Project M Recommended Ruleset

[DrinkingFood]

Saying "These things are different in both examples" doesn't mean the amount of difference is at all similar...

|Width|Side Blastzone|Edge to Side Blastzone|Top Blastzone
Pokemon Stadium 2|187.5|235|141.25|180
Distant Planet|185|235|142.5|205
Difference|2.5|0|1.25|25

|Width|Side Blastzone|Edge to Side Blastzone|Top Blastzone
Battlefield|136.7|224|155.65|200
Yoshi's Story|112|174.65|118.65|168
Difference|24.7|49.35|37|32

Data from Joe's Spreadsheet
For whatever reason the data in the three spreadsheets linked in Joe's PM Info Thread all slightly vary but comparisons should still produce similar results.

On the objective aspects, it's quite clear the PS2/DP are far more similar than BF/YS.
The width difference of PS2/DP is minor enough to be considered pretty much irrelevant.

The effect of the other aspects are a bit harder to quantify, however...
Narpas_sword to claim that the impact of the platform differences between PS2 and DP is anywhere near any of the examples you just listed is frankly absurd. I seriously don't think I need any data to prove that, I can't imagine anyone would agree with you.

jesus christ, the camera is very misleading in that case
because the blastzones look and feel significantly smaller on DP

 

[nimigoha]

From SOJ's data sheet I have DP as 173.16 and PS2 as 178.17.

PS2 was decreased in size in 3.6. Maybe DP was as well? @SOJ can you clarify?

Also props to BRodz/Sovva who ran ECHO in Ottawa.

N9 char first, 2 ban Bo3 1 ban Bo5.

Looks expectantly at Toronto.

 

[DMG]

That's over-simplified @ ceiling is only reason to pick differently. There are chars who would pick DP over PS2 for walls (DP is almost always an improvement for Falcon), and a couple that could take advantage of added platforms for camping

Problem is if the PS2 width/layout is problematic for your char or for the MU, going to DP won't suddenly improve that. You may not die off the top so early, or may live longer because of walls, but your neutral is still going to be dookie cause of how similar they are.

 

[JOE!]

My Spreadsheet is up to date as of Dec of 2015 using Brawl Wall to measure dimensions.

 

[Narpas_sword]

Lol, I was just being a pain.

Of course they're the most similar.

 

[_Chrome]

nimigoha Ottawa used NE 9 thanks to @Avro-Arrow, Bazkip and I. Brodz knew about it, but I showed him this thread after mentioning it to him. So the props should really go to you guys for creating this stage list. Hence... Props.

 

[DMG]

jesus christ, the camera is very misleading in that case
because the blastzones look and feel significantly smaller on DP

PM camera is one of the least consistent feeling things. Idk how "fixed" it ever became but it's been mild cancer

 

[nimigoha]

Quick the head TO of the area wants an "official link" to the Nebraska ruleset similar to using the "Paragon ruleset" what's the "most official" or prominent tournament that's used it? It's pretty sparse so far, I think ECHO is my best bet since its Canadian lol

 

[DMG]

BR 20 (by Sethlon) is using Neb 10. He stuck with stage first since DFW hasn't explored char first much yet. Pretty prominent DFW monthly series though

https://www.facebook.com/events/1738763156342978/

Stagelist:
Starters:
Green Hill Zone
Battlefield
Smashville
Bowser's Castle (Alt)
Pokemon Stadium 2

CounterPicks:
Wario Land
Fountain of Dreams
Dreamland
Final Destination
Yoshi's Island (Brawl)


If ur looking for Neb 9 instead, idk

 

[nimigoha]

Thanks. I'm gunning more for Char first than Neb though. Sorry if that was unclear.

 

[DMG]

Thanks. I'm gunning more for Char first than Neb though. Sorry if that was unclear.

College Station is running an event with char first (but different stage list)

First post in this thread was edited to have character first in the CP process as well. Can literally link first post of this thread and scroll down to CP process if you want char first info for him

Project M Counter Pick System (from OP)

1. Blind Picks character selection.
2. Stage Striking: Players eliminate stages from the Starter Stage List until only 1 remains, and the players then play the first match on that stage. Players strike stages in 1 2 2 1 order. Striking order is determined by player seed or by Rock-Paper-Scissors.
3. The first match is played.
4. Winning player of the preceding match picks a character.
5. Losing player of preceding match picks a character.
6. Winning player of preceding match bans 2 stages.
7. Losing player of preceding match picks one of the remaining stages after bans and MDSR.
8. The next match is played.
9. Repeat 4-8 for each consecutive match as necessary until the set is complete.

 

[Kulprit]

Since the last ~12 pages have been about the NE9 and how to improve it, I made a new thread here: http://smashboards.com/threads/the-nebraska-9-pm-singles-stagelist.427489/ just so it's easier for outsiders to know what we're discussing.

 

[Bazkip]

Came across something interesting, apparently DMG 's DSR is already an existing thing
http://www.ssbwiki.com/Dave's_Stupid_Rule#.22Stage_Dismissal_Rule.22

Though I went looking through the rulesets of some recent European Melee tourneys and there was no mention of it so idk. Maybe they just decided to use the US ruleset at some point.

Kulprit

 

[DMG]

The wording of that DSR is a bit vague. You could interpret it as banning re-picks, but not re-selections (I pick FD and win, it's banned for set. Opponent picks FD, I win, it's not banned because I didn't pick it?)

I dunno the original intent or clarified interpretation of that DSR. If I thought it expressly defined my DSR variant, I would have just linked that. If it ends up = actually same as my variant, use this older name instead of labeling it my variant etc

Also don't know if it was intended to be used with stage bans carried over in Melee Bo5 or if it was still for 0 bans.

 

[DrinkingFood]

Wait hang on I thought the Neb 9/10 was something totally different. What's so special about the BC alt that makes it worth a starter? Does the alt get rid of that stupid ridge in the center?

 

[DMG]

Wait hang on I thought the Neb 9/10 was something totally different. What's so special about the BC alt that makes it worth a starter? Does the alt get rid of that stupid ridge in the center?

BC alt still has the sorta "raised" circular thing in the center. I don't think it translates into any real slopes though, haven't seen tilts and stuff follow the curves like Yoshi/Metal Cavern etc

 

[Bazkip]

BC alt still has the sorta "raised" circular thing in the center. I don't think it translates into any real slopes though, haven't seen tilts and stuff follow the curves like Yoshi/Metal Cavern etc

Apparently it can mess stuff up? There was some discussion on it on reddit the other day
https://www.reddit.com/r/SSBPM/comments/3yis06/universal_project_m_competitive_stage_list/cydsk9h

 

[DMG]

Edit: tether grab miss sounds lame on Bowser, "Any tether grab on any part of the decline (which is actually a fair bit) causes them to miss."

 

[JesteRace]

Wait hang on I thought the Neb 9/10 was something totally different. What's so special about the BC alt that makes it worth a starter? Does the alt get rid of that stupid ridge in the center?

Assuming SV/BF/PS2 as universal starters, you get 2 medium stages and 1 large stage, 2 medium ceilings and 1 low ceiling, and 3 medium blastzones. GHZ balances out PS2 well, countering the large stage and low ceiling with a small stage and high ceiling. It also has small blastzones, so we need a stage with large blastzones. It has to be a medium stage with large blastzones so there's not a skew towards small or large stages. Bowser's Castle is the only stage that fits this balance

 

[DrinkingFood]

That's already how the middle five bottom row works lol.

Does the alt get rid of the stupid ridge in the center? I'm not and never will be on board with slopes in tourney play; Smash just isn't designed to work well with them.

 

[JesteRace]

That's already how the middle five bottom row works lol.

No, because PS2 and DS are both large stages. GHZ and DS have high ceilings. Middle five bottom row is skewed towards large stages and high ceilings. NE 9 is 1/3/1 in all 3 size categories in the neutrals.

 

[DMG]

That's already how the middle five bottom row works lol.

Does the alt get rid of the stupid ridge in the center? I'm not and never will be on board with slopes in tourney play; Smash just isn't designed to work well with them.

*ahem*

Alt Castle still has ridge in the center, with the sloping

 

[DrinkingFood]

1/3/1 isn't totally 100% necessary. We just need to make sure we don't have any 1/1/3s. If we're rocking something a little lopsided I don't see it being a huge issue unless a stage attribute isn't totally avoidable. But all of them are- we have two at most on the list. Stage size is 1/2/2, ceilings are 1/2/2.

 

[JesteRace]

1/3/1 isn't totally 100% necessary. We just need to make sure we don't have any 1/1/3s. If we're rocking something a little lopsided I don't see it being a huge issue unless a stage attribute isn't totally avoidable. But all of them are- we have two at most on the list. Stage size is 1/2/2, ceilings are 1/2/2.

Say I want large stages and you want small stages. A medium stage is obviously going to be most neutral for us, but in 1/2/2 you have to use both your strikes on the large stages and I only have to use one on the small stage, which means I get to pick which medium stage we go to and you have no say. Same goes for ceiling height if that is the big thing in our matchup. This is an undesirable situation that is avoided with Nebraska 9.

 

[nimigoha]

Yeah honestly the amount of floor space where the slope is is tiny. It's also consistently there and can easily be avoided.

Worth including it on a starter for the 1/3/1 tbh.

