Project M Recommended Ruleset

[Cubelarooso]

Its ceiling is really low, though, so that crosses over with PS2.
Also people hate it.

 

[TheGravyTrain]

I would be hesitant to put any stage that that is on the fringe of being banned in a starter list. That is just asking for trouble. And while its main stage size and platforms that move vertically make it feel like a big stage, its blastzones are that of a medium stage, which like Cubelarooso said, crosses over with PS2 (which at this point essentially has to be on the starter list because people are dumb). I could get behind PS2 being the big stage and Lylat/YI being a medium. Its the best we are gonna get at this point imo. The problem is Lylat/YI are both really fringe starters, Lylat moreso than YI.

So that would be:
Starters
Green Hill Zone
Smashville
Battlefield
Yoshi's Island Brawl
Pokemon Stadium 2

Counterpicks
WarioWare
Fountain of Dreams
Lylat
Norfair
FD
Dreamland

That's my ideal list. You would get 2 bans, can't counterpick to a stage you have already won on unless agreed upon, normal stuff. I will discuss specific counterpicks if anybody has questions. I would totally replace Dreamland with Skyworld if I knew people would shoot it down instantly, but I know they will. I think Skyworld is a more moderate Dreamland and its weird how they complain about circle camping/top plat camping when DL has those same issues.

And I know people will hate on this list, but its the best I can come up with. The reason I don't like Umbreon's list is because it pays no attention to certain attributes of stages. Its almost a popularity contest for the whole list. He even said that it doesn't matter if a stage is small or medium or large. Imo it does because otherwise you end up with lopsided lists where it favors one side or the other too much. My list shoots for a balance of 3 5 3. 1 of each extreme and 2 moderate of each extreme, then 5 of the best medium stages we got. People will complain that they can't deal with certain attributes of stages, but you have 2 bans for a reason.

 

[Leafeon]

The reason I don't like Umbreon's list is because it pays no attention to certain attributes of stages. Its almost a popularity contest for the whole list. He even said that it doesn't matter if a stage is small or medium or large. Imo it does because otherwise you end up with lopsided lists where it favors one side or the other too much.

He definitely did not say that. You took it out of context.

Anyways I would question Yoshi's Island being a starter. And I'm going to assume you mean pokemon stadium 2, not pokemon stadium. If you're talking about ignoring certain attributes of stages take a look at Yoshi's Island again, and don't just say "it's medium sized, so it should be a starter." Fits great in your theoretical 1S 3M 1L starter list but doesn't actually work well as a starter I'm afraid.

 

[TheGravyTrain]

He definitely did not say that. You took it out of context.

Anyways I would question Yoshi's Island being a starter. And I'm going to assume you mean pokemon stadium 2, not pokemon stadium. If you're talking about ignoring certain attributes of stages take a look at Yoshi's Island again, and don't just say "it's medium sized, so it should be a starter." Fits great in your theoretical 1S 3M 1L starter list but doesn't actually work well as a starter I'm afraid.

"i think we should stop categorizing stages as much. when i say we should have 2 small stages in the full set, its a relative thing and not a category. the difference in practice is negligible but in this thread it sounds like a much bigger deal than it really is. really, how much bigger is PS2 than smashville? does it really matter? probably not in most cases." -Umbreon

He said that people are categorizing stages too much. My argument more applies to starter lists, but it kind of applies to the large stages as well. In his list (and I recognize other people had input), both his starter list and his full list favors larger stages. You can argue that will be the best we can get or the impact isn't that significance, but I believe we can do better (especially next patch if we could get some changes). I would argue that the length PS2 and its lower ceiling matters and is definitely not negligible. That's why I want to see some reactions of YI as an actual 3rd medium starter. Others have advocated for FoD and Norfair, but FoD is closer to small anyways and shouldn't be with GHZ on a starter list. Norfair is close to being banned on grounds of being to easy to platform camp in some platform configurations. If you wanted FoD, you need to get rid of GHZ for Warioware, which works fine with Dreamland, but a lot of people don't want that (having the two most extremes on a starter list).

Anyways, the way I worded it doesn't really reflect what he said or I intended, the above paragraph better shows what I meant.

