Raziek]

Yeah, ADHD is right about the apples, but only partially. They can explode, but not after you pick them up. Move away from them as they land, since they explode just after hitting the ground. Then go in and pick them up.

 

[billybeegood]

LOL MAD LAZY AND I COPIED THIS FROM ANOTHER THREAD (still my work tho)
back to the 9 starter debate / *****ing

The difference being the neutral system (which the best definition I can give is a stage that hinders neither player and makes neither player excel) would range from a 3 stage starter, to a 5 stage starter, seeing as BOTH aerial and ground based characters play average on stages such as BF SV etc

notice that I said that ground characters play average on neutrals, save for maybe ICs Diddy or snake of which FD hold a small advantage at.
We have lylat cruise in the 5 neutral set. So remove FD while the player using the ground character bans lylat, seeing as aerial charcters excel at lylat.

The point that I'm trying to put across here is that the 5 neutrals don't make ground characters excel, because they only do average on stages such as SV and BF but we're under the false impression that they excel on those stages. But in reality we're all just *****es about how to nullify diddy ics and snake once mk gets banned <3

The goal of the 9 STARTER stages is to give each player a stage that neither player really loves or hates. But this idea is flawed if you take into account the fact that aerial charcters love every stage...except maybe FD
Their arguement is that the 5 neutral gives ground based charcters a buff they don't deserve and air charcters should be rewarded for their versatility.
By adding in some stages that air characters excel at (except for snake, he likes Siege and BS hal) they comprised a stage list that makes the system more "balanced"

I personally find it hard to believe that the community is asking for more of a buff for aerial (or versital, either one works) seeing as the aerial characters basicly nail a free win on their counter pick (a free win is a bit overstated but it is an EXTREMELY difficult time)

as far as I see it, that one counterpick is enough of a reward for the air based characters versatility and should not be extended any more than that

and the end goal with the 9 starter is flawed seeing as their goal of going on a stage that neither player likes nor hates is already acheived with the 5 neutral starter, so It can only be used as an unfair buff TOWARDS aerial based charcters...and for the time being, snake

 

[Nefarious B]

You're saying aerial character basically get a free win on their CPs. You could pretty much change that to MK (and maybe Wario).

Even if that were true (it's laughably false), thats still two stages that favor a grounded character in a 3 game match. Even if ICs don't **** **** everyone on FD or SV like MK does on RC, they still become significantly better, which means they are favored.

Somehow, even with aerial characters getting their so called "free wins" on their CP, grounded characters are 4 of the current top 5 on the current tier list. Care to explain that?

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

LOL MAD LAZY AND I COPIED THIS FROM ANOTHER THREAD (still my work tho)
back to the 9 starter debate / *****ing

The difference being the neutral system (which the best definition I can give is a stage that hinders neither player and makes neither player excel) would range from a 3 stage starter, to a 5 stage starter, seeing as BOTH aerial and ground based characters play average on stages such as BF SV etc

notice that I said that ground characters play average on neutrals, save for maybe ICs Diddy or snake of which FD hold a small advantage at.
We have lylat cruise in the 5 neutral set. So remove FD while the player using the ground character bans lylat, seeing as aerial charcters excel at lylat.

The point that I'm trying to put across here is that the 5 neutrals don't make ground characters excel, because they only do average on stages such as SV and BF but we're under the false impression that they excel on those stages. But in reality we're all just *****es about how to nullify diddy ics and snake once mk gets banned <3

The goal of the 9 STARTER stages is to give each player a stage that neither player really loves or hates. But this idea is flawed if you take into account the fact that aerial charcters love every stage...except maybe FD
Their arguement is that the 5 neutral gives ground based charcters a buff they don't deserve and air charcters should be rewarded for their versatility.
By adding in some stages that air characters excel at (except for snake, he likes Siege and BS hal) they comprised a stage list that makes the system more "balanced"

I personally find it hard to believe that the community is asking for more of a buff for aerial (or versital, either one works) seeing as the aerial characters basicly nail a free win on their counter pick (a free win is a bit overstated but it is an EXTREMELY difficult time)

as far as I see it, that one counterpick is enough of a reward for the air based characters versatility and should not be extended any more than that

and the end goal with the 9 starter is flawed seeing as their goal of going on a stage that neither player likes nor hates is already acheived with the 5 neutral starter, so It can only be used as an unfair buff TOWARDS aerial based charcters...and for the time being, snake

Been there done that.

http://www.smashboards.com/showpost.php?p=10803065&postcount=1918

And yet still nobody has answered that point. ICs on FD is just as potent a counterpick as MK on brinstar. Ground characters never excel, in fact, they're usually very, very poor on stages that aren't biased in their favor. If you always give them those stages, they don't become game-****** monsters, they become average. Air characters always excel. In fact, they're always very, very good on stages that aren't biased immensly against them. If you always give them those stages, they go from awesome to slightly above average. However, if the natural balance would be that a certain few chars in the cast get abused by the stagelist, and some get massive boosts from it, why are we helping the ones that get abused?

Also, your claim that aerial characters "excel" on Lylat is woefully false. Aerial characters excel on Lylat the same way grounded characters excel on it-they don't like it, but it's better than something like Brinstar (for aerial chars, FD). FD is an absolutely polar neutral. If I have to automatically strike FD as an aerial character (I do, almost always, as it is a stage that is almost exclusively based on ground combat), my opponent should always have to strike Brinstar, the stage that exemplifies aerial combat. Not Lylat, a stage which is shockingly middle-of-the-road.

You say that ground characters don't excel on stages like Smashville or FD. Tell me, if SV, FD, and BF did not exist, how good would Falco, ICs, and Diddy be? I'd say around B-tier, because their matchups with most characters just went waaaay downhill. Those are literally the only stages those characters are really good on (okay, falco has Japes and Diddy has Pictochat...). Saying they don't excel there is like saying that Ganondorf doesn't excel on Norfair. No, actually, he does–the stage actually might give a ****ty char like him a reasonable chance to win a match in the set when he reasonably should NEVER win. The fact that all of his matchups are still mediocre there, on his strongest counterpick, points to him being a lousy character. And he doesn't get too much worse when you go down the list (not far towards the bottom to go LMAO), ending on FD.
If a character is only good on a few stages, it is a bad character. It should never be able to get those stages game one.

Aerial characters seriously get the short end of the stick in this system, even with their so-called "automatic win" on game 2 (because, as said, Falco, ICs and co. can't function on stages that aren't flat+plat). If they're really that much better characters, then why even bother to play anyone else? You can't hand Falco or Diddy a top counterpick game one and then claim the system is balanced. It's like ensuring that G&W starts on Norfair, RC, or Brinstar, and calling that fair because now he has a chance against snake and marth and a few other problem matchups.

 

[Linkshot]

If those three stages didn't exist, people would stop playing Brawl competitively because "Bawwww no static stages left"

 

[-LzR-]

Static stages suck, if you like, go play street fighter.

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

I wouldn't say they suck. They simply build the other end of the spectrum to stages like Mario Bros, 75m, or Warioware. You can choose where to fight.

 

[-LzR-]

Those stages are all great, but not for competitive game. The problem about static stages is th at they take the smash away. The greatest part of smash is it's interactive stages. The stages don't get in the way, they are part of the game. Like how well you can control the lava in Brinstar or control the area in Frigate.
FD has this major hazard: Too ****ing big and boring.

 

[ADHD]

Those stages are all great, but not for competitive game. The problem about static stages is th at they take the smash away. The greatest part of smash is it's interactive stages. The stages don't get in the way, they are part of the game. Like how well you can control the lava in Brinstar or control the area in Frigate.
FD has this major hazard: Too ****ing big and boring.

gewdz point, i totlly agre3e3e3ee3333

 

[Luxor]

stuff

ADHD's got you there. Personal stage preference doesn't mean anything. Lrn2rgu.

 

[-Ran]

MK is not unbeatable on green greens. Heck it's one of the few stages that provides an anti planking item with the Apples.

Anti-planking... No offense, but I'm pretty sure the apples only spawn around once every two to three minutes, and even then the meager damage they are going to do is only going to reset the situation to neutral for a few seconds, before the apples have fallen off the stage/disappeared. Besides, an MK would be able to airdodge/uair to catch the apple, and then regrab the ledge, and then z drop the apple, or throw it straight up as they fall off the ledge.

Green Greens shares the same issue as Jungles Japes. Two consistent platforms that force players to jump to reach their opponent. In doing so, the attacker is going into a horrible situation, where their opponent just needs to shield to beat every option they have. In doing so, it allows them to easily punish the attacker, knocking him either back into the center of the stage, or to the dangerously close borders.

 

[Amazing Ampharos]

The approaching player has ledges too though. Japes is actually really easy. If someone is platform camping me on Japes, I wait for the ideal timing relative to klaptrap, grab the ledge, and then fishbowl through the stage to either get some free damage or force them to move. I can also Chef from the main platform and see how they react to that. I'm pretty sure more of the cast than not has analogous options to this.

On Green Greens, I find some players do just jump over the block wall to approach the side platforms which makes winning very easy for me if I can get any lead at all. Better players will just attack the blocks and use the ledges to assist their approaches. You can't even really get ledge trapped since you have solid ground behind you that you can retreat to if things go sour for you. Sure it's overall good for the person on the platform if they have a solid anti-air game, but I don't think the other guy has a dearth of options.

 

[-Ran]

Game and Watch isn't truly a good example, since he's one of the best characters in the game on the edge, as evidenced by UTD Zac. With good, multi-hit aerials, Game and Watch can approach in a situation, where most characters could not. You being on the ledge is never a bad option in the situation, while other characters are putting themselves into a worse situation.

It's not just good for the person that is on the platform, but -amazing.- As long as you are adequate at power shielding projectiles, you are safe. For the example above, they could powershield the Bacon, and the moment you go for the ledge, they are able to retreat back onto the stage, and towards the other ledge platform. Aside from Green Greens and Japes, there aren't any stages in our list that have persistent disjointed platforms. Rainbow Cruise, could be argued, but none of the situations remain for long. Furthermore, most of the time they don't have an edge to grab, or they have a platform directly under the platform that would be camped.

Green Greens and Japes promote a style of play that isn't condoned as skillful competition. Every other stage in Brawl is about getting your opponent off the main level to where you can either utilize platforms, or deny their access back to the stage's ledge. The addition of stagnant sides produces matches that overly rely on their existence and result in exceedingly long matches that are some of the most boring affairs I've ever watched. Almost every match I've played on Japes has gone to timer. I would say, that out of all the banned stages, Japes would fit in as a -great- teams only level.

 

[Amazing Ampharos]

Can they teleport now? Going past me to the other platform when I grab the ledge requires going past me. I just hit them when they try that nonsense. Remember both of these stages are very linear. Unless the other guy goes really high or really low, generally your only option to get to the other side is to go through them. If they are playing so passively you can easily just jump past them, that's really their own fault.

To go through character by character:

MK has so many answers I don't think it's worth explaining.

Snake can murder your shield with explosives. If you can consistently powershield properly cooked grenades and smart nikitas, I'd be impressed. He can also jump up high and put a C4 down on the platform and then mix in the detonation of it with his other explosive pressure. Remember you have time as well so if you want to pre-emptively make a side platform a pain to use, feel free to put a down smash mine on it.

Wario doesn't mind jumping at you and can use his aerial mobility to easily retreat. I don't think Wario's game plan really changes much at all.

Diddy Kong can use peanuts to put you into a powershielding test if he wants, or he could throw a banana down onto the edge of the platform and use it to cover his approach (being ready to smack you with an aerial if you go for it yourself). Landing behind his banana is the idea for him.

Marth can just retreating fair shields repeatedly pretty much safely. Fair the shield with your tipper, pull back, and grab the far ledge or land on the central platform. Repeat a lot. If they back up far enough to make it difficult, land on the ground on the center stage side of the platform and enjoy your commanding position.

Pikachu can rain Thunder and Thunder Jolts on you until he decides to QAC onto the platform really fast and do his usual business. Pikachu can make really smart use of those ledges and the center platform to stay unpredictable while going for the far platform with his unique mobility.

Mr. Game & Watch I covered earlier. In addition to what I said, he can use his fair kinda like Marth uses his. G&W is pretty strong in these situations.

Toon Link can easily use his projectiles to at least give him an opening to land on the platform. He has three of them and can use them in unison in smart ways. He also can use zair safely to land.

Pit and Kirby both would seem to have poor options but can use their large number of mid-air jumps to make aerial approaches a lot more viable. Pit can also loop arrows to help his approach, and both have a good ledge game.

Olimar has an unblockable projectile that lets him trivially resolve the situation.

Zero Suit Samus can keep falling on your shield with side-B which that close to the side blast zone is a major threat for a low% kill. She has to be careful not to target the ledge (but not that careful since if she messes up she just retreats to the ground behind her), but the other guy is probably not going to be able to consistently powershield that if she mixes up the timing.

