| Queensland Smash Meets | Meet @ Bob's house this weekend |

[Darkwing SykeDuk]

I noticed ther was a 360 last time so I'll bring halo/doa4/controller and anything else. Bring naruto still l3ooker.. NEED RAGE MODE!!!!

Ryans idea of contributing - Posting a random stage list with no real discussion on stage placement. Also adding how he "*****" people on not only banned stages but (I've been lol'ing at this for years now) ALLLLLLL the way back at squat 1 (yer i told it was old) ryan "*****" me in a fox ditto (after i put the controller down on my last life at 0%, ryan being oblivious to this keeps playing), he then proceeded to boast about how good he is and that he is able to now beat me, meaning he is the best in Aus. There's a quote on the gaia forum actually in the "Best Player You've Played" thread... Ryan "I would put Syke, but I can beat him sooo.."

Basically pay no attention to any Ryan ever says on the boards, it's what 90% of us do.

zomg I wanna play sc4 but the 360 version cause yoda is god and vader is frakin gaymax.

 

[l3oOkeR]

OMFG RYAN VS SYKE IT COULD BE A MAIN EVENT!!!!

But umm Orpheon is ****in gay i hate the stage no way should it be Starter if a stage can flip the **** upside down its bull****. Delfino but should be a starter. Why is there no push for this as a starter at least you cant die from the stage besides drowning.

 

[Sieg]

Silly Zac, no one plays Yoda!

Ok. So like, this is online SC4.

HAY GUYS LOOK AT MY CERVANTES.

Or.

HAY GUYZ I HAVE KILIK HE IS LONG RANGE KEKEKEKEKEKEKEKKEKEKEKEKEKEKE.

I can bring that Naruto game that we played Squat 3ish. I can't remember, and I cbf looking up the name, it's the one you have Zac.

This is less Smashfest and more ZOMG FIGHTERFEST!

EDIT: Onett for Starter? Or are the cars too much of a negative? Contribution.

DOUBLE EDIT: I don't see why Delfino can't be a starter. It's very neutral and there's nothing that really changes it throughout the match.

 

[Scrubs]

I will comment on smash related stuffs as well....

I like what paff said add these to starters

- Brinstar
- Corneria
- Frigate Orpheon
- Battleship Halberd
- Jungle Japes
- Lylat Cruise (I always thought this was a neutral no ****ing idea why it shouldn't be)

Oh and all games except for Smash are bad....

Also console fps's are piles of ****

 

[CAOTIC]

I thought traditional fighters were bad until I picked up competitive GGXX - it's deep and fun how i like it

 

[xXArrowXx]

All players except captain falcon can just ban big blue.

big blue to starter =D

but seriously i agree with scrubs except for jungle japes unless it was 64 version XD

as for interesting fighting games.. ultra cosplay wars... lolz

but seriously soul caliber 3 and fzero gx (its a fighting game the way i play it lol)

 

[l3oOkeR]

Also console fps's are piles of ****

I Agree but There are exceptions to all the rules. In this case Halo and The Timesplitter series along with Bond/Dark on N64.

im gonna push this till its done Delfino TO STARTER! Ir Brinstar and Frigate Orpheon make it Delfino is a must

 

[xXArrowXx]

in the brawl buddies tournament i played nofair... lolz it was banned and we lost but it was against chris and jei jei therefore we lost anyway XD

yeah goldeneye 64 pro pro pro... so much better than gordon freeman gordon freeman gordon freeman gordon freeman.

dont forget CONKERS BAD FUR DAY >:D

 

[undead_moose]

Time splitters yes halo no

Guilty gear is fun but intant death moves are like super gay

conkers was best game ever on the 64

Hey gordon freeman would research the **** out of you.

Need to play eternal darkness again

THIS ISNT REALLY HAPPENING

 

[Darkwing SykeDuk]

Gekitou Ninja Taisen 4, I'm way too pro at that now (lol nick), High Def Halo massive want...

 

[Kust0m]

lols, conkers. i remember that. They used to play that game on the tv show 'Amazing'

 

[Sieg]

So I herd you liek Timesplitterz.

TS4 is coming out on the Wiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii.

Looks hot.

WE NEED TO HAVE AN EPIC F-ZERO GX RACE.

Also Conkers was god lol.

 

[xXArrowXx]

yeah conkers is pro as, go drunk mode =P

i got fzero gx ill bring it to next std so probably kustoms


Amazing was ftw too even tho they ALWAYS put the key behind the cactus :/

 

[Darkwing SykeDuk]

Ohemgee f-zero will need time to get back into snaking lolz

 

[Sieg]

Suicide finish ftw.

I remember when I first beat the ****ing F-Zero Gran Prix on Very Hard mode.

I cried the whole night.

lol.

EDIT: ZOMG THE VALKYRIA DEMO IS OUT.

MUST DOWNLOAD.

 

[Vyse]

Stage List Revision[

Starter
Battlefield
Final Destination
Smashville
Yoshi's Island
Castle Siege
Delfino
Halberd
Pokémon Stadium 1
Lylat Cruise (They say that lylat cruise is considered unbalanced. Although really, it's no more of an advantage than what Diddy has on FD)

Counter
Brinstar
Corneria
Distant Planet
Frigate Orpheon
Green Hill Zone
Jungle Japes
Luigi's Mansion
Norfair
Pictochat
Pirate Ship
Rainbow Cruise
Yoshi's Island (Pipes)
Green Greens
Onett
Port Town Aero Dive
Mario Circuit
Bridge of Eldin
Shadow Moses

Banned
Skyworld
Pokémon Stadium 2
75m
Big Blue
Flat Zone 2
Hanenbow
Hyrule Temple
Mario Bros.
Mushroomy Kingdom I
Mushroomy Kingdom II
New Pork City
Rumble Falls
Spear Pillar
The Summit
Wario Ware

Stages in red are Dedede banned unless agreed upon by all players.

Even though certain stages like Delfino or Onett have walkoffs and/or walls, they are interrupted by stage elements (such as the stage changing or the cars on Onett).

Also, to create this list, I've examined all of your opinions and have considered the SBR's reasoning behind each of the stages in their list.

 

[Sieg]

Have to admit that's looking alot better.

We have enough starters at the moment now, and a wider choice.

I don't see why we need to edit it anymore, unless someone has an opinion on the placings.

 

[MaCa]

Also console fps's are piles of ****

yeah that goes without saying if you play pc fps enough.

 

[Paff]

@vyse:

Looks pretty good, only one question (out of curiosity mostly): why the decision to not implement Scrubs's idea (i.e. why not move Brinstar, Corneria, Frigate Orpheon, and/or Jungle Japes to starter)?

 

[Sieg]

In my opnion we'd have too many starters then.

It's all good to increase the numbers, but we can't have too much excess.

The one's we have in starter atm are the most neutral stages give or take a bit.

 

[Vyse]

http://www.smashboards.com/showthread.php?t=187736

This is the SBR's reasoning:

First, here's the SBR vote split:

Stage: Starter - Counterpick - Banned
Brinstar: 1-20-0
Corneria: 1-27-9
Frigate Orpheon: 1-29-0
Brinstar 1-20-0

Brinstar

The uneven ground completely changes how aerials are canceled, and the lava can be a strong influence on the match; this placed it in the counterpick list.

Corneria

While the wall on the right is dangerous and the ceiling is low on top of the fin, we do not believe these are uncontrollable aspects of the stage and therefore it should not be banned. If you wish to camp the wall in hopes of getting off an infinite, you must put your back to the blast zone that is incredibly close to that side of the stage.

Frigate Orpheon

Due to the lack of ledge on the right side of the first transformation and the potential danger of stage flipping for bad recoveries, this was placed as a counterpick.

Jungle Japes

The water and high ceiling made this a counterpick.

 

[Paff]

@Sieg:

The theory (which I'm not knowledgeable-enough to know if it's valid or not) is that the SBR-recommended starter stages are generally biased in favor of the top-tier characters, and that somehow these other stages would relatively speaking be better for lower-tier characters, thereby balancing the characters out some. If this is true (again, I personally don't know if it is or not), then I think that's a pretty strong case for adding them to starter.

@vyse:

I guess it comes down to how straightforward we want the starter stages to be; I, for one, don't mind the unusual features of those stages in the least.

Since everyone's acknowledging that the starter stages are not "neutral" in terms of charcter advantages, it seems to me to be pretty arbitrary to try to prefer levels that don't move and consist entirely of solid and drop-through blocks for the starter stages - other features that aren't totally random, and aren't difficult to work around, don't strike me as having a negative impact on the gameplay.

 

[Sieg]

Above ^

There are already stages which have been added to balance it out with low tiers. Castle Siege, Delfino, Halberd. While they are stages that a good MK/Snake can play well on, they are also stages that give advantages to other lower tiered characters.

Also Vyse although I agree with the points you made, I thought the reason for this was to not-adhere to what the SBR had agreed upon?

 

[CAOTIC]

Paff seems really intelligent! I like what he said!

 

[Vyse]

Also Vyse although I agree with the points you made, I thought the reason for this was to not-adhere to what the SBR had agreed upon?

I'm just putting out the reasons why the SBR has put them in counter pick.
Tell me why they shouldn't.

Whilst the *may* benefit lower tiered characters, higher tiered characters *may also* benefit from them as much, if not more.

I'm just voicing an objective opinion for you guys to prove wrong, because that's precisely what we need. Something to get you guys talking and ultimately justifying the stage list.