As for the next paragraph, I do mean PS2, my b. The debate about YI is interesting. People instantly "feel" it should be a counterpick or banned, but that goes back to what is the point of a starter. I say that what makes a stage a starter is its relation to other starter stages (for example, GHZ could be a starter, FoD could be a starter, but both would have 2 similar stages in a type we don't want 2 of the same, so we have GHZ as a starter and FoD as CP). There is nothing wrong with plenty of stages that are CP's, they just don't fit a needed mold. I would say if we deem Yoshi's Island fair for legal play and an accurate test of skill, it should be fine as a starter. It is the same length as BF/SV, has the exact same bz's as SV, a unique platform layout, and unique offstage game. It depends on what attributes are the problem for you. If it is the platform, I disagree and think it is just a new type of interaction that you aren't used to that is totally fine. If you are talking about the blargwhiches, I personally think they are fine for a starter. If you are talking about the wavy stage that isn't flat, I agree, but I still think its fine. I would love to be proven wrong and shown there is a better option, but I posted that list more for discussion and less "This is the best stage list ever, deal with it". I would like to hear what people have wrong with it.

tl;dr What actually makes a stage a starter

Also, when I grabbed that quote, I also found this from Umbreon:
"and frankly, i'm pretty okay putting norfair to the 5th starter and DP to the large CP. i would like a better starter for the large stage and i definitely dont think DP fits that role, but lets be real, if you dont want to get bomb camped or something you won't go to a large stage anyway. as long as its decently acceptable, its probably fine for tournament play. my real issue with norfair is that its too opened up for (MK/fox/CF/sonic style) dashdancing and chaingrabbing which makes it redundant with FD/GHZ on chaingrabbing and FD/DP for dashdancing. everything else fits 2 bans except that as far as i can tell. heres just hoping we get something better down the road."

@Umbreon Are you still fine with Norfair or has your opinion changed. It defnitely feels like a better starter (whatever that means) compared to YI and probably would be easier to convince people.

 

[skellitorman]

I'd agree except for two things: 1) FLSS requires an odd number of stages, starter/counterpick does not and 2) because you effectively have (n-1)/2 strikes in an FLSS system, it may change the way we regard certain stage options. Five or six alternating strikes vs the current two or three for the winner shifts the amount of control each player has over what stage they'll play on in each match, along with eliminating the "starters" subgroup discussion entirely.

I would really recommend looking through Cubelarooso's thread if you haven't already. Answering specific questions in the thread should lead the community to agree upon a solid list of stages that all happen to be just "good." If we find that FLSS works better (than the current starter system) with the new found list (modifying what we need to, to make it happen), then it should happen.

Trying to establish FLSS right now is difficult because the stages in question (and reasoning for them) are constantly being argued for or against. Establishing how we regard stage options should come first. It should not be argued for or against so that we can accommodate FLSS. It should be the other way around.

 

[Blitzus]

Would like to mention the new trailer for 3.6

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rcJHZCuaG84

Noki Bay Secret looks like a mid-sized walled stage with inverted Battlefield layout.. Might solve a few problems, but too early to tell unless we get some inside info on it.

 

[TheGravyTrain]

@ SOJ You tricky PMDT... Is that why you told Umbreon you can guarantee any changes wouldn't make it into the next version of PM?

 

[Blitzus]

OK Nanobuds said that it's Dracula's replacement. Trying to pull extra 3rd party stuff out.

 

[Sandfall]

OK Nanobuds said that it's Dracula's replacement. Trying to pull extra 3rd party stuff out.

Some of the platform layouts have some edits and the blast zones are different though

 

[Blitzus]

Some of the platform layouts have some edits and the blast zones are different though

Oh good, Here I say that Draclua's could be legal with a few edits, and my boys at the PMDT might've just pulled through.

 

[SOJ]

Yup. Delfino's Secret is that magical last stage

 

[Rizner]

Some of the platform layouts have some edits and the blast zones are different though

Yup. Delfino's Secret is that magical last stage

In the still images, the colors / background shown look... difficult to manage on that stage. Can you verify or comment on how well it works visually with keeping track of everything? Are the colors harsh when playing?

 

[Sandfall]

In the still images, the colors / background shown look... difficult to manage on that stage. Can you verify or comment on how well it works visually with keeping track of everything? Are the colors harsh when playing?

They were at first, so we made some edits. In-game they should be fine.

 

[Deleted member]

since SOJ spilled the beans i guess it's not a spoiler from me. i tested delfino secret and loved it and knew full on that we were getting a large stage replacement. i played it, its great, i love it, you guys will love it, i'll swap the OP when its out.

 

[MegaMissingno]

YES YES YES. Drac's is my favorite stage not named Smashville, and the new reskin looks so beautiful. It'd be a crying shame if such a wonderful stage didn't make the cut.

PMDT you guys are my heroes today. Moreso than usual.

 

[Narpas_sword]

I had just put a bunch of Castlevania music together on my build =(

But awesome work =D

 

[TheGravyTrain]

I bet you the only reason it got moved to page 2 was legal stuff. Were the platforms intact, but bz's changed?

