Proposed Ruleset for Smash 4 Tournaments

[lordvaati]

I am reminded of the URC days, when they tried to make a definitive ruleset. what really got in everyone's pants though was the MK ban, which both the URC and community voted for. despite this,people still argued against the changes, most notably led by Mike HAZE, a URC member himself.

Now,if what you say is true, then that means that "if they truly cared for and were invested in the game they would play the character ban list the majority prefers."

This Everyone must be lemmings and jump off te same cliff logic just does not fly.

 

[LiteralGrill]

Do you have any evidence that people are being treated poorly.
Not getting the ruleset you want isn't being treated poorly, the smash community in general is really chill (at least offline), and there should be very few people that would leave the game just because some stages they like aren't legal (if they truly cared for and were invested in the game they would play on the stagelist the majority prefers)

Let's look at this OP, or even you and how you'd treat Ness mains. Or TOs simply saying "screw you it's banned" without even looking at stages. It's fairly common, a TON of examples can be found in the social stage thread and compendium. And you would have to ignore people arguing only over someone "being stupid" with severity to not notice it happening constantly. No matter how invested someone is, being told they are idiots over and over again will break you down. So those people became disgusted with the community and left. If no one would even be somewhat reasonable when you said anything ever, how long would you stay?

Also, if that's the case we should have played on the larger list, as at that time you would have been in the minority. Food for thought, even though you are still using that fallacy.

I second this.
I got into Smash because I liked the characters and it seemed different from a normal fighting game. I stuck with it because I liked, among other things how it's a platformer as well as a fighting game and how, unlike other fighting games, it's dynamic on a big scale, with items that can be picked up and used, stages that actually matter in game play and just the way it's all presented (Melee had the best presentation, what little presentation Brawl had outside of SSE was ripped from Kirby's Air Ride). I never got into the competitive scene because a lot of this was taken away, and being taken away by the month. I'm not saying that Items off, ban 60% of the stages is inferior, but I don't like it as much. To me, and this is just my opinion, it takes away from what the game was intended to be about, as people try to turn it into a Guitar Hero Fighter. I don't like how everyone is pressured into compliance with these standards. It seems to me, like what Capps said earlier, that there should be a different division, where all (or at least the vast majority) of stages are allowed.
That's just my 2 cents.
Again, I would like to say: I am not arguing for my preference to replace yours, nor am I arguing for items to be on. I want the co-existence of people who play the full game and Guitar Heros who can't adapt.

There are others who agree with you. My greatest suggestion is never back down, and try to make plans to host even small events if you can and become as educated as possible on the game. I've been reading hundreds of pages in preparation for this next smash game. If ever you want to bounce your thoughts off of someone and find what you really stand for to argue it well, PM me.

Though here's another good good example: how many people may have been simply turned away from the start because we didn't welcome them?

 

[Overswarm]

Rule #1: No Items

Rule #2: No dumb*** stages.

Done.

I just skipped 1 year of bull**** upon Smash 4's release, and saved everyone the trouble of hosting stupid *** tournaments with ridiculous rules only to end up at the point we know we're all going to end up at.

For one, a bunch of people think we need to test out stages before we write them off. I have a better system. Here's a quick guide on how to identify a bad stage right off the bat:
1. Is there **** that could kill you without directly coming from your opponent's body? Banned.
2. Can you walk off? Are you serious? Banned
3. Camera can kill you?? **** you, you're ruining tournaments. Banned.
1 year of your life back.

I still exist, so that won't happen.

I'm willing to bet no proponent of items or oddball stages would be able to maintain dominance over the competitive community. Mastering these skills related to gimmicky item/stage practices do not translate to any type of fundamental fighting game abilities. You're all fooling yourselves if you think learning these skills are practical. Find me one player. One.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YkfBqaMF1aU

Back when Smash players weren't pansies they learned the stages and used them to the best of their ability. No one said "Man, Fox is broken on Onett" and immediately banned the stage. They waited and tested it and I got to personally watch this match and report on it:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HUD8CJ1Dlz4
Notice where Neo stands. He actually prepped for this counter-pick extensively with Roy. Roy couldn't be infinited and he discovered that with proper DI, you couldn't be u-throw u-aired by Fox consistently because you can tech the balcony platforms. You can see him do this in the first 30 seconds or so. He also knew that if you hug the wall and time it right, you can tech off of them if your opponent hits you at the wrong angle. You can see him do this repeatedly.

You can watch Neo attempt to maintain stage control by limiting his approaches to a certain range. When he does get hit and techs, he does so towards his "safe zones". His first stock was lost when he wasn't throw low/high enough to tech off the middle platforms. He had stated around the time that it was easy to shield the cars, but that meant for a good grab opportunity when the "!" sign appeared because you had enough time to do so. I don't believe he implemented that though.

Roy is outclassed in every way by Fox, but Neo took him as a fun character, got good with him for the time, and then studied Onett to learn what did and didn't work. You can see him trying to implement the things he learned even when they don't work, you can see the gears turning.


That was one of the big things about smash that made it worth playing. You had characters with different traits, good and bad, and you used them to the best of their ability. The stages compounded certain traits and made others pop into existence. People thought Jungle Japes was a CP against Falco for years because "the platform in the middle doesn't let you dair through it", and then Forward sat down and learned the stage.

It made for super entertaining matches and was a ton of fun to play as and against. It was adopted almost universally in the midwest and east coast following his matches at SMYM.

When you shrink the stagelist, you shrink the character and strategy choices. You're choosing games like this:
Mew2King vs. Darkrain
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XNSh5AKA-UU

To be more fun than games like this:
Mew2King vs. Bum
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T7f5_7yz8Ow


Watch the first match and it shows you how ridiculously weak a character Falcon is. The moment you're off stage, you should be dead. Mew2King makes a dozen mistakes and is still able to wipe the floor with him, and at the time Darkrain was universally lauded as the best Falcon in the country. Falcon still sucks. He's fun to play, but he's a mediocre character that succeeds off of other people not taking advantage of his weaknesses.

That's the result of any and every set that doesn't use a top tier flat/plat character on stages that are designed for flat/plat characters. How well do you think that Marth would have done on a stage like Pokefloats, or Kongo Jungle 64 (where Falcon has extra recovery options)? Probably still have won because, ya know, he's M2K.


That second video? The set inspired legions of Donkey Kong players for some time because Bum was like "hey DK can do stuff" and showed Jungle Japes as a strong ANTI-FOX STAGE. Shortly after this stage was universally banned for "being gay". I'm not joking on the reason.

Bum knew the klap trap timer, knew how to use his up+b to navigate the stage, knew how to edgeguard a Fox on the stage, and nearly took a set off of mew2King in his prime. That is a huge, huge thing.

What's funny is we saw the same thing in Brawl. Ook, a DK player, and some other DKs started realizing the potential of stages like Luigi's Mansion and Jungle Japes as CPs against Meta Knight. Luigi's Mansion didn't work out so well for them, but Japes did phenomenally. It was an awful stage for MK and great for DK. Banned! Because it requires thought.

You want to tell me that the Jungle Japes Bum vs. M2K match wasn't a show of skill? Or that the Neo vs. Ken Roy/Fox match on Onett didn't show a simple understanding of the stage and it being played at a competitive level (for its time)?

People want to ban any and all stages that aren't completely flat and have platforms.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5ttmobqZWLw

That's from 3 years ago, Hax vs. some Fox. Tell me that manuevering around that stage didn't require more skill than moving around a flat, stationary environment. Explain to me what this stage did that was so wrong that it needed to be removed from a stagelist.



I'm tired of mediocre players thinking that they'll somehow get good if we somehow dumb down the game for them by only including the most simple and easy-to-understand stages.

 

[Overswarm]

Rule #1: No Items

Rule #2: No dumb*** stages.

Done.

I just skipped 1 year of bull**** upon Smash 4's release, and saved everyone the trouble of hosting stupid *** tournaments with ridiculous rules only to end up at the point we know we're all going to end up at.

For one, a bunch of people think we need to test out stages before we write them off. I have a better system. Here's a quick guide on how to identify a bad stage right off the bat:
1. Is there **** that could kill you without directly coming from your opponent's body? Banned.
2. Can you walk off? Are you serious? Banned
3. Camera can kill you?? **** you, you're ruining tournaments. Banned.
1 year of your life back.

I still exist, so that won't happen.

I'm willing to bet no proponent of items or oddball stages would be able to maintain dominance over the competitive community. Mastering these skills related to gimmicky item/stage practices do not translate to any type of fundamental fighting game abilities. You're all fooling yourselves if you think learning these skills are practical. Find me one player. One.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YkfBqaMF1aU

Back when Smash players weren't pansies they learned the stages and used them to the best of their ability. No one said "Man, Fox is broken on Onett" and immediately banned the stage. They waited and tested it and I got to personally watch this match and report on it:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HUD8CJ1Dlz4
Notice where Neo stands. He actually prepped for this counter-pick extensively with Roy. Roy couldn't be infinited and he discovered that with proper DI, you couldn't be u-throw u-aired by Fox consistently because you can tech the balcony platforms. You can see him do this in the first 30 seconds or so. He also knew that if you hug the wall and time it right, you can tech off of them if your opponent hits you at the wrong angle. You can see him do this repeatedly.

You can watch Neo attempt to maintain stage control by limiting his approaches to a certain range. When he does get hit and techs, he does so towards his "safe zones". His first stock was lost when he wasn't throw low/high enough to tech off the middle platforms. He had stated around the time that it was easy to shield the cars, but that meant for a good grab opportunity when the "!" sign appeared because you had enough time to do so. I don't believe he implemented that though.

Roy is outclassed in every way by Fox, but Neo took him as a fun character, got good with him for the time, and then studied Onett to learn what did and didn't work. You can see him trying to implement the things he learned even when they don't work, you can see the gears turning.


That was one of the big things about smash that made it worth playing. You had characters with different traits, good and bad, and you used them to the best of their ability. The stages compounded certain traits and made others pop into existence. People thought Jungle Japes was a CP against Falco for years because "the platform in the middle doesn't let you dair through it", and then Forward sat down and learned the stage.

It made for super entertaining matches and was a ton of fun to play as and against. It was adopted almost universally in the midwest and east coast following his matches at SMYM.

When you shrink the stagelist, you shrink the character and strategy choices. You're choosing games like this:
Mew2King vs. Darkrain
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XNSh5AKA-UU

To be more fun than games like this:
Mew2King vs. Bum
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T7f5_7yz8Ow


Watch the first match and it shows you how ridiculously weak a character Falcon is. The moment you're off stage, you should be dead. Mew2King makes a dozen mistakes and is still able to wipe the floor with him, and at the time Darkrain was universally lauded as the best Falcon in the country. Falcon still sucks. He's fun to play, but he's a mediocre character that succeeds off of other people not taking advantage of his weaknesses.

That's the result of any and every set that doesn't use a top tier flat/plat character on stages that are designed for flat/plat characters. How well do you think that Marth would have done on a stage like Pokefloats, or Kongo Jungle 64 (where Falcon has extra recovery options)? Probably still have won because, ya know, he's M2K.


That second video? The set inspired legions of Donkey Kong players for some time because Bum was like "hey DK can do stuff" and showed Jungle Japes as a strong ANTI-FOX STAGE. Shortly after this stage was universally banned for "being gay". I'm not joking on the reason.

Bum knew the klap trap timer, knew how to use his up+b to navigate the stage, knew how to edgeguard a Fox on the stage, and nearly took a set off of mew2King in his prime. That is a huge, huge thing.

What's funny is we saw the same thing in Brawl. Ook, a DK player, and some other DKs started realizing the potential of stages like Luigi's Mansion and Jungle Japes as CPs against Meta Knight. Luigi's Mansion didn't work out so well for them, but Japes did phenomenally. It was an awful stage for MK and great for DK. Banned! Because it requires thought.

You want to tell me that the Jungle Japes Bum vs. M2K match wasn't a show of skill? Or that the Neo vs. Ken Roy/Fox match on Onett didn't show a simple understanding of the stage and it being played at a competitive level (for its time)?

People want to ban any and all stages that aren't completely flat and have platforms.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5ttmobqZWLw

That's from 3 years ago, Hax vs. some Fox. Tell me that manuevering around that stage didn't require more skill than moving around a flat, stationary environment. Explain to me what this stage did that was so wrong that it needed to be removed from a stagelist.



I'm tired of mediocre players thinking that they'll somehow get good if we somehow dumb down the game for them by only including the most simple and easy-to-understand stages.

 

[firebro17]

Final Destination no items Fox only. There saved you guys the bickering

 

[ぱみゅ]

It's been a while since we had a heated, steamy stage discussion.
I sometimes love SWF... though I do not share the sentiment with some of its posters....

 

[Mr.Showtime]

The one thing I do disagree with is walk-off stages. The only reason why walk-off stages were banned were do to chain-grabs (like King D3's down grab) and mindlessly killing someone without any skill (don't argue this...please...).

We do not know if the current roster has chain grabs such as this so I refuse to list that as a benefactor tournament rule. Characters that have poor recovery such as Yoshi / Ness could use these stages as a counter pick. Walk-offs aren't really bad until broken things like chain-grabbing in Brawl was, is put into the game.

I agree with most of the stuff Oversawm says, but certain things I disagree. Any level that has hazards not controlled by the player should not be allowed. The only thing you posted that I can not think of a good counter-argument is that timing was beneficial for skill in Jungle Japes. The only thing I will say is that there are many times that by chance the Klap killed someone unintentionally in competitive play. Also that match was actually quite boring. M2K just took important position of the map such as the right platform and just gunned him down forcing DK to come...kind of stale gameplay when you have that position and character.

Luigi's Mansion was mostly flat, but was removed due to unfair tech capabilities. Characters that were hit with a Donkey Kong punch on that stage could EASILY surviveby wall teching against it. Also how in the world was that stage bad for Meta Knight...it was by far one of Meta Knight's cheap levels... He can easily live over 300% if he just constantly positions himself inside the mansion until it falls...

 

[ぱみゅ]

Luigi's Mansion Cave-of-life effect works for everyone, not just MK.

Walk-offs, at least for Brawl and its shield mechanics where the defender has a MASSIVE advantage, when a character stands next to the blastzone enters a high-risk, high-reward scenario that very few characters are actually able to stay safe against. Every other character would enter in a game where the game boils down to "can the walkoff camper grab him three times?", completely negating the purpose of a competence, by lowering the skillcap to being able to grab>throw three times.

This is true for at least FLAT walk-offs though, most characters are able to stay their ground against blastzone campers in diagonal walk-offs, but that's a tale for another time.

 

[Mr.Showtime]

Luigi's Mansion Cave-of-life effect works for everyone, not just MK.

Walk-offs, at least for Brawl and its shield mechanics where the defender has a MASSIVE advantage, when a character stands next to the blastzone enters a high-risk, high-reward scenario that very few characters are actually able to stay safe against. Every other character would enter in a game where the game boils down to "can the walkoff camper grab him three times?", completely negating the purpose of a competence, by lowering the skillcap to being able to grab>throw three times.

This is true for at least FLAT walk-offs though, most characters are able to stay their ground against blastzone campers in diagonal walk-offs, but that's a tale for another time.

This is true that everyone can wall tech. The reason why I state this is unfair is that light characters that usually die around low percentages can live up to abnormally high percentages. One of the best advantages for heavier characters is their longevity. You give light / fast characters the same advantage as a heavy character due to a level choice becomes a HUGE counter-pick.

What you say about walk-offs is true though. I forgot about stallers that will just stand near the blastzone and will stall the game until the opportunity arrives.

 

[LiteralGrill]

It's been a while since we had a heated, steamy stage discussion.
I sometimes love SWF... though I do not share the sentiment with some of its posters....

I've read through every single one of those posts... I get this weird warm fuzzy feeling seeing it go down again.

 

[MopedOfJustice]

This is true that everyone can wall tech. The reason why I state this is unfair is that light characters that usually die around low percentages can live up to abnormally high percentages. One of the best advantages for heavier characters is their longevity. You give light / fast characters the same advantage as a heavy character due to a level choice becomes a HUGE counter-pick.

What you say about walk-offs is true though. I forgot about stallers that will just stand near the blastzone and will stall the game until the opportunity arrives.

I am no expert, but let me remind you of something that is true in nearly anything: If both sides gain the same advantage/buff/whatever makes sense in the context, nothing is gained over the other. Light characters live longer in proportion to their weight, but so do heavy characters. Unless Luigi's Mansion is as secretly non-Euclidean and illogical as it seemed to me when I first played it (referencing the stage, then game "Luigi's Mansion," respectively), I see no unfair advantage.
Also, there is a lot of talk about how hazards interfere with skill [*Oh, except for X time, when they were shown not to be, but just that one time*].
I would like to point out that, with the exception of Spear Pillar and possibly Flat Zone 2, all hazards are easily avoidable and, if you spent even a little time on them, only a threat if your opponent makes them a threat. PictoChat is a perfect example: I will never get hit by the hazards (with the exception of the cart, but even then rarely), unless I get hit or forced into them. I have no idea why people keep talking about being put into positions that their opponent didn't earn, as stages (aside from stage-character matchups) don't attack a certain player in a major way. That laser in Spear Pillar is avoidable, and the laser in Halberd, and the rockets in PictoChat, and the arrows in WarioWare (not advocating for that stage), and the Bulborb, Giant Fish and (what's the other instant KO?) in DP, that Ice Climbers stage and (stage who's name escapes me right now.) With the exceptions of Spear Pillar and WarioWare, I bet no one can point to a stage mechanic that is completely unfair and/or game breaking that effects most characters.

 

[Grim Tuesday]

Overswarm post

Videos from a billion years ago fail to counter the simple truth that if Melee had a more liberal stage list, no one would be able to beat Fox or Falco on their counterpicks. Stages like Onett/RC/Poke Floats seriously make all of their MUs +2 or better. If that wasn't your point, I apologize.

Luigi's Mansion Cave-of-life effect works for everyone, not just MK.

Walk-offs, at least for Brawl and its shield mechanics where the defender has a MASSIVE advantage, when a character stands next to the blastzone enters a high-risk, high-reward scenario that very few characters are actually able to stay safe against. Every other character would enter in a game where the game boils down to "can the walkoff camper grab him three times?", completely negating the purpose of a competence, by lowering the skillcap to being able to grab>throw three times.

This is true for at least FLAT walk-offs though, most characters are able to stay their ground against blastzone campers in diagonal walk-offs, but that's a tale for another time.

Why would players opt for a high risk/high reward strategy (walk-off camping) over a low risk/low reward strategy (every single other part of the game) to the point where the game boils down to "can the walkoff camper grab him three times?"

I don't really see it as any different to picking Ice Climbers, but eh.

------------

Also, caves of life aren't actually game-breaking guys. People just don't like a higher focus on teching, which is okay, but yeah... not like people will be living forever or anything.

 

[Overswarm]

I agree with most of the stuff Oversawm says, but certain things I disagree. Any level that has hazards not controlled by the player should not be allowed. The only thing you posted that I can not think of a good counter-argument is that timing was beneficial for skill in Jungle Japes. The only thing I will say is that there are many times that by chance the Klap killed someone unintentionally in competitive play. Also that match was actually quite boring. M2K just took important position of the map such as the right platform and just gunned him down forcing DK to come...kind of stale gameplay when you have that position and character.

You know DK won that match, right?

Luigi's Mansion was mostly flat, but was removed due to unfair tech capabilities. Characters that were hit with a Donkey Kong punch on that stage could EASILY surviveby wall teching against it. Also how in the world was that stage bad for Meta Knight...it was by far one of Meta Knight's cheap levels... He can easily live over 300% if he just constantly positions himself inside the mansion until it falls...

MK couldn't kill you on that stage at basically any point, and other characters did waaaay better at it. Olimar especially, but really anyone with the proper throws/trajectory. You can end the "cave of life" by removing the pillars on the stage. The stage would then regenerate after some had time had passed, assuming the entire stage had collapsed. The top strategy was typically to leave the house in place until your opponent was at a high %, then remove one half of the stage and keep your opponent on that side so that you could use the house and he could not.

 

[Mr.Showtime]

I am no expert, but let me remind you of something that is true in nearly anything: If both sides gain the same advantage/buff/whatever makes sense in the context, nothing is gained over the other. Light characters live longer in proportion to their weight, but so do heavy characters. Unless Luigi's Mansion is as secretly non-Euclidean and illogical as it seemed to me when I first played it (referencing the stage, then game "Luigi's Mansion," respectively), I see no unfair advantage.
Also, there is a lot of talk about how hazards interfere with skill [*Oh, except for X time, when they were shown not to be, but just that one time*].
I would like to point out that, with the exception of Spear Pillar and possibly Flat Zone 2, all hazards are easily avoidable and, if you spent even a little time on them, only a threat if your opponent makes them a threat. PictoChat is a perfect example: I will never get hit by the hazards (with the exception of the cart, but even then rarely), unless I get hit or forced into them. I have no idea why people keep talking about being put into positions that their opponent didn't earn, as stages (aside from stage-character matchups) don't attack a certain player in a major way. That laser in Spear Pillar is avoidable, and the laser in Halberd, and the rockets in PictoChat, and the arrows in WarioWare (not advocating for that stage), and the Bulborb, Giant Fish and (what's the other instant KO?) in DP, that Ice Climbers stage and (stage who's name escapes me right now.) With the exceptions of Spear Pillar and WarioWare, I bet no one can point to a stage mechanic that is completely unfair and/or game breaking that effects most characters.

For Luigi's Mansion there is no equal advantage here. You're make a light character into surviving as long as a heavy. What's the advantage of a heavy? They stay the same. You give a character that dies around 100% a chance to live triple that. Whereas heavys are more easy to combo, have huge hitboxes, and other important aspects to them. They can take the extra damage and still live, but rely on small combos. Play a skilled Meta Knight player on Luigi's Mansion and you will see exactly what I mean. I understand what you are saying, but its not on equal terms by any means. Its true that they have the same survivability in that level, the difference is that the light characters can EASILY dish way more damage than a heavy character that relies on slower attacks to kill someone.

Correct, they can avoid hazards (especially if they are timed and people know the exact timing) just like in Meta Knight's level in Brawl. When you have randomness though, it affects gameplay which is the same reason we do not allow items in competitive play. The issue here is that for those ____ seconds that those hazards are out, the fighting comes to a halt and usually becomes campy and /or a waiting game until the hazard is gone. Players do not usually engage each other while a hazard is approaching (besides maybe Clap on Jungle Japes). It essentially promotes stalling gameplay. Characters that are ranged will use this to their advantages spamming projectiles (which not all characters have, guess everyone should play Snake now?)...

 

[Overswarm]

Videos from a billion years ago fail to counter the simple truth that if Melee had a more liberal stage list, no one would be able to beat Fox or Falco on their counterpicks. Stages like Onett/RC/Poke Floats seriously make all of their MUs +2 or better. If that wasn't your point, I apologize.

People said this back then too, but it was and always has been theory craft. A few stages proved it true (I was one of the guys that got green greens and kongo falls banned in the midwest! :D ), but they were banned without incident. No one cares when a stage is banned due to a tournament history that can be referred to via video.

Truth is, Fox has had an advantage on every stage forever at all times. He didn't suddenly get better on stages like Rainbow Cruise or Pokefloats. He was just good at all stages so he didn't take the hit someone like Captian Falcon would. It wasn't that Fox was so good, it was that characters like Falcon were so limited. Think about Falcon's approaches and combos, and realize how poorly they work on a vertical section of rainbow cruise. Or the ICs, who need grabs and only grabs. It puts them at a disadvantage because the characters suck. For some reason people had the solution of "ban the stages they're bad at".

Meta Knight has the same scenario in Brawl. He's not better on all the CP stages, he just have mobility and doesn't get hurt by most stages like others would. What's really funny though is that in Melee, characters like Fox actually had trouble on stages like Mute City vs. Jigglypuffs and DK/Falco on Jungle Japes and the like. These few counterpicks actually gave Fox a disadvantage in play, or at the very least helped even the score. This may not have held true over time, but when the stages were banned they weren't banned because of Fox. They were banned because "they're gay". That was posted so frequently in the Melee years.

Brawl has had the same problem with MK since banning stages. He was already doing well, but now the character list has shrunk exponentially and it's a celebration whenever he doesn't take 50% of the top 8. :\


To get off track for a bit:

I have absolutely no problem with re-examining stages and characters and rulesets when it comes to characters that simply win on certain stages. I do have a problem with people saying "Fox is too good on these stages, let's ban them" when in reality it's that your character is bad on those stages.

Did you know Samus is awesome on Onett? Most people didn't, but she was. She had some really nifty stuff she could do against Fox, a normally unwinnable matchup for most. Those kinds of things never really matter to most as they don't play Samus. They play Marth, or Falcon, or Sheik, etc., and they want stages that fit the bill for their character.

As a thought experiment, sit down with a piece of paper and a pencil and write down the top 5 characters in the game. Now draw the "perfect stage" for each of them, and take a look at the layout. You can't beat the neutrals in Melee for Sheik and Marth and Falcon. ICs will always just be a flat line. Those "best stages" are the starting stages and helped determine what is "good" in Melee. Believe it or not, characters like DK and Doc could have been top tiers had the stage selection been entirely different, but we made choices that helped some characters and hurt others. It's how it goes.

 

[Mr.Showtime]

You know DK won that match, right?

Correct, do you know how much of the match was M2K was sitting on the right platform spamming projectiles and waiting for DK to approach?

MK couldn't kill you on that stage at basically any point, and other characters did waaaay better at it. Olimar especially, but really anyone with the proper throws/trajectory. You can end the "cave of life" by removing the pillars on the stage. The stage would then regenerate after some had time had passed, assuming the entire stage had collapsed. The top strategy was typically to leave the house in place until your opponent was at a high %, then remove one half of the stage and keep your opponent on that side so that you could use the house and he could not.

I think SmashWiki and any professional Meta Knight player will disagree with you here.... =/ (and no I'm not saying I am one).

Even still, an unskilled player knowing simple mechanics like that could stall the match even though they would still eventually lose. We would reach the 8 minute mark on that level if this was played in tournaments with ease due to this abusive mechanic. So do you request we should remove time limits as well to promote more stalling gameplay?

 

[Overswarm]

For Luigi's Mansion there is no equal advantage here. You're make a light character into surviving as long as a heavy. What's the advantage of a heavy? They stay the same. You give a character that dies around 100% a chance to live triple that. Whereas heavys are more easy to combo, have huge hitboxes, and other important aspects to them. They can take the extra damage and still live, but rely on small combos. Play a skilled Meta Knight player on Luigi's Mansion and you will see exactly what I mean. I understand what you are saying, but its not on equal terms by any means. Its true that they have the same survivability in that level, the difference is that the light characters can EASILY dish way more damage than a heavy character that relies on slower attacks to kill someone.

Correct, they can avoid hazards (especially if they are timed and people know the exact timing) just like in Meta Knight's level in Brawl. When you have randomness though, it affects gameplay which is the same reason we do not allow items in competitive play. The issue here is that for those ____ seconds that those hazards are out, the fighting comes to a halt and usually becomes campy and /or a waiting game until the hazard is gone. Players do not usually engage each other while a hazard is approaching (besides maybe Clap on Jungle Japes). It essentially promotes stalling gameplay. Characters that are ranged will use this to their advantages spamming projectiles (which not all characters have, guess everyone should play Snake now?)...

The problem you have here is that you're coming from a starting point of "this is how the game should be played".

Why shouldn't a character with a ranged attack take you to a stage with a hazard that will "interrupt" gameplay? They get free chances to pop projectiles at you they otherwise would not. That's an inherent advantage for their character.

Unless your answer is "because they win such a staggering amount due to this stage's features, it overly centralizes gameplay around that point", you don't have a good answer.

Also, the "light characters are better on Mansion" thing is bunk. It's also a fun, but horrible, MK stage. MK can't combo as well on Mansion as he can off, nor can he spam tornado as well (you can tech it easily). His main OoS options, nair and grounded up+b, lose both their knockback capability, their KO ability, AND their safety they otherwise had. Was one of the most frustrating stages to play against Olimar, DK, or Lucario.

 

[ぱみゅ]

Why would players opt for a high risk/high reward strategy (walk-off camping) over a low risk/low reward strategy (every single other part of the game) to the point where the game boils down to "can the walkoff camper grab him three times?"

I don't really see it as any different to picking Ice Climbers, but eh.

Which is why I specifically said "lowering the skillcap to being able to grab>throw three times."
ICs are, get the setup > grab > throw > correctly timed regrab > throw > repeat till kill those are many steps, and there is a possibility for human error.

 

[Overswarm]

Correct, do you know how much of the match was M2K was sitting on the right platform spamming projectiles and waiting for DK to approach?

That's how you play smash, man. You stay out of their range, deal damage with projectiles if possible, and punish them when they make a mistake. You pretend to be aggressive until they over-reach when they try to attack, and then you capitalize as much as possible. What kind of idiot has Fox's blaster and speed and says "I'm going to run in and attack DK's shield despite the fact that he can 0-death me"?

There's nothing wrong with running away and camping, either. The timer is 8 minutes, you can use that timer as you see fit. If games are lasting too long, lower the timer.

I think SmashWiki and any professional Meta Knight player will disagree with you here.... =/ (and no I'm not saying I am one).

Even still, an unskilled player knowing simple mechanics like that could stall the match even though they would still eventually lose. We would reach the 8 minute mark on that level if this was played in tournaments with ease due to this abusive mechanic. So do you request we should remove time limits as well to promote more stalling gameplay?

I am one of those Meta Knights and played on Luigi's Mansion more than anyone else except for maybe Kel. The stage sucked for MK and only worked against noobs that couldn't tech a spammed tornado.

I saw a few timeouts on Luigi's Mansion early on, but I don't really see the problem there either. It wasn't like the games were going to time by accident, people were attempting to make this the case. Perfectly legal and okay.

Also... I'm not sure if you just have a habit of talking about things you don't know about or if you're trolling, but removing the timer actually reduces any sort of "stalling" gameplay. The whole point of running out the timer is to win via the timer. With no timer to run out, it is pointless to run away. We've run timerless tournaments and had much faster matches as a result in Brawl. In Melee there wasn't as much of a change.

 

[MopedOfJustice]

For Luigi's Mansion there is no equal advantage here. You're make a light character into surviving as long as a heavy. What's the advantage of a heavy? They stay the same. You give a character that dies around 100% a chance to live triple that. Whereas heavys are more easy to combo, have huge hitboxes, and other important aspects to them. They can take the extra damage and still live, but rely on small combos. Play a skilled Meta Knight player on Luigi's Mansion and you will see exactly what I mean. I understand what you are saying, but its not on equal terms by any means. Its true that they have the same survivability in that level, the difference is that the light characters can EASILY dish way more damage than a heavy character that relies on slower attacks to kill someone.

Correct, they can avoid hazards (especially if they are timed and people know the exact timing) just like in Meta Knight's level in Brawl. When you have randomness though, it affects gameplay which is the same reason we do not allow items in competitive play. The issue here is that for those ____ seconds that those hazards are out, the fighting comes to a halt and usually becomes campy and /or a waiting game until the hazard is gone. Players do not usually engage each other while a hazard is approaching (besides maybe Clap on Jungle Japes). It essentially promotes stalling gameplay. Characters that are ranged will use this to their advantages spamming projectiles (which not all characters have, guess everyone should play Snake now?)...

Ok, I suppose that makes sense.

For the Hazard thing, I don't camp (save for the Metroid stages). I do my best to use the hazard to my advantage. Let's use 2 examples:
PictoChat (missiles): I simply knock my opponent into the missiles, same as a regular fight, but focusing on launching my opponent through a certain area.
Distant Planet (Bulborb): I try to force him onto the Bulborb, but if it fails or is doomed to fail, I simply ignore it.

This is meant less aggressively than it sounds, but besides SP and WW, name a stage with hazards/mechanics so unfair that it takes the skill out of a match by ruining the competitive aspect with luck or taking over the match.

 

[Mr.Showtime]

The problem you have here is that you're coming from a starting point of "this is how the game should be played".

Why shouldn't a character with a ranged attack take you to a stage with a hazard that will "interrupt" gameplay? They get free chances to pop projectiles at you they otherwise would not. That's an inherent advantage for their character.

Unless your answer is "because they win such a staggering amount due to this stage's features, it overly centralizes gameplay around that point", you don't have a good answer.

Also, the "light characters are better on Mansion" thing is bunk. It's also a fun, but horrible, MK stage. MK can't combo as well on Mansion as he can off, nor can he spam tornado as well (you can tech it easily). His main OoS options, nair and grounded up+b, lose both their knockback capability, their KO ability, AND their safety they otherwise had. Was one of the most frustrating stages to play against Olimar, DK, or Lucario.

I never stated "this is how the game should be play".... If you read it like that...then I don't know what to say, but it made me laugh.

The argument here was that it gives an unfair advantage. I've already answered that.

Since there are mostly levels with hazards, a random chance of a level is most likely going to land on one that includes a hazard. If that random stage just so happens to be a hazard stage in the first match of a set three, that player has a HUGE advantage through the rest of the set.

How can you assume I do not have a good answer before me giving one?...I seem to hit a soft spot by providing logic and counter arguments...and now you are taking this discussion into petty insults. Take a chill pill.

It was said that these stages give an equal advantage, and I just proved that wrong...and with your last statement you did as well. The point of these stages is to give a fair opportunity for characters. Not finding a way to disrupt the flow of battle giving a certain character an edge over another.

You can give me a counter-argument stating that stages like Battlefield and Final Destination give some advantages to certain characters that rely on spacing such as Marth...but the opposing player can time perfectly and / or predict the spacing to find an opening. The only thing I can possibly think of as a disadvantage is Yoshi's horrible recovery. The only stage that won't gimp him is a walk-off stage, and that has been proven to be unfair due to mindless King D3 chain grabs.

 

[Mr.Showtime]

Ok, I suppose that makes sense.

For the Hazard thing, I don't camp (save for the Metroid stages). I do my best to use the hazard to my advantage. Let's use 2 examples:
PictoChat (missiles): I simply knock my opponent into the missiles, same as a regular fight, but focusing on launching my opponent through a certain area.
Distant Planet (Bulborb): I try to force him onto the Bulborb, but if it fails or is doomed to fail, I simply ignore it.

This is meant less aggressively than it sounds, but besides SP and WW, name a stage with hazards/mechanics so unfair that it takes the skill out of a match by ruining the competitive aspect with luck or taking over the match.

I will list some stages and character advantages:

75M: The point of this level is to strategically stick on the top right hand side of the level since no hazards spawn there. The player starting on the right-most side will have a starting advantage due to level being not symmetrical by any means. Since this stage requires lots of jumping, characters with poor jumping ability can easily get a suicide. This forces it on chance that you do not randomly select this level in competitive play in fear of having a character with poor jumping abilities. Also this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wxI10P4QvBY

Bridge of Elden: As mentioned before, due to being a walk-off stage. This promotes campy / spammy behavior at the blastzone. Also King D3's chain grab. If characters are also on opposite sides when the bridge splits, the players won't attempt to try to get to the opposing side and rather wait till the bridge gets repaired, unless of course both characters have multiple jumps such as Kirby, D3, Meta Knight, etc.

Distant Planet: Unsymmetrical disadvantage at start. As you said though, the Bulbord can be easily avoidable and can cause cool combos if timed correctly. However the timing of the Bulbord or the rain in that stage is ever the same and can not be predicted. The sense of randomness can become kind of unfair. Any randomness in a game is usually not accepted by the competitive community. Other than that the hazard here does not provide any sort of advantage to one side. Could be seen as a competitive stage.

Flat Zone 2: Walk-off stage, same as above. Stage is really small, gives advantages to heavy characters. Random events happening at unpredictable times with hazards.

Green Hill Zone: Promotes campy gameplay by attacking the annoying checkpoint post on this level. If someone has control on this spot, you know they won't move.


I would go on, but becoming too lazy at the time.

 

[ぱみゅ]

Rain in Distant Planet gives a fair warning since the sky gets cloudy and before the stream starts carrying people and items.
Also, as the slant doesn't really favours anything and the Burblob affecting the result is pretty unrealistic, I can not see any problem with the stage being asymmetrical.

Pretty sure you can react to everything except the lion tamers in Flat Zone 2; the walkoff is still a problem though.



Anyway. it's impossible for every stage to be completely fair for every kind of characters. Different traits mean different interactions, and every stage *WILL* give someone an advantage.

 

[MopedOfJustice]

I will list some stages and character advantages:

75M: The point of this level is to strategically stick on the top right hand side of the level since no hazards spawn there. The player starting on the right-most side will have a starting advantage due to level being not symmetrical by any means. Since this stage requires lots of jumping, characters with poor jumping ability can easily get a suicide. This forces it on chance that you do not randomly select this level in competitive play in fear of having a character with poor jumping abilities. Also this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wxI10P4QvBY

Bridge of Elden: As mentioned before, due to being a walk-off stage. This promotes campy / spammy behavior at the blastzone. Also King D3's chain grab. If characters are also on opposite sides when the bridge splits, the players won't attempt to try to get to the opposing side and rather wait till the bridge gets repaired, unless of course both characters have multiple jumps such as Kirby, D3, Meta Knight, etc.

Distant Planet: Unsymmetrical disadvantage at start. As you said though, the Bulbord can be easily avoidable and can cause cool combos if timed correctly. However the timing of the Bulbord or the rain in that stage is ever the same and can not be predicted. The sense of randomness can become kind of unfair. Any randomness in a game is usually not accepted by the competitive community. Other than that the hazard here does not provide any sort of advantage to one side. Could be seen as a competitive stage.

Flat Zone 2: Walk-off stage, same as above. Stage is really small, gives advantages to heavy characters. Random events happening at unpredictable times with hazards.

Green Hill Zone: Promotes campy gameplay by attacking the annoying checkpoint post on this level. If someone has control on this spot, you know they won't move.


I would go on, but becoming too lazy at the time.

Well, lets see how many I can defend:
(Let me start by saying that "Promotes Camping" is not something I deem a valid criticism, and I'll ignore the walk-off bit too, I haven't decided on that.)

75M: Really, the entire right side is pretty safe (aside from the contained retro-hothead), and it's easy to get to the right side. Characters with projectiles or good means of forced entry (I would say CF, forgive me if I'm mistaken) have a particularly easy time getting there, and perhaps that ledge glitch could help the approach somehow?

BoE: (Ignoring walk-off argument) I find it ironic that a creature that works for Ganondorf screws him over so badly. It's not irredeemable though. Let's say it's Pit versus Ganon: When the bridge gets blaster, a campy Pit flies to the other side and snipes. A good Ganon, seeing the opportunity, leaps after him immediately. Either Pit avoids Ganon, and he reaches the other end, or Pit attacks Ganon midway, at which point I would imagine Ganon could use his second jump, dair Pit, and continue across. Ganon is considered the worst character in the game, last I checked, so if you play ashim without knowing how to deal with his weaknesses, blame yourself.

DP: I see no trouble for characters with even mediocre recovery, though I've died by water many times. It is a great stage for non-item users, as pellets spawn. It takes maybe 2 seconds to reach the center, though you don't need to until you receive warning of the storm, of which there is plenty. The bulborb's near-uselessness doesn't invalidate the stage, it just means that that part doesn't matter.

Flat Zone 2: I am almost certain it is on a timer, and ANYONE who has played the stage can tell you that the events are: Fire, Cook-Out, Traffic and Zoo in that order at equal or near-equal times, with a fade in/out between that provides plenty of warning. Just saying that there are hazards doesn't mean that the are a problem, that was the point of the whole argument. The Cook interrupts me often, but he can be "disposed of" lol. The woman on the right side of the stage has high knock-back, but just stay away from her, it's not like the stage starts with her. The zoo is the most likely to kill you, but there are 3 spots, very easily identified, that the zookeepers go to. It's very regular (two columns of danger) though their movement might be random. If you can stay where they won't hit you, good for you. If you can knock someone else out using them, have a cookie. If they kill you with the keepers, they used the stage better than you. If you kill yourself on the keepers, you aren't good at the stage, but that's exactly why people develop strategies. Learn one or make one.

You forgot to mention the two other hazards that BoE has: The demon bull rider hurts you unless you hit him and the bomb has high knockback. Both of these have easy counters.
If you just learn the stages (with the possible exception of 75M, I'm not sure about that one) none of these things are issues, just mechanics put in there to separate this game fom Street Fighter.

 

[Mr.Showtime]

Great counter arguments!

Now my own opinion, I feel like out of these stages mentioned Distant Planet is probably the fairest of these. The rest of them I feel have too much intrusion on the fight itself or create stalling opportunities.

 

[Ulevo]

Baited and outsmarted.

GG, Hugs.

 

[nat pagle]

I'll go ahead and respond for giggles.

Well, lets see how many I can defend:
(Let me start by saying that "Promotes Camping" is not something I deem a valid criticism, and I'll ignore the walk-off bit too, I haven't decided on that.)

Why isn't "promotes camping" a valid criticism? If there's a huge advantage for camping and not going into a fight, it's naturally hindering and delaying the game.

And walk-off blast walls are guaranteed anti-competitive aspects. Recoveries become irrelevant and getting to close puts you at a huge risk just because the blast wall can be within walking distance. A strong throw or follow up could always mean a kill.

75M: Really, the entire right side is pretty safe (aside from the contained retro-hothead), and it's easy to get to the right side. Characters with projectiles or good means of forced entry (I would say CF, forgive me if I'm mistaken) have a particularly easy time getting there, and perhaps that ledge glitch could help the approach somehow?

The fact that you have to high tail it to the right side is proof enough this stage isn't competition worthy. You are potentially punished for not spawning in the right area. And as you said, projectile characters have an easier time to get to the safe zone.

BoE: (Ignoring walk-off argument) I find it ironic that a creature that works for Ganondorf screws him over so badly. It's not irredeemable though. Let's say it's Pit versus Ganon: When the bridge gets blaster, a campy Pit flies to the other side and snipes. A good Ganon, seeing the opportunity, leaps after him immediately. Either Pit avoids Ganon, and he reaches the other end, or Pit attacks Ganon midway, at which point I would imagine Ganon could use his second jump, dair Pit, and continue across. Ganon is considered the worst character in the game, last I checked, so if you play ashim without knowing how to deal with his weaknesses, blame yourself.

It's not like the Halberd shoots at Meta Knight or anything.

Anywho, walk off blast walls aside, the sheer size of this stage is pretty tough. Projectile characters and fast characters can stall and rack up damage via blasters or just camp. And then, there's always the bomb that adds a too noticeable factor into the gameplay. With of course, a huge gaping hole in the middle.

DP: I see no trouble for characters with even mediocre recovery, though I've died by water many times. It is a great stage for non-item users, as pellets spawn. It takes maybe 2 seconds to reach the center, though you don't need to until you receive warning of the storm, of which there is plenty. The bulborb's near-uselessness doesn't invalidate the stage, it just means that that part doesn't matter.

Too many factors playing in for competitive play. Players shouldn't have to be restricted from parts of the stage and be wary of multiple killing factors.

Flat Zone 2: I am almost certain it is on a timer, and ANYONE who has played the stage can tell you that the events are: Fire, Cook-Out, Traffic and Zoo in that order at equal or near-equal times, with a fade in/out between that provides plenty of warning. Just saying that there are hazards doesn't mean that the are a problem, that was the point of the whole argument. The Cook interrupts me often, but he can be "disposed of" lol. The woman on the right side of the stage has high knock-back, but just stay away from her, it's not like the stage starts with her. The zoo is the most likely to kill you, but there are 3 spots, very easily identified, that the zookeepers go to. It's very regular (two columns of danger) though their movement might be random. If you can stay where they won't hit you, good for you. If you can knock someone else out using them, have a cookie. If they kill you with the keepers, they used the stage better than you. If you kill yourself on the keepers, you aren't good at the stage, but that's exactly why people develop strategies. Learn one or make one.

The fact that there are so many factors you have to deal with instead of fighting the opponent directly is enough to prove this stage isn't competition worthy. Stages get banned because certain characters find an advantage via the environment that's way too much in their favor. I'm sure one could be devised here.

You forgot to mention the two other hazards that BoE has: The demon bull rider hurts you unless you hit him and the bomb has high knockback. Both of these have easy counters.

Shouldn't have to counter them at all.

If you just learn the stages (with the possible exception of 75M, I'm not sure about that one) none of these things are issues, just mechanics put in there to separate this game fom Street Fighter.

Then why not allow every stage? No reason you can't just avoid the aspects that give people advantage or break the competitive gameplay.

 

[MopedOfJustice]

Great counter arguments!

Now my own opinion, I feel like out of these stages mentioned Distant Planet is probably the fairest of these. The rest of them I feel have too much intrusion on the fight itself or create stalling opportunities.

Thanks, you may be the nicest person I have ever debated (within the context of the debate).
You may have seen my previous post, if I put it here, that I believe there should be 2 accepted divisions (I'm pretty sure there isn't a division like what Capps described making). One with all of the stages that don't do what SP and WW do, and one like the current competitive seen, but discouraging the rampant peer-pressure in rule making. I think we've really said all there is for us (or at least for me) to say on the matter, though if you wanted to bring up any other bad offenders, you can (I'm surprised the Ice Climber's stage wasn't on the list).

 

[LiteralGrill]

Thanks, you may be the nicest person I have ever debated (within the context of the debate).
You may have seen my previous post, if I put it here, that I believe there should be 2 accepted divisions (I'm pretty sure there isn't a division like what Capps described making). One with all of the stages that don't do what SP and WW do, and one like the current competitive seen, but discouraging the rampant peer-pressure in rule making. I think we've really said all there is for us (or at least for me) to say on the matter, though if you wanted to bring up any other bad offenders, you can (I'm surprised the Ice Climber's stage wasn't on the list).

Yeah, the idea of coexisting has been there, but the idea that both sides are correct even is probably new.

 

[MopedOfJustice]

I'll go ahead and respond for gigles.



Why isn't "promotes camping" a valid criticism? If there's a huge advantage for camping and not going into a fight, it's naturally hindering and delaying the game.

And walk-off blast walls are guaranteed anti-competitive aspects. Recoveries become irrelevant and getting to close puts you at a huge risk just because the blast wall can be within walking distance. A strong throw or follow up could always mean a kill.



The fact that you have to high tail it to the right side is proof enough this stage isn't competition worthy. You are potentially punished for not spawning in the right area. And as you said, projectile characters have an easier time to get to the safe zone.



It's not like the Halberd shoots at Meta Knight or anything.

Anywho, walk off blast walls aside, the sheer size of this stage is pretty tough. Projectile characters and fast characters can stall and rack up damage via blasters or just camp. And then, there's always the bomb that adds a too noticeable factor into the gameplay. With of course, a huge gaping hole in the middle.



Too many factors playing in for competitive play. Players shouldn't have to be restricted from parts of the stage and be wary of multiple killing factors.



The fact that there are so many factors you have to deal with instead of fighting the opponent directly is enough to prove this stage isn't competition worthy. Stages get banned because certain characters find an advantage via the environment that's way too much in their favor. I'm sure one could be devised here.



Shouldn't have to counter them at all.




Then why not allow every stage? No reason you can't just avoid the aspects that give people advantage or break the competitive gameplay.

I just want to point out a couple things:
The only thing that has any chance of killing you on DP is the waterfall, but you can recover (as Sakurai says you must), you can ledge grab, though it's hard. There is so much warning, it's not like a thunder crack then BAM! swept away. You can gradually move to the safe zone, or stay at the safe zone, which is what I do. If you die by the bulborb, it's either your opponent's or your stupidity's doing. Everything is so gradual, it's not like you need split second reaction to anything of your opponent. Just notice the weather and move.
FZ2 only has one factor at a time, unless you count each Zoo Keeper as a factor, and I stand by my previous argument for it.
About countering the bull rider:
To counter the Bull Rider's charge: Get out of the way or hit him. If you get out of the way, it has the advantage of forcing your opponent to deal with him, as well as being able to attack an approaching opponent more quickly, while hitting him nullifies the damage and knockback he does. It's very simple, and still involves the opponent.
To counter the bomb: Get out of the way. If you get out of the way, you're out of the way. It's good to try to keep your opponent inside the blast radius, an aspect that again involves both players.
About "Why not unban all stages?":
I say SP and WW are fundamentally different from the other stages, and (almost) objectively disbalanced to a terrible extent.
SP screws with your controls and the camera. An argument can be made for why this is just another thing to master, but I think it goes too far.
On the other end of the spectrum: WW. The premise is fine: Do X, get a reward. The issue is the reward. It's ok if P1 does the challenge, gets a reward and destroys P2, who thought it would be cute to attack during the "Don't Move!" Challenge. It's ok to have a Clash-of-the-Titans when both players dodged the arrows (which, by the way, can be "dodged" by simply not taking damage from them, which can be done in various ways). The issue comes when one player becomes invincible and the other, giant. People say there are not true combos in Brawl, but giant Bowser + invincible CF comes pretty close.
Also, according to the canon of SSE, G&W would be the one who shouldn't be shot at. While, in all Kirby games with the Halberd, MK controls it until it blows up, the ship is piloted by the G&W army for something like 2/3 of the game and, as far as I know, there are two scenes where MK has control. One is where he retakes the ship, the other is where his ship is, quite literally, ripped a new one. The opening scene where the Halberd was taken over that, while still being canon, was stripped from the game would have made your suggestion more likely.
You know, something I never appreciated until writing a paragraph about something that is arbitrary, fallacious and silly: The Halberd stage essentially simulates a one-way boss-fight. I just realized how cool that is.
Note: Like I mentioned earlier, I would prefer 2 divisions, one with more stages, one with Guitar Heroes and Street Fighters.

 

[LiteralGrill]

Note: Like I mentioned earlier, I would prefer 2 divisions, one with more stages, one with Guitar Heroes and Street Fighters.

Never actually heard the "Guitar Heroes" thing, could you explain that?

And you may want to use better wording, Liberal and Conservative can work better for this sort of thing.

 

[ぱみゅ]

SP screws with your controls and the camera. An argument can be made for why this is just another thing to master, but I think it goes too far.

That's an opinion though.
I personally could play like three Palkia games and be used to the sudden control changes.
Others could just figure it out and play it like it was nothing without even practising.
Matter of preference.

The thing that's wrong with Spear Pillar is Circle Camping and that's about it.

 

[MopedOfJustice]

Never actually heard the "Guitar Heroes" thing, could you explain that?

And you may want to use better wording, Liberal and Conservative can work better for this sort of thing.

When I say "Guitar Hero," I mean people who play (in Melee and Brawl respectively, where each applies) entirely in combos, chain grabs and other techs/strats/whatever that make it less like a game where you're fighting someone else, and more like Guitar Hero, where you're pressing buttons (and manipulating everything else) in a less-than-interactive way that doesn't measure skill so much as the ability to do X long input combination. This is, of course, a drastic over-statement, and meant to be so, as it seemed self-explanatory enough and conveyed my position on which I prefer. That's why I prefer items-on, with a list similar to the ISP list, on any stage, it feels less mindless (and I want to stress that I don't want to argue this, and recognize everyone is entitled to their own opinion, with mine not being superior, etc. etc. etc.) I only use it because I have thought of no better term. Question about Conservative/Liberal:
Would it be Conservative to "conserve stages", or to keep it simple?

 

[LiteralGrill]

When I say "Guitar Hero," I mean people who play (in Melee and Brawl respectively, where each applies) entirely in combos, chain grabs and other techs/strats/whatever that make it less like a game where you're fighting someone else, and more like Guitar Hero, where you're pressing buttons (and manipulating everything else) in a less-than-interactive way that doesn't measure skill so much as the ability to do X long input combination. This is, of course, a drastic over-statement, and meant to be so, as it seemed self-explanatory enough and conveyed my position on which I prefer. That's why I prefer items-on, with a list similar to the ISP list, on any stage, it feels less mindless (and I want to stress that I don't want to argue this, and recognize everyone is entitled to their own opinion, with mine not being superior, etc. etc. etc.) I only use it because I have thought of no better term. Question about Conservative/Liberal:
Would it be Conservative to "conserve stages", or to keep it simple?

You raise a good question.

Generally, Liberal smashers have larger stagelists, they might be called conservationists, but not conservatives. At least to my understanding.

Edit: Also this thread has brought up Flat Zone 2... I don't even know if any testing ever happened there if if there is even serious 1v1 matches attempted there or anything. Never seen it disputed, cool to see something new in this thread. If anyone does know of such video, link me. I'm curious to watch.

 

[MopedOfJustice]

That's an opinion though.
I personally could play like three Palkia games and be used to the sudden control changes.
Others could just figure it out and play it like it was nothing without even practising.
Matter of preference.

The thing that's wrong with Spear Pillar is Circle Camping and that's about it.

That's fair. Notice how I said "I think?" If it helps us have more stages become allowed, I'm all for it whether I am good at said stage or not, even whether I think it should be in or not. It's not so much the reversal as the upside-down camera that gets me, but you can be better and remove reasons for a stage ban if you want, just so long as we all agree that WW deserves its ban.

 

[LiteralGrill]

That's fair. Notice how I said "I think?" If it helps us have more stages become allowed, I'm all for it whether I am good at said stage or not, even whether I think it should be in or not. It's not so much the reversal as the upside-down camera that gets me, but you can be better and remove reasons for a stage ban if you want, just so long as we all agree that WW deserves its ban.

I'd take you there as Sonic or maybe Fox and you'd be very sad that I did. Circle camping is terrible. If something does make it "do this strategy or lose" it's a good candidate for banning. Sorry Sky Pillar

 

[MopedOfJustice]

You raise a good question.

Generally, Liberal smashers have larger stagelists, they might be called conservationists, but not conservatives. At least to my understanding.

Edit: Also this thread has brought up Flat Zone 2... I don't even know if any testing ever happened there if if there is even serious 1v1 matches attempted there or anything. Never seen it disputed, cool to see something new in this thread. If anyone does know of such video, link me. I'm curious to watch.

I looked, and I didn't really find anything. The Wiki Page is really bad. I appreciate the trivia, but it doesn't mention If it's on a timer or random. http://www.ssbwiki.com/Flat_Zone_2
I can testify that I have played it several dozen times (not including allstar and such), and I have never seen it go in anyway other than Fire, Chef, Cars, Zoo at fairly consistant intervals. While I don't have a recording device for my TV, I will test it out tomorrow if no one else does, and get back to you. I have no evidence, of course, but if you think I would lie (or worse, be wrong) about such a simple test, so be it.

 

[MopedOfJustice]

I'd take you there as Sonic or maybe Fox and you'd be very sad that I did. Circle camping is terrible. If something does make it "do this strategy or lose" it's a good candidate for banning. Sorry Sky Pillar

Can't say I'd miss *Spear Pillar. Idea is fun, then Crestelia appears. I want a stage for that Deoxys/Raquaza fight, that would be fun. Speaking of Legendaries fighting in movies as stages, I could see Sakurai trolling us by putting Mewtwo in the game as a stage hazard fighting Mew.
"They wanted me to put him in the game, so I did. I didn't know they loved stage hazards so much, but I'll do anything for the loyal fans *snicker*"

 

[LiteralGrill]

I looked, and I didn't really find anything. The Wiki Page is really bad. I appreciate the trivia, but it doesn't mention If it's on a timer or random. http://www.ssbwiki.com/Flat_Zone_2
I can testify that I have played it several dozen times (not including allstar and such), and I have never seen it go in anyway other than Fire, Chef, Cars, Zoo at fairly consistant intervals. While I don't have a recording device for my TV, I will test it out tomorrow if no one else does, and get back to you. I have no evidence, of course, but if you think I would lie (or worse, be wrong) about such a simple test, so be it.

Sit down and try to watch a match there. This was the most I could find on Flat Zone 2 from the "Why is this stage banned?" A Q&A regarding stage legality thread.

Spoiler

Flat Zone 2

reason for banning:
excessive randomness (marginalizing of skill)
walk-off camping(arguably over-centralizing)

Amazing Ampharos said: ↑

This stage isn't quite a total pariah, but it's pretty close. Most people saw the similarity to known bad melee stage Flat Zone and were done with it. However, it has seen some actual argument in the distant past. Some others have Mario Circuit style arguments for why it should be banned (run-away isn't powerful here but the rest holds). Some feel the hazards are just too powerful for consistent matches to occur here, especially the lion tamers. Some feel this stage skews matchups too much and is therefore imbalanced, pointing out the low ceiling and disruptive geography and how it can give some characters strong advantages. No one I know of today supports this stage for legality.​

This is one of those times I really advocate having full stage guides for EVERY stage so we know everything about it for discussion, even the blatantly obvious bans like Wario Ware. I dunno about playing here, but no youtube vids and nothing really about it around is bad even if it's not good material for a stage maybe.

 

[Xiivi]

When the 'basic' stages are diverse enough in and of themselves to allow notable counterpick choices, then I don't mind a smaller stage list. "Fountain of Dreams", "Battlefield", "Pokemon Stadium", "Yoshi's Story", "Dreamland", and "Final Destination" are diverse enough to sustain a healthy metagame in my opinion. The stage list could be expanded some past that and probably should; but it being there isn't a bad thing for the metagame.

Hugs, You're like the best Samus main ever

Woah now: