Proposed Ruleset for Smash 4 Tournaments

[MopedOfJustice]

@ GUIGUI Walk-offs are exploitable by their very nature. Chain-grabbing has made them an insta-ban.
And you could make a fair argument against even predictable elements/for semi-random elements. This thread has plenty of them

 

[GUIGUI]

What if Smash 4's mechanic is different enough that it doesn't allow chain grabbing anymore, tough?

 

[Priap0s]

What if Smash 4's mechanic is different enough that it doesn't allow chain grabbing anymore, tough?

I'd still not want to see someone with 100+% camping to the far right or left, fishing a grab and killing his opponent at 0%. Or rather, I don't want to ever see someone camping at the walk-of-edge fishing for grabs that will instant K.O, regardless of the % they are at. Good projectile based characters would especially be able to abuse this, cause then you would have to go there. Or if the time is running out and your opponent is in the lead they could go camp there. A worse palyer could have a good shot at beating his better foe just by getting cheap edgegrabs, it would promote a campy, defensive play style.

To sum up: to many lame/cheap and unfair things could be exploited at stages with walk off. No fun to play vs and for sure no fun to watch.

 

[BADGRAPHICS]

Just a question I alreasy asked in the stage thread: Do we have to obligatory ban walk-off? Why? unless it's something exploitable by some characters, I don't see any reason to do so.
The only reason to ban Walk-off is if it can give unfair advantage to certain characters.

I don't know if many share this opinion, but we should only ban stage who have random/unpredictable elements in it, or who have desing tha can be unfairly exploited by a limited number of character.

Therefore, stages whose source of damage actually follow a predictable pattern and/or you can 100% foresee should actually be Legal. This mean it can be tactically exploitable instead of being based on luck. This seems to be the case with the Megaman stage and the Yellow Devil, who has a very predictable pattern of attack. Even the moving platforms rise and lower in clockwork timed way.

We can assume that due to Little Mac's poor airgame, he would fare well on walkoff stages. However, we wouldn't ban Battlefield for making life harder for him, would we?

I've always been a fan of stages with tactically exploitable elements, but the issue here is not one of fairness, but of purity. Most competitive Smash players don't want to play on a stage that detracts from the core gameplay, which is fair enough. The community plays the way most people agree on.

 

[GUIGUI]

Purity is a bit subjective. One could claim that taking advantage of the stage is part of to the core gameplay.

Rulling out camping strategy is understandable, to prevent the fight from becoming too defensive, when smash is meant to be fast packed.Tough I would see, for the sake of preventing complains the final and semi final being fought on stages with no source of threat in it, even if predictable.

Maybe a a special tournament could be specifically dedicated to the purpose of actually take advantage of the terrain. (that's one of the thing that make the Pokemon Stadium so fun, IMO). where the rule would be
-no Random/unpredictable threat.
-no design that can be exploited by ONLY certain characters.
-no design that allow camping/defensive play. (so walking off is out, anyway)

Still a shame, tough, I really wanted to see what the curved gravity would have given, in a pro tournament.

 

[mimgrim]

Just a question I alreasy asked in the stage thread: Do we have to obligatory ban walk-off? Why? unless it's something exploitable by some characters, I don't see any reason to do so.
The only reason to ban Walk-off is if it can give unfair advantage to certain characters.

I don't know if many share this opinion, but we should only ban stage who have random/unpredictable elements in it, or who have desing tha can be unfairly exploited by a limited number of character.

Therefore, stages whose source of damage actually follow a predictable pattern and/or you can 100% foresee should actually be Legal. This mean it can be tactically exploitable instead of being based on luck. This seems to be the case with the Megaman stage and the Yellow Devil, who has a very predictable pattern of attack. Even the moving platforms rise and lower in clockwork timed way.

The main reason walk-offs are banned is because the dramatically change the way the game is played.

Smash is unique in how it has a focus on recovery. Walk-offs eliminate this.

Walk-offs also, inherently, promote, what most consider, "bad" gameplay. A competitive player's first goal is to win. Any way possible. So this means that they will, more often then not, camp out near the blast zone to get that grab or abuse it some other way to get easy kills. Hell. I've done it before on on Castle Siege/Delfino Plaza lol.

 

[BADGRAPHICS]

Purity is a bit subjective. One could claim that taking advantage of the stage is part of to the core gameplay.

Whereas I agree that stage variables are a huge part of Smash, so are items. The place of each in a tournament setting is obviously questionable.

"No items, Fox only, Final Destination" might be a joke, but the community does lean toward an ideal of "player vs player, no distractions" for competition. That's the purity I speak of; just because each player may have equal chance to exploit a stage, doesn't mean it's something people want to allow.

 

[Empyrean]

Of course the idea of what makes the core gameplay is subjective, but like Badgraphics said, the community has come upon a consensus on how they see fit to play the game. It's not necessarily limited to competitive play too. Back when I played casually, it really didn't take me long enough to come to the same conclusion.

 

[Dr. James Rustles]

Purity is a bit subjective. One could claim that taking advantage of the stage is part of to the core gameplay...

BadGraphics actually hit it square on the head when he said that competitive players don't want to play with distractions. The core competitive experience to us is how we outplay the other person with our characters, not how we use a boon that the terrain gives us. Using stage hazards optimally to defeat an opponent is a skill no doubt but it's not something we have direct control over and essentially introduces an unruly third player. Playing this way is not unique to Smash Bros.: Just about every other e-sports game trims the game elements around this concept, except where it can't be avoided like in MOBAs. Some claim the crazy stages and (random) gameplay are what set Super Smash Bros. apart from other games in the first place, but it really goes back to the character design, game mechanics, and unique victory conditions.

You could try designing a special tournament around using the stages to win, but there really aren't any stages designed for this purpose. I don't think the new stages, such as the Mega Man boss stage, are any good for it either: The Yellow Devil's explosion only belongs to the person who hit it last, so it's probably more of a race than any real control over outcome. It's not really a race you want to participate in anyway. You might be able to prime the Yellow Devil while the enemy is away from you, but you have to have some kind of certainty it's worth giving up not fighting them at the time and that you can strike the Devil when it's most opportune to you instead of the enemy stealing it. It seems like such a narrow window to execute such a risky strategy. I don't think these tournaments will show up anywhere apart from side events outside or launch parties, and the occasional odd event run by people who have never even ran into the competitive scene (it happens.)

 

[kataridragon]

No items, final destination stages only. Battlefield is cool.

People lets not make this complicated.

 

[Dr. James Rustles]

No items, final destination stages only. Battlefield is cool.

People lets not make this complicated.

This is starting to become spam.

 

[MopedOfJustice]

This is starting to become spam.

Starting?
I don't get why people are so closed-minded. Smashville is legitimately the best stage in the game.

 

[mimgrim]

Starting?
I don't get why people are so closed-minded. Smashville is legitimately the best stage in the game.

Smashville is overrated.

 

[Empyrean]

Smashville is overrated.

Not in the slightest.

Unless you were joking.

 

[MopedOfJustice]

Smashville is overrated.

What stage in Brawl is more balanced? And what stage in Brawl has the most KK Slider?
[collapse=Spoiler]Smashville at 8 PM on Saturdays[/collapse]

 

[Dr. James Rustles]

Smashville is overrated.

You don't know what you have done.

You poor soul.

Flee while you still can.

 

[Morbi]

Starting?
I don't get why people are so closed-minded. Smashville is legitimately the best stage in the game.

I honestly feel as though Final Destination/Battlefield are the most "balanced" stages. As for the best stage? 75m, if you create a stage that no one wants to play in casuals, you are doing something right!

 

[mimgrim]

What stage in Brawl is more balanced?

Pokemon Stadium 2.

 

[MargnetMan23]

I honestly feel as though Final Destination/Battlefield are the most "balanced" stages. As for the best stage? 75m, if you create a stage that no one wants to play in casuals, you are doing something right!

Aww but I liked 75m- FINALLY SOMEONE THAT AGREES WITH ME =D

 

[Empyrean]

Pokemon Stadium 2.

In Project M, for sure.

In Brawl, HELL NAW.
Brawl is already floaty enough by itself, a wind transformation is overkill

 

[mimgrim]

In Brawl, HELL NAW.
Brawl is already floaty enough by itself, a wind transformation is overkill

Actually. You would be rather surprised how balanced PS2 is in Brawl. It doesn't heavily favor any character that much, every character basically has a better CP then PS2, to the point PS2 would never be picked as a CP. It actually is one of the fairest stages in Brawl when it comes to characters.

The problem people have with it is that they believe the transformations changes the game for the worst. Because they change the way the game is played, or so it is said. I personally don't agree with them. But either way, it's no where near as bad as, say, walk-offs.

 

[MopedOfJustice]

Actually. You would be rather surprised how balanced PS2 is in Brawl. It doesn't heavily favor any character that much, every character basically has a better CP then PS2, to the point PS2 would never be picked as a CP. It actually is one of the fairest stages in Brawl when it comes to characters.