 

[Deleted member]

DS is just draculas if that stage was reasonable for tournament play, it will be replacing DL64 in the stage list. a much better question right now is if we want lylat legal as a CP. i have no issue with the edges, i rather dislike that the sides tilt down. most moves in smash in general hit high to low and not low first, which makes it particularly hard to deal with low crouches (kirby gaw sheik for example) that makes it non-interactive enough to be banned imo. that said, a CP is supposed to give a mild advantage, but how we draw the line in the sand for what that means is ambiguous and lylat is basically right on that line (or past it imo).

 

[Binary Clone]

DS is just draculas if that stage was reasonable for tournament play, it will be replacing DL64 in the stage list. a much better question right now is if we want lylat legal as a CP. i have no issue with the edges, i rather dislike that the sides tilt down..

What about Yoshi's Island? The slants don't go as far, but they are more dramatic at the edges, and the center still dips as well.

 

[Deleted member]

What about Yoshi's Island? The slants don't go as far, but they are more dramatic at the edges, and the center still dips as well.

i think YI is pretty non-debatably fine as a CP and it will probably stay on our stage list forever as-is

 

[Cubelarooso]

On the other hand, crouching on Lylat's slopes means you're DI'ing down at the edge of the stage, which is usually not so favorable.
I can see how Lylat is just a good Kirby stage all around, but I think that it's far less pronounced than the effect some other stages have. Plus the advantages come in the form of actual tactics that the Kirby must properly execute, and to which the opponent can adapt and develop counter-tactics.

 

[Narpas_sword]

if i was up against kirby, Lylat would be the first stage i strike.
If i didnt strike it, and i got taken there. id learn pretty fast to strike it next time.

Though, it's not bad for samus. I assume the problem lies with characters that cant just spam projectiles at kirby.

 

[Deleted member]

even if we decide that lylat is fine from a CP standpoint, it might still be banned because a lot of people hate it. personally i think its just a little too good, but tbh i'd probably move to ban it anyway even if it wasnt.

 

[TreK]

Slopes are kinda janky in general, nothing new here. I don't believe the PMDT really takes slopes into account when balancing PM based on some observations (on slopes some moves are able to hit you when you sweetspot your recovery, which is a pretty huge deal). But they do have a couple of interesting mechanics to them (Ivy/Snake/Rob/Mario/Luigi can use them to give new angles to their projectiles, in example) which I think outweigh the few gimmicks that are there (yeah, crouching characters pretty much)

But anyway, the Melee battlefield type edges help edgeguarders and the tight platforms are good for a juggler. The slopes are kinda inconsequential compared to those two other aspects of the stage imo.

There some serious bias going on though because it's one of my two main CPs.

 

[Jacob29]

don't forget the wolf gimmick with his side-b on YI

 

[Narpas_sword]

don't forget the wolf gimmick with his side-b on YI

That's on any slope

 

[Jacob29]

Yeah true, but it seems most notable on YI due to all the slopes

 

[TheGravyTrain]

The main reason I prefer Lylat over Yoshi's is the platform layout. The Yoshi's platform frustrates me. Not the tilting as much as it is just so long. Lets of low platforms like PS2, Lylat, and others are good for tech chasing even if they interrupt a combo. Yoshi's is so long it can prevent a lot of tech chases. It also isn't good for platform waveland movement stuff either. Lylat's platform layout is unique and is really good for all of the above. Granted, that may be a reason to have YI over Lylat considering lots of platforms are good at that.

Also, it looks like Distant Planet's frustrating walls are fixed.

 

[Bazkip]

I think we're probably getting a calm background Lylat as an alt version, so there goes one of things people complain about.

 

[Stride]

I think we're probably getting a calm background Lylat as an alt version, so there goes one of things people complain about.

I find the background distracting enough that I avoid counterpicking to it despite it otherwise being really good for Kirby. I feel like it interferes with tech chasing in particular (it's worse at ground level with the grey stage and the similarly-coloured constantly moving explosions and stars and such). I can only hope that the improved background is set to the default, or that there's a way to predefine which versions are the default so they can be used when the stage is chosen randomly.

It's not that bad, but it really shouldn't be a problem at all. The stage is just working against the player for no reason, without the possibility of interaction or "playing around it" like slopes or other minor stage hazards/variables.

90% of the time I counterpick to Yoshi's Island; stupid slopes everywhere, good platform, good size, good blastzones. No-one seems to ban it either. The Support Ghosts tend to help a lot of other characters more than Kirby but it's not too bad.

If the background was fixed on Lylat it would be a reasonable enough decision to swap Yoshi's Island out for it, since they do fill many of the same niches. Not necessarily a good choice, but justifiable.