 

[Amaterasu]

I'm fine with that stage list, no complaints from me Anthony
I've probably been desensitized by the melb rulings haha

 

[CAOTIC]

Since nothing is neutral, consider putting everything legal into random select (Maybe you can consider this later so the Smashers don't get overwhelmed with the expansion of stages). It's the closest thing Brawl can ever get to having a 'fair' first match. Vyse's revised stage legality list is almost identical to Victoria's one now, bar 2 really gay stages (Big Blue and PKStad2), which is completely understandable

The benefits of doing so is that everyone will be familiar with stages that are less friendly and sharpen skills based off instinct rather than just skills based off total stability. When you think about it, Melbourne smashers probably had an edge over other states in Nintendo's Connection Tour because we were less fazed with CP and Banned stages. We were used to them. It's just another interesting facet of a player's development that can be further improved on.

For what it is so far though, QLD has a much more dynamic ruleset now. Take THAT Americants!

<3 Woxy

 

[Sieg]

Above ^

There are already stages which have been added to balance it out with low tiers. Castle Siege, Delfino, Halberd. While they are stages that a good MK/Snake can play well on, they are also stages that give advantages to other lower tiered characters.

Also Vyse although I agree with the points you made, I thought the reason for this was to not-adhere to what the SBR had agreed upon?

Quoting myself here.

Bold was at Paff, not you Antho lol.

@ Paff - I can see where you are coming from. Stages like Frigate Orpheon I don't mind myself personally, as the flip is easy to dodge. But I dunno if people will like the whole "edges are crap" thing. I mean, look at how much of an outrage there was when people found out Pokemon Stadium 1 had been changed.

Then again, PKST1 is in the starters, so I don't see why Orpheon couldn't be there.

 

[Scrubs]

Stage List Revision[

Starter
Battlefield
Final Destination
Smashville
Yoshi's Island
Castle Siege
Delfino
Halberd
Pokémon Stadium 1
Lylat Cruise (They say that lylat cruise is considered unbalanced. Although really, it's no more of an advantage than what Diddy has on FD)

I thought the reason we were thinking of expanding the amount of starters was to reduce the gap between top and lower tier characters.

The only stage that I can see on here that poses a threat to any of the top tier characters is delfino for Snake. But even then its not that bad a stage for him

 

[Paff]

Okay, so basically the way I see it, we'd need someone who's knowledgeable about the various matchups on those proposed-as-starter stages (Scrubs?) before being able to decide what to do with them. If indeed adding them would balance the characters out more, I think it's probably worth doing.

As far as good criteria in terms of what should and should not be starter stages, I have the following thoughts (not trying to force my opinion or claim that it's exceptionally valid, but this seems like something we should probably discuss):
1. Like the counterpick stages, they should obviously not have anything ban-worthy.
2. The pool of starter stages, as a whole, when played on random, on average, should be as balanced amongst the characters as possible.
3. Individual starter stages should, where possible, not be extremely advantageous or disadvantageous for any character (to avoid randomly getting stages for the first match that throw the balance out-of-whack).
4. Individual starter stages should be _relatively_ straightforward, in terms of not having anything really random or really out of the ordinary. Where we draw the line for this is up for debate, and I personally would consider at least Frigate Orpheon and Jungle Japes to fit squarely into the "straightforward-enough-to-be-a-starter-stage" category.

I dunno, what does everyone else think? And what's the SBR's criteria for the starter stages?

 

[Sieg]

SBR's criteria is Neutral. To the extreme.

I guess that's why we only got 4 starters from them.

They went even more hardout in this game. I mean, Corneria used to be a starter in Melee but got changed in Brawl to Counterpick. Anything with smallsides/lower ceiling seems to be extremly unbalanced according to them.

I don't see what got so different. I mean,

Marth on Yoshi story was HORRIBLY broken, but no one complained about it.

I think we should have some set rules as to what we are looking for in a stage for starters, many off us have different ideas about what is neutral and what not.

 

[CAOTIC]

The SBR is a joke sometimes. Some of the threads and arguments that happen in there makes me want to stab my eyes

 

[Vyse]

SBR's criteria is Neutral. To the extreme.

I guess that's why we only got 4 starters from them.

They went even more hardout in this game. I mean, Corneria used to be a starter in Melee but got changed in Brawl to Counterpick. Anything with smallsides/lower ceiling seems to be extremly unbalanced according to them.

I don't see what got so different. I mean,

Marth on Yoshi story was HORRIBLY broken, but no one complained about it.

I think we should have some set rules as to what we are looking for in a stage for starters, many off us have different ideas about what is neutral and what not.

Eh?
Corneria was a neutral???

Also, the reason why they call them 'starters' is because they recognise that it's invalid to call them neutral anymore.

---
SBR Brawl Starters:

Battlefield
Smashville
Final Destination
Castle Siege*
Halberd*
Pokémon Stadium 1*
Yoshi's Island
Delfino*
Lylat Cruise*

Melee Neutrals:
Dream Land: Fountain of