 

[Kulprit]

Here's an image of Bowser's stage, showing all the slopes and such to it. The ledges stick out a little bit and I can see how it effects tethers, but it shouldn't cause a lot of hiccups in action. The slightly elevated center doesn't effect gameplay TOO much, I've never personally had to deal with it messing up my game, nor has anyone in my local scene brought it up. It's hardly noticeable and once people realize it's not that huge of a slope, they'll adapt to it.

There's no reason to write it off right away since there isn't a better alternative for a medium stage as a starter.

Source: http://imgur.com/a/XKg9V

 

[Kneato]

PM camera is one of the least consistent feeling things. Idk how "fixed" it ever became but it's been mild cancer

It was never really touched. The difference between camera and BZ is different for every stage. This could easliy be fixed though.

Do you think there would be any interest for a stage pack with NE9/10 with normalized cameras?

 

[nimigoha]

It was never really touched. The difference between camera and BZ is different for every stage. This could easliy be fixed though.

Do you think there would be any interest for a stage pack with NE9/10 with normalized cameras?

I'd be interested. I don't think it would be used in any tournament capacity any time soon.

I think a nice stage layout would be:

WL-FoD-YI-FD-DL
GHZ-SV-BF-BC-PS2

 

[JesteRace]

I'd be interested. I don't think it would be used in any tournament capacity any time soon.

I think a nice stage layout would be:

WL-FoD-YI-FD-DL
GHZ-SV-BF-BC-PS2

The HSC build in Nebraska will look like this:

WL-FoD-FD-DL-DS
GHZ-BF-SV-BC-PS2

We have BF to the left of SV because it's smaller, we obviously don't run YI(though in the middle is ideal if you do run it) and our scene runs DS in dubs instead of WL. Again, if your scene doesn't replace WL, than that format is fine, but SV should be in the middle, especially with YI, which is basically identical in size, being the middle up top.

Haha wow. We're at the point of discussing optimal SSS layout. That's awesome. Have we hit all the important issues?

 

[_Chrome]

I always thought it was strange to have BC to the left of BF, which was to the left of SV. :/ As for doubles, I'd still argue FoD is too small and could be replaced by something like YI or Lylat (yeah I know, everyone hates it based on stigma; it's not so bad now and I like it).

Having GHZ and FoD means those options will get banned each time if there are two bans and the opponents prefer those stages anyways, so they won't see too much use and just take up bans.

 

[DMG]

Eating up bans is fine if it leads to a decent stage. If both bans are currently used on FoD and GHZ, removing FoD leads to some other stage being banned (say BF in this case for being similar to FoD). Now that team doesn't get GHZ, FoD, OR BF.

 

[JOE!]

It was never really touched. The difference between camera and BZ is different for every stage. This could easliy be fixed though.

Do you think there would be any interest for a stage pack with NE9/10 with normalized cameras?

Normalized cameras meaning..?

 

[eideeiit]

Equal distance from the end of camera-tracking zone to the blastzone, at least that's how I understood it.

 

[nimigoha]

Thanks Junebug for showing us yet again that stage first is kinda sorta BS. Literally can't play against his Diddy on a small stage.

 

[JesteRace]

Yup. All he has to do is ban Battlefield and (if it's legal) Bowser's Castle and just laugh his ass off.

 

[DMG]

Man up, do the Ganon ditto on Wario

 

[Narpas_sword]

Theres no rule against CPing random stage is there?

So for example, JuneBug would have to select whatever character he wants, based on the odds of the stages left randoming in the favour of the character he chose.

 

[Bazkip]

Theres no rule against CPing random stage is there?

So for example, JuneBug would have to select whatever character he wants, based on the odds of the stages left randoming in the favour of the character he chose.

I'm almost positive any major TO would consider random to be a gentleman's agreement rather than a standard selection.

 

[DMG]

Edit: Cool the backup didn't totally erase my post! First for everything I guess


Depends on how TO wants to interpret things. This is one interpretation based on usual stage first:

1. Player A wins Game 1, selects stage ban/s

2. Player B picks / declares Random Stage

3. All legal stages (minus Player A bans) are enabled in Random Select

4. Random is hit; the Stage chosen is now officially the CP (you exit out, the players have not locked chars yet)

5. Winner selects char


In that interpretation, chosing Random Stage does not bypass the flow of stage being selected before characters. Since there's not often 100% clarity in the rules (hint: bad thing fix it cough), it's possible for a TO to come to a different conclusion. A different one would be not allowing Random Select, or forcefully picking a stage if a person refuses to pick a singular stage.


I think the only correct interpretation is to treat Random Select in the same manner as a valid, "normal" CP. In Stage First, picking Random Stage should result in some method (Random Select, Random Drawing, Random Choice at TO's discretion) of determining what the stage is before characters are locked. In your scenario, if I tried to take June to a random stage, the random process of picking a stage would have to occur before he is character locked, and thus he would be able to switch chars if needed.

 

[Narpas_sword]

ah fair enough.