 

[PlateProp]

The main reason I prefer Lylat over Yoshi's is the platform layout. The Yoshi's platform frustrates me. Not the tilting as much as it is just so long. Lets of low platforms like PS2, Lylat, and others are good for tech chasing even if they interrupt a combo. Yoshi's is so long it can prevent a lot of tech chases. It also isn't good for platform waveland movement stuff either. Lylat's platform layout is unique and is really good for all of the above. Granted, that may be a reason to have YI over Lylat considering lots of platforms are good at that.

Also, it looks like Distant Planet's frustrating walls are fixed.

You can actually waveland/wavedash better on YI because you point the stick on a straight horizontal because of the slanting parts

 

[Stride]

You can actually waveland/wavedash better on YI because you point the stick on a straight horizontal because of the slanting parts

Only if you're wavelanding or wavedashing up the slope; it's more awkward and otherwise worse than normal if you're trying to go down the slope.

 

[PlateProp]

Only if you're wavelanding or wavedashing up the slope; it's more awkward and otherwise worse than normal if you're trying to go down the slope.

Only if you're bad at wavedashing

 

[Deleted member]

i know lots of good players that **** it up all the time, i do too

YI is rough for me since it makes edge guarding way harder

characters with **** recoveries are generally much better on YI

 

[Stride]

Only if you're bad at wavedashing

No. Just like you can waveland with a more horizontal angle up the slope, you can't waveland with as much of a horizontal angle down the slope; you can't assert one without accepting the other. The slope makes it physically impossible to waveland down it as far as you would be able to on a flat surface.

 

[PlateProp]

No. Just like you can waveland with a more horizontal angle up the slope, you can't waveland with as much of a horizontal angle down the slope; you can't assert one without accepting the other. The slope makes it physically impossible to waveland down it as far as you would be able to on a flat surface.

Been testing it with Ganon for about the past ten mins. When at max tilt the difference in distance is like the length of his foot. So I'm pretty sure many of you are blowing this out of proportion.

 

[Narpas_sword]

He's right in saying if you assert that it's easier uphill, you can't say it's not harder downhill.

That's like, opposites 101.

 

[Leafeon]

Been testing it with Ganon for about the past ten mins. When at max tilt the difference in distance is like the length of his foot. So I'm pretty sure many of you are blowing this out of proportion.

on yoshi's island, when playing a character with a wavedash length that's not absurd, wavedashing backwards to grab ledge can be an annoyance because of the slope. Similarly, you can get a larger wavedash length when going up the slope, but that's not what we're talking about.

 

[PlateProp]

on yoshi's island, when playing a character with a wavedash length that's not absurd, wavedashing backwards to grab ledge can be an annoyance because of the slope. Similarly, you can get a larger wavedash length when going up the slope, but that's not what we're talking about.

I was talking about the platform.

Edit: Ialso never said that it made wavedashing easier, I said you can wavedash better.

 

[eideeiit]

You know how there's that 17° (I believe) rounding to full horizontal in Smash?

Because of that it isn't possible to waveland with an angle of -1° or 181° (supposing 0° is full right). Except with certain characters that have airdodge animations that move their landing bones downwards (Ganon at least, probably Bowser). With slanted stages any character should be able to pull off these sharper wavedashes.

Examples, in which 0° is full right:

1.) You try to wavedash as far as possible to the left with Mario on FD. Your wavedash goes farther the closer to 180° your airdodge is, but 180° will result in an airdodge, a failed waveland. If you hold 167° - 197° you will only do a full horizontal airdodge, because of the rounding to full angles mechanic. Therefore you get the best wavedash by holding 198°, which is 18° from 180°, when the ideal wavedash would be attained with the impossible 181°.

2.) You try to wavedash as far to left with Mario on YI's platform. Now for convenience's sake I'll suppose the platform has stopped with its right side at 17° and its left side at 197°. You'll get the longest possible wavedash by airdodging as close to 197°, but with 197° giving you an airdodge. Because the platform is slanted, you don't have to worry about the rounding mechanic making you perfect waveland an airdodge. You then proceed to wavedash with an angle of 198°, which differs from an airdodge by only 1°. You just pulled off a wavedash that is impossible without a slant with Mario and it should carry farther than an "ordinary farthest wavedash" by as much as a wavedash with and angle of 252°/288° is long.

I certainly hope someone learned something (most folks must've already known this). Also I'm not 100% on whether it's 17° that's rounded to full angles or just something very close to it. Also it may be possible that the second scenario would result in a shorter wavedash than normal because the landing bone may not touch the ground on frame 1 (or frame 2 if you account for momentum delay).