Donkey Kong fully charges Giant Punch and jumps in planning to land at your feet for a guessing game. If you guess right you hit him long-ways across the stage which won't kill him until something like 150% (more like 250% on Japes!). If he guesses right, he lands a Giant Punch (which will armor through attacks!) and hits you toward the near blast zone and kills you at 50% or similarly stupid percentages. His bair is also really good if he wants to go with that plan.

Peach has floating and turnips and good aerials. Any Peach player worth his salt won't have any trouble.

Ness and Luigi have very fast aerial attacks at least so jumping right at someone has above average pay-outs with them.

So among the good characters who am I missing? Ice Climbers, King Dedede, Lucario, and Falco? Falco independently is good on Jungle Japes and Green Greens for other reasons even if his options to address this particular situation are mediocre (though his laser is not something I'd want to try powershielding for 8 minutes). Ice Climbers are bad on a lot of stages with these obviously not being anywhere near their worst. King Dedede has some hope of using Waddle Dees to cover him a bit or Inhale gimmicks from the ledge or his multiple jumps; no individual option is that great, but having several mediocre options probably lets him muddle through this situation in most matchups. Lucario can use his dair to mix up his fall speed at least. I guess we could get into characters like Sonic, Pokemon Trainer, Ike, Fox, and Wolf at this point (the next quality group), but at this point we're dipping a bit low. Even if you go into the real low tiers, not all of them even mind the situation (Jigglypuff, for instance, has no problem with it at all).

I'm just not seeing the problem here. Sitting on the side platforms can make approaching you difficult, but it's super risky since if you get hit by something solid you die pretty early as they come in on you, but if you hit them, they fly long ways across the stage and don't die until high damages. Most characters have character specific options to ease this approach as well. The approaching player does have to be careful and deliberate, but the control of the match is in his hands. I don't think it's bad or anti-competitive gameplay.

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

Game and Watch isn't truly a good example, since he's one of the best characters in the game on the edge, as evidenced by UTD Zac. With good, multi-hit aerials, Game and Watch can approach in a situation, where most characters could not. You being on the ledge is never a bad option in the situation, while other characters are putting themselves into a worse situation.

It's not just good for the person that is on the platform, but -amazing.- As long as you are adequate at power shielding projectiles, you are safe. For the example above, they could powershield the Bacon, and the moment you go for the ledge, they are able to retreat back onto the stage, and towards the other ledge platform. Aside from Green Greens and Japes, there aren't any stages in our list that have persistent disjointed platforms. Rainbow Cruise, could be argued, but none of the situations remain for long. Furthermore, most of the time they don't have an edge to grab, or they have a platform directly under the platform that would be camped.

Green Greens and Japes promote a style of play that isn't condoned as skillful competition. Every other stage in Brawl is about getting your opponent off the main level to where you can either utilize platforms, or deny their access back to the stage's ledge. The addition of stagnant sides produces matches that overly rely on their existence and result in exceedingly long matches that are some of the most boring affairs I've ever watched. Almost every match I've played on Japes has gone to timer. I would say, that out of all the banned stages, Japes would fit in as a -great- teams only level.

<massive amounts of pretty good theorycraft>

What you seem to be missing here (both of you) is that people arguing that said disjointed platforms are broken have to prove it. Not the other way around. And you say camping the platforms is "not condoned as skillful competition"; you might as well criticize any stage with a strage property. RC is the only moving stage currently legal, and I could just as well say, "we don't condone moving stages as places where you can hold skillful competition". Or "We don't condone tactics involving rising lava/acid as condonable for skillful competition". Completely arbitrary-if it's a broken tactic, then prove it.

 

[-Ran]

Can they teleport now? Going past me to the other platform when I grab the ledge requires going past me. I just hit them when they try that nonsense. Remember both of these stages are very linear. Unless the other guy goes really high or really low, generally your only option to get to the other side is to go through them. If they are playing so passively you can easily just jump past them, that's really their own fault.

To go through character by character:

MK has so many answers I don't think it's worth explaining.

I counter Mk's answers, with MK being the one on the outer platform. =p

Snake can murder your shield with explosives. If you can consistently powershield properly cooked grenades and smart nikitas, I'd be impressed. He can also jump up high and put a C4 down on the platform and then mix in the detonation of it with his other explosive pressure. Remember you have time as well so if you want to pre-emptively make a side platform a pain to use, feel free to put a down smash mine on it.

Though Snake is capable of grenade cooking, it takes time. 3-4 seconds for each grenade that he's going to lob in the direction of his opponent. The point of holding control of the outer platform is to remove the commodity of time. Grenades do not do a lot of shield damage. By the time a second grenade would be throw, the shield would be almost at full.

If a Snake is attempting to Cypher to drop a Mine... then he's being a moron. It's incredibly telegraphed, and allows his opponent to simply go to the other side of the stage, all while Snake takes the 10 seconds to do it. Let's not forget the position that Snake is putting himself in to drop a mine. As a character without adequate options on landing, he's just given his opponent an opportunity to increase the damage lead that he already has.

Wario doesn't mind jumping at you and can use his aerial mobility to easily retreat. I don't think Wario's game plan really changes much at all.

Actually, it does. Considering the one thing Wario doesn't want you to do is grab him in most match ups, he would have to be overtly careful in approaching this situation. Wario is at his strongest ascending, rather than descending with his aerials. If a zoning based character was on the platform, what would Wario be able to do, in all honesty? His best option is to go in with an aerial and then auto-cancel it, but this can be beaten by pivot grab, and if the individual on the edge has a half decent aerial/oos option, they can just knock him back off the disjointed platform.

Diddy Kong can use peanuts to put you into a powershielding test if he wants, or he could throw a banana down onto the edge of the platform and use it to cover his approach (being ready to smack you with an aerial if you go for it yourself). Landing behind his banana is the idea for him.

Banana could be grabbed with a jab by most characters with ease or air dodging into it, or they use the fact that one banana is now on the stage to retreat to the center of the level. Diddy would then want to go grab his other banana, and the process continues assuming adequate mobility for the character that is camping. As a character though, it's hard to keep Diddy from gaining control of an area when he wants it.

Marth can just retreating fair shields repeatedly pretty much safely. Fair the shield with your tipper, pull back, and grab the far ledge or land on the central platform. Repeat a lot. If they back up far enough to make it difficult, land on the ground on the center stage side of the platform and enjoy your commanding position.

Another character with good options against a shield. Marth is able to use his disjointed, good aerials to gain control, as long as his opponent doesn't have better options, or a projectile to slow him down.

Pikachu can rain Thunder and Thunder Jolts on you until he decides to QAC onto the platform really fast and do his usual business. Pikachu can make really smart use of those ledges and the center platform to stay unpredictable while going for the far platform with his unique mobility.

Yet another character that wouldn't have much of an issue. Conversely, another character that would be amazing to be on the actual platform vs another character.

Mr. Game & Watch I covered earlier. In addition to what I said, he can use his fair kinda like Marth uses his. G&W is pretty strong in these situations.

Agreed, unless his opponent has better disjoints than him. Such as Marth or MK.

Toon Link can easily use his projectiles to at least give him an opening to land on the platform. He has three of them and can use them in unison in smart ways. He also can use zair safely to land.

Zair isn't safe on shield. Toon Link has enough projectiles to where he wouldn't have to approach onto the platform. It's always strange playing against a Toon Link, since he only needs to approach to kill really. Bombs are relatively annoying to power-shield consistently and so they have the chance to shield push you off of the platform.

Really, I don't see any need to go beyond here in your points, since most situations are beat out by a matter of WHO is on the platform, and WHY they are there. People go to the platform to waste time, so that they can mount damage against characters that are forced to approach them due to their percent lead. Marth isn't going to wrestle control of the platform from MK, and Game and Watch isn't going to get Marth off it either.

It's a situation that gives entirely too much control of the match to whoever has the lead and the right options to stay on those platforms. [Why would they have Cp'ed there anyways, if they didn't?] Even still, with the proper options, due to the relative size of the level and the ease of navigation players constantly do a cat and mouse battle as they run around the stage. When I look at stages, I often ask myself:

"Would I want someone to view this as the first tournament match they've ever seen?"

The answer for Japes is pretty easy. It's a boring stage that encourages players to camp time-out due to the composition of the level. Being on the platform isn't an unbeatable tactic, but rather one that will tilt the percents in the favor of the player that is already in the lead, and waste time. If a player is mixing up between a decent aerial/projectile and shielding, it is incredibly hard to get them off the platform without putting yourself into a position that won't allow them to just go to the other platform. My personal bias in all of this, is that I have never seen a match that didn't almost run the timer on this stage.

As mentioned before, I do believe this would make for an amazing Team's stage. We've discussed doing so in Louisiana before, but our team's scene isn't really alive due to an unbalance in player skill. So the conversation more or less stagnated. I would be perfectly OKAY with the addition of more stages into the conversation for Teams, but Japes stands as a horrible stage for singles.

The main character that would look to Japes as a CP would be Falco, and that would simply open up FD as a counter-pick for him, instead of being banned. The more stages that are included at a tournament, the less intellectual and important the ban that a player has. Stage diversity is important, but we should be careful about the inclusion of stages that leave a player in a position of.... "Well I can ban one ganky stage, but my opponent will still be able to take me to two more."

Ps: On the note about Rainbow cruise, I believe that as a stage it doesn't belong in tournament play. It is completely opposed to the normal way that Brawl is played in a competitive environment, and it tends to be a last ditch effort counter-pick by players that are outclassed in a conventional sense of a match up. I can't tell you how many times I've witnessed lower-level players pick it against someone else in hopes to have the stage beat their opponent for them. As mentioned, it's the only stage that continually moves during the match. There's a noted lack of ledges to grab on the stage as well. It's a bad stage for competitive play, but it'll remain for the same reasons MK won't be banned anytime soon.

Then again, unlike most TO's I didn't automatically switch to anything that MLG is doing. Louisiana as a state came to terms with what stages we were going to use, and have kept to that by and large.

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

It's a situation that gives entirely too much control of the match to whoever has the lead and the right options to stay on those platforms. [Why would they have Cp'ed there anyways, if they didn't?] Even still, with the proper options, due to the relative size of the level and the ease of navigation players constantly do a cat and mouse battle as they run around the stage.

Good, you have your theory that goes against the null hypothesis. Now prove it.

When I look at stages, I often ask myself:

"Would I want someone to view this as the first tournament match they've ever seen?"

Completely irrelevant.

As mentioned before, I do believe this would make for an amazing Team's stage. We've discussed doing so in Louisiana before, but our team's scene isn't really alive due to an unbalance in player skill. So the conversation more or less stagnated. I would be perfectly OKAY with the addition of more stages into the conversation for Teams, but Japes stands as a horrible stage for singles.

Actually, there are so many stages that would be perfectly decent for teams that don't work for singles. Why hasn't this been brought up? Any stage where the only really broken strategy is "run away a lot" are all of a sudden not an issue. Spear Pillar? How are you going to circle camp two players at once? Hanenbow? Same deal. NPC and Temple I suppose have other issues... 75m? Who the hell knows.

The main character that would look to Japes as a CP would be Falco, and that would simply open up FD as a counter-pick for him, instead of being banned. The more stages that are included at a tournament, the less intellectual and important the ban that a player has. Stage diversity is important, but we should be careful about the inclusion of stages that leave a player in a position of.... "Well I can ban one ganky stage, but my opponent will still be able to take me to two more."

Why? Is this proven to be much better than the game in its normal state? Remember, when you ban a stage, you are effectively removing a part of the game. It's as if you hacked the game to turn it into a game where you cannot select that stage.

Ps: On the note about Rainbow cruise, I believe that as a stage it doesn't belong in tournament play. It is completely opposed to the normal way that Brawl is played in a competitive environment, and it tends to be a last ditch effort counter-pick by players that are outclassed in a conventional sense of a match up. I can't tell you how many times I've witnessed lower-level players pick it against someone else in hopes to have the stage beat their opponent for them. As mentioned, it's the only stage that continually moves during the match. There's a noted lack of ledges to grab on the stage as well. It's a bad stage for competitive play, but it'll remain for the same reasons MK won't be banned anytime soon.

You ignored the point behind it. How about I reformulate it like this: "We can't allow Final Destination. Its lack of platforms is completely different from competitive brawl in its true state". It's completely arbitrary. Also this post is slightly relevant. And also, how many times have you seen a lower-level player win after counterpicking someone way better than him to rainbow cruise, in a match where the actual effects of the stage played a defining role? I'm guessing not all that often. Good players know how to play RC. It's a test of skill as much as any other stage.

 

[-Ran]

Everyone that asks for something to be proven has a horrible memory. We've all witnessed how these stages were played early in the meta-game. You ask me to prove it, and my counter argument is for you to instead prove it to me that it isn't still broken. -.- It's always easier to push the work on to the person that is counter to your position, but that simply doesn't work in the real world. Especially when we have already seen evidence of how the stages played out before. These stages have already been banned and discussed before. It is your duty to provide information as to why they shouldn't be banned.

Budget, you seem to want everything to be allowed in this game. If that's the case, run your own tournaments and start up a community that supports it. Maybe I'm viewing you the wrong way, but every post you write screams of someone that doesn't even attend tournaments. You may consider it a cop-out to 'debating with you,' but I'm choosing to ignore your radical stance on everything in this game, and your slippery slope arguments. Smashboards isn't going to change in the direction that you want, and so I implore you to take your energy and start your own community.

 

[Raziek]

Ran, I'm still going to have to agree with AA and BPC here. We've had this stage legal forever around here, and it has NEVER given us any problems, and I've had people claim that certain characters like Falco are auto-wins on it. Like AA said, the majority of the cast has options to deal with this. One of the easiest, I find, is simply pressuring their shield until they either fall onto the ledge, or they get hit. Alternatives include sharking them (being mindful of the Klap-trap), or simply camping them out until you have the lead.

Japes shouldn't be banned just because it encourages defensive play. That's downright silly.

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

Budget, you seem to want everything to be allowed in this game. If that's the case, run your own tournaments and start up a community that supports it. Maybe I'm viewing you the wrong way, but every post you write screams of someone that doesn't even attend tournaments. You may consider it a cop-out to 'debating with you,' but I'm choosing to ignore your radical stance on everything in this game, and your slippery slope arguments. Smashboards isn't going to change in the direction that you want, and so I implore you to take your energy and start your own community.

It's not just me, you know. My "radical" stance on the game is nothing more than basic game theory. See Sirlin. The typical null hypothesis in video games regarding banning is, "as little as possible, preferably nothing, should be banned". Do you agree with this tenant?

 

[-Ran]

No, I don't. Sirlin is not the end all, be all of gaming theory. He is only suited to speak about traditional 2d fighting games. I wish people would stop hoisting him atop a pedestal. Smash is filled with a community that bans things. It's what we do, and it's how we will continue to do so. From 64 to Brawl, to whatever iteration comes out next, we will ban things in mass to make the game play as we want it to.

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

No, I don't. Sirlin is not the end all, be all of gaming theory. He is only suited to speak about traditional 2d fighting games. I wish people would stop hoisting him atop a pedestal. Smash is filled with a community that bans things. It's what we do, and it's how we will continue to do so. From 64 to Brawl, to whatever iteration comes out next, we will ban things in mass to make the game play as we want it to.

So no. Now tell me, what is the null hypothesis? When do we ban something? Do we ban what we want to ban? Do we ban what feels like it's unfun? Do we ban what we have a clue might be broken, but aren't sure? Do we ban what we feel like? How can you justify this premise in the slightest, and explain how it makes sense with the rest of what we've done? And why we as a community should spit on the most basic tenants of video game design?

 

[Akaku94]

To my understanding, we ban something if we believe that it changes the way the game is played or breaks any aspect of gameplay. Items, banned stages, final smashes... all of them meet those criteria. having a larger stage list does the exact opposite, as long as we dno't include Hyrule, Warioware, and the like in that list. More neutrals are better, as long as the overall list remains basically neutral.

 

[-Ran]

You're a purist. We aren't. It's that simple. No amount of conversation with you will change your stance, which is why you should go start your own community that promotes the game play you want. It doesn't matter to you that we have used democratic methods to vote for stages to be used in our competition, or that we have taken player feed back from actually running events and removing what players hated.

We don't play Super Smash Brothers: Brawl. That game is filled with items, random stages, a two minute timer, one hit kills and four friends playing together to have a zany fun day. We play a very specific subgame that we have created as a community. We never bothered to give it a new name, but it's understood. Competitive Smash is of the same vein as kids playing with All Pokeballs on High. It's a gametype their little community voted as the best way to play, and so they do. Just like us, except we're so much bigger because our little internal rules that we all started with our friends have evolved into the community you see before you.

 

[sunshade]

You're a purist. We aren't. It's that simple. No amount of conversation with you will change your stance, which is why you should go start your own community that promotes the game play you want. It doesn't matter to you that we have used democratic methods to vote for stages to be used in our competition, or that we have taken player feed back from actually running events and removing what players hated.

We don't play Super Smash Brothers: Brawl. That game is filled with items, random stages, a two minute timer, one hit kills and four friends playing together to have a zany fun day. We play a very specific subgame that we have created as a community. We never bothered to give it a new name, but it's understood. Competitive Smash is of the same vein as kids playing with All Pokeballs on High. It's a gametype their little community voted as the best way to play, and so they do. Just like us, except we're so much bigger because our little internal rules that we all started with our friends have evolved into the community you see before you.

I am not a purist. I don't care about how the game was originally made and I don't understand why anyone else would either.

I however do stick to the principle that in a competitive game everyone will strive to find the most powerful tactic. Everything is fair game and the only things that should ever be removed are those that are truly broken and have been proven to be so.

In smashes case we have a lot of broken things which need to be removed (stages which allow circle stall, walk off camping, planking, etc) but we also have the issue of dealing with skill marginalizing elements (excessive randomness as seen in items, on warioware, and arguably on other stages).

I am not a purist, far from it actually. I do however have standards when it comes to what I support being banned or unbanned and so does BPC. He may be a bit hard headed about it but the general statement of "if its not broken don't ban it" holds true to many people in the competitive smash scene.

You so far have only stated that following public opinion is a correct choice and Sirlin is wrong without providing support for either statements.

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

You're a purist. We aren't. It's that simple. No amount of conversation with you will change your stance, which is why you should go start your own community that promotes the game play you want. It doesn't matter to you that we have used democratic methods to vote for stages to be used in our competition, or that we have taken player feed back from actually running events and removing what players hated.

Fair enough, I'm a purist then.

We don't play Super Smash Brothers: Brawl. That game is filled with items, random stages, a two minute timer, one hit kills and four friends playing together to have a zany fun day. We play a very specific subgame that we have created as a community. We never bothered to give it a new name, but it's understood. Competitive Smash is of the same vein as kids playing with All Pokeballs on High. It's a gametype their little community voted as the best way to play, and so they do. Just like us, except we're so much bigger because our little internal rules that we all started with our friends have evolved into the community you see before you.

This analogy is fair if you also mention that the people playing with pokeballs on high arbitrarily ban random **** they don't like, like Metaknight and Pit because they're gay spammy ***s, or FD because it's boring. We don't ban items. We merely turn them off.

 

[-Ran]

I have read numerous of BPC's posts, and he's a purist. It really is that simple. Everything to him hinges on that the game state shouldn't be changed from what it was. Sirlin, who for simply writing a book, is considered to be a gaming theory god. His book is written about 2d fighting games, predominately about Street Fighter. I've read it, and that's the realm of knowledge that he pulls from. Smash isn't a fighting game, it's a completely different genre of game.

Let's look at why Sirlin has his views:
1) Fighting games come out of the box meant to be fighting games. Most of them, meant to be taken to the competitive extreme. These games are balanced and designed to be 1vs1 fighting games.
2) Eventually, a few techniques crop up that tend to be damaging to the meta game, such as infinites.
3) Stages don't matter, since they are all just different backgrounds.
4) The game has a set win condition from the onset.

Sirlin doesn't have to worry about items, nor does he have to worry about the countless differences that are brought on in match ups because of stages. The win condition for the game is already set, everything is good to go out of the box. The only thing that their community then has to do is contain anything that would break their metagame, such as one character having an infinite on all of the cast, or an airfireball that no one can deal with.

Smash is different. We have all of those problems, and then some. Sirlin is able to speak as he does and as concisely on the subject of banning because the logistics that he is under simply aren't the same as us. A fighting game merely has to worry about banning techniques, and at the worst a character. Smash is a game of banning.

We ban more things than the FCC does.

Regardless of what term you use 'turn off' the end result is the same. There is no reason to dive into the semantics of what term should be used. At the end of the day, Items aren't going to be used in most tournaments because they are off/banned. We are no different from a group of six friends that have gotten together and decided that the best way to play smash is with Ganon banned, or any other arbitrary thing they have decided to do. We attempt to justify out choices, and have channels to have the right decisions made, but at the end of the day we are a small portion of a larger community playing the game a different way than most. Competitive Brawl, isn't the game that's on the cd. It's our little game that we made up, and decided to make a world-wide game type.

 

[sunshade]

Ok so you have told me that BPC is bias and that you are unable to see how the core idea of what I posted and the core idea of everything Sirlin says are the same.

Can you reply to my post instead of harassing Sirlin without even quoting from him as example and insult BPC at another time?