The problem people have with it is that they believe the transformations changes the game for the worst. Because they change the way the game is played, or so it is said. I personally don't agree with them. But either way, it's no where near as bad as, say, walk-offs.

Thing is, I like liberal stage lists, but the Electric and Flying stages are ridiculous. Unless your playing as Sonic (in which case you should go die in a hole), the conveyor belts are invasive as hell, and the only possible way to reach the ground in Flying is with a dynamic dair/dspecial.
Ice is fine, Ground probably facilitates chain-grabbing.

 

[Empyrean]

Actually. You would be rather surprised how balanced PS2 is in Brawl. It doesn't heavily favor any character that much, every character basically has a better CP then PS2, to the point PS2 would never be picked as a CP. It actually is one of the fairest stages in Brawl when it comes to characters.

The problem people have with it is that they believe the transformations changes the game for the worst. Because they change the way the game is played, or so it is said. I personally don't agree with them. But either way, it's no where near as bad as, say, walk-offs.

Of course the stage isn't as bad as walk-offs, but some of the transformations still favor certain kind of characters (or make the stage flat out unplayable). Now, when the stage is neutral, then yes, I agree that it is perhaps the most balanced stage. Coupled with transformations, I'm afraid I'll have to go with Smashville for most balanced. Here's hoping the Elite 4 stage is completely neutral, since its layout looks a bit like the Stadiums.

 

[MopedOfJustice]

Of course the stage isn't as bad as walk-offs, but some of the transformations still favor certain kind of characters (or make the stage flat out unplayable). Now, when the stage is neutral, then yes, I agree that it is perhaps the most balanced stage. Coupled with transformations, I'm afraid I'll have to go with Smashville for most balanced. Here's hoping the Elite 4 stage is completely neutral, since its layout looks a bit like the Stadiums.

Ends up having a six-part Champion Battle boss

 

[Dr. James Rustles]

So we're banning Rainbow Cruise, right?

 

[MopedOfJustice]

So we're banning Rainbow Cruise, right?

...Maybe?
If the walls facilitate wall infinites, then I guess we need to.

I still say it would be better to ban wall infinites (which seem much easier to fairly determine than, say, camping).

 

[ryuu seika]

It was a good stage in Melee but Brawl introduced problems. The stage needs testing to see if those problems persist.

 

[Dr. James Rustles]

It was a good stage in Melee but Brawl introduced problems. The stage needs testing to see if those problems persist.

No thanks. If you're not playing a character like Jigglypuff, you're going to be spending as much time keeping up with the stage than you are actually fighting the opponent. If we want to keep things between players, the camera shouldn't be allowed to kill you.

@ MopedOfJustice wat

you's trollin' me

That stage had a lot more issues, like standing infinites, disappearing platforms, edges that can't be grabbed, walk-offs...

 

[MopedOfJustice]

No thanks. If you're not playing a character like Jigglypuff, you're going to be spending as much time keeping up with the stage than you are actually fighting the opponent. If we want to keep things between players, the camera shouldn't be allowed to kill you.

I think we had a discussion a while ago about that part. Some Olimar player beat an MK or something... Which demonstrated a character's potential to thrive in a stage that someone who's inexperienced with it would write off as "impossible." Something like that. If only Capps were here.

People exaggerate the speed of that stage. Playing as Ganondorf, the only part I ever have trouble with (during a match, not training mode) is the up-to-right transition, but even that isn't bad, and even if it were, it's just one of the innumerable sacrifices you accept when you play Ganon.

 

[Empyrean]

I think we had a discussion a while ago about that part. Some Olimar player beat an MK or something... Which demonstrated a character's potential to thrive in a stage that someone who's inexperienced with it would write off as "impossible." Something like that. If only Capps were here.

One player beating MK with a different character doesn't really demonstrate anything. It would be like saying that ZSS has an advantage on X and Y stages since she beat I don't know how many MKs there at Apex last year. One case should not be used to generalize stage advantages/disadvantages.

Correct me if I'm misunderstanding.

 

[---]

Please stay on topic everyone. This thread is for discussing competitive Smash 4, not Melee/Brawl/PM, not to mention none of those stages and several of those characters have not be confirmed for the game either.

 

[MopedOfJustice]

One player beating MK with a different character doesn't really demonstrate anything. It would be like saying that ZSS has an advantage on X and Y stages since she beat I don't know how many MKs there at Apex last year. One case should not be used to generalize stage advantages/disadvantages.

Correct me if I'm misunderstanding.

I wasn't saying Olimar has an advantage against MK or anything to that effect. The match showed that, as I said a while ago, it was within the character's potential to be able to do well, and it certainly isn't his best stage. In other words, if other Olimar players can't do that, they can't complain, as it has been proven to be doable.
It's an argument against the claim that certain characters cannot do well on dynamic stages in a competitive setting as it has been demonstrated that they can if the player controlling them understands the stage and the character well enough. His new recovery will likely make it easier for him on vertically-scrolling stages [see? Smash 4 stuff!].

Please stay on topic everyone. This thread is for discussing competitive Smash 4, not Melee/Brawl/PM, not to mention none of those stages and several of those characters have not be confirmed for the game either.

I doubt that MK or Ganondorf will be cut, and RC will probably return.
But I was mostly using them as surrogates for "High-tier super-mobile character" "Super-immobile character" and "Crazy scrolling stage." We can all agree that those will definitely return, right?

You can imagine I said Bowser instead of Ganon, but no one is quite as useless dynamically disinclined as Ganon

Edit: Is that acceptable?

 

[mimgrim]

Well. I was gonna reply to the posts that quoted me. But then a mod said to stay on topic. And I guess that isn't on topic.

Though I still stand by the PS2 is one of the most balanced stages in Brawl as it doesn't favor a single character heavily and it doesn't hinder a single character significantly. It has been tested

As for staying on topic. Ermmmmm.

I suppose it would be interesting to see how a metagame developed around FD only would turn out.

 

[Dr. James Rustles]

Well. I was gonna reply to the posts that quoted me. But then a mod said to stay on topic. And I guess that isn't on topic.

Though I still stand by the PS2 is one of the most balanced stages in Brawl as it doesn't favor a single character heavily and it doesn't hinder a single character significantly. It has been tested

As for staying on topic. Ermmmmm.

I suppose it would be interesting to see how a metagame developed around FD only would turn out.

For the online mode, sure, but you already know how I think it's going to shape up. It's going to have minimal impact on the actual competitive scene. It's significantly harder to get away with getting a single stock and then timing out offline. Online I think it will be harder for characters like pit to get away with that strategy if they also have their glide removed.

 

[Joe73191]

Hugs thank you for your honesty. I really hope people understand that fighting over bad rulesets for 10 months won't help the overall metagame. If you look at all the legal stages from brawl, melee, 64 and PM you find an unspoken standard in stages.

First: No legal stage has more than 3 levels including the base. Meaning base is 1, middle platforms are 2 and top platforms are 3.
Second: the base is never larger than FD, Dreamland, or PK stadium type stages. The base can be floating like Smashville or Battlefield or tower-like as in Fountain of Dreams or Yoshi's Story. No walk offs.
Third: the second level has no more than 3 platforms though almost always 2. Also the middle level has had moving platforms as in Fountain of Dreams or Smashville, but mostly stationary.
Fourth: The top level always has no more than 2 platforms, mostly one or none and are always stationary.
Finally: There are no hazards, no falling platforms or other kinds of interruptions.

Any stage that meets all 5 of these criteria can be legal. This has been the standard and it works great.

The reason it works is because anything more complex than this encourages camping, slow matches, less skill, gimmicky play and less fluidity. Walk offs beg for chain grabbing and camping. Which favors some characters over others giving some characters a disadvantage right out of the gate. Going so far as to make some characters obsolete without even starting. Larger bases than FD encourage camping and long matches, more than 3 levels encourages camping and long matches. More than 3 platforms on the second level requires too big a stage to be efficient in tournies. More than 2 platforms on the top level or moving platforms on the top level encourages camping and makes for fights the drag on. Smash is a spectator sport too. We can't have matches where every stock has both players at 250% before anyone can hope for a kill. Hazards discourage skill and implant randomness, the same goes for falling platforms or other interruptions because you need to focus on avoiding the stage instead of fighting your opponent.

tl;dr Listen to Hugs!

 

[BADGRAPHICS]

I suppose it would be interesting to see how a metagame developed around FD only would turn out.

I'm a little concerned that For Glory rules are going to become the tournament standard; i.e. FD only. I'm sure nobody wants that, but I can't help but worry that we'll see a new generation of players assuming that FD is the only way to play, and the transition will be inevitable.

I wish they'd given each stage a "simple" mode, with a couple of stationary platforms in a few different orientations.

 

[Empyrean]

I'm a little concerned that For Glory rules are going to become the tournament standard; i.e. FD only. I'm sure nobody wants that, but I can't help but worry that we'll see a new generation of players assuming that FD is the only way to play, and the transition will be inevitable.

I wish they'd given each stage a "simple" mode, with a couple of stationary platforms in a few different orientations.

Some stages could be "fixed" only by removing the hazard there or one simple element (think GoH's random-ass stick in the middle).

And I wouldn't worry about For Glory rules becoming the standard. The Wii U version has a good variety of legal stages shown until now, and the number is only likely to increase. TOs are definitely not going to let newer players decide what the ruleset it, and even if they themselves are new, they'd have to be completely oblivious to the world of Smash to think that FD is the only legal stage.

Now, for the 3DS version, it may end up being a bit different, with gameplay completely centered around FD and Battlefield. I think Lumiose could work too.

 

[mimgrim]

For the online mode, sure, but you already know how I think it's going to shape up. It's going to have minimal impact on the actual competitive scene. It's significantly harder to get away with getting a single stock and then timing out offline. Online I think it will be harder for characters like pit to get away with that strategy if they also have their glide removed.

Oh I know. And agree. I just said it would be interesting to see how it would develop if it did, not that it will.

 

[smashbro29]

I still think we should try every stage.

Who knows? This one looks different enough.

 

[Amazing Ampharos]

Walk-off camping in most match-ups is a bad tactic though. I mean, it's pretty straightforward. For most character in Melee and Brawl (and probably smash 4 too), back throws and back airs have a lot of knockback growth but little base knockback while forward airs and forward throws are the other way around. That means that, if sitting near a walk-off, generally the player closer to center stage can kill you earlier than you can kill them. The player closer to center stage also has free movement across the stage while you're pinned against a wall, and for that matter your only real option to send them backward is landing a grab whereas they have a large number of moves that will send you toward the blast zone. Generally walk-off camping only begins to make sense when you either have one of the handful of special back throws that cover a lot of fixed distance (Pikachu and Sonic are the only two characters in Brawl like that that I can recall, and giving up their mobility is a huge sacrifice that should not be made casually) or when the match-up is such that the opponent has really no approach at all on your shield like Bowser vs Olimar in Brawl but honestly those match-ups are pretty much hopeless on FD-ish stages too so I'm not sure those situations change the game. I often see people talk about this tactic like it's ban-worthy, but I've yet to be convinced it accomplishes much beyond making the person using it more likely to lose.

RCish stages kinda have a different sort of argument; the idea about interference with the match just doesn't make sense to me because honestly these stages tend to by and large be incredibly easy to keep up with. Even as Ganon, I could easily spend 10+ hours on Rainbow Cruise in training mode and never once be in even small trouble of failing to keep up. Even against someone like Meta Knight trying to zone me out, I don't feel like I even have fewer options than I have on somewhere FD-ish as Ganon (to be fair, Ganon has very few options on every stage, but this same line of thought extends to every slow character). Like for stages like Port Town Aero Dive where the hazards can be fast and tricky or for stages like Mushroomy Kingdom where it actually goes kinda fast that's one thing, but for stages more like Rainbow Cruise where the scrolling is overwhelmingly slow or stages like Norfair where it's just so crazy easy to avoid the hazards (or stages like Halberd with both!), I just don't see the argument. You're sacrificing a lot of different types of gameplay in order to prevent players from having to deal with factors that any vaguely good player with average stage knowledge or better can deal with so incredibly easily.

The thing is that these dynamic factors actually have a huge impact; stages on which "approach from below" is a viable option show different facets of the match-ups that just can't be seen on FD or SV. Stages in which standing in one place is not allowed inherently change the nature of defensive play turtle characters like Olimar have to use (it's not always even bad for them but it is different!). Every character has their own natural zones of spatial control that are different, and different geographies are very important to avoid favoring characters who simply control flat ground well. Like I main G&W in Brawl who controls flat ground "okay" but controls vertical space better than perhaps anyone else, and I always feel like small stage lists in Brawl are biased against my character because it basically takes a major aspect of his metagame and greatly de-emphasizes it. We don't know the nature of smash 4's balance so it's possible that things will be different thing time, but we already know Little Mac is a ground character, Olimar returns, Diddy returns, and ICs probably return so the characters who naturally benefit way more from FD than from all the other stages seem to be in place. The other side of the coin is less clear, but we already do have Pikachu who has often had that aspect with so many vertical options compared to most other characters. It's not about taking away from the character-character match-ups as often portrayed; liberal stage lists are more born out of a desire to see the entirety of what the characters can do represented in the metagame instead of only a sliver that may not represent their true quality. I don't want to see the metagame artificially constrained out of a search for purity so I have always strongly felt that we need to give more than a single digit number of stages a real shot; we can compromise so everyone gets some of what they want, but just going with a "pure conservative" stage list hurt the game and the community I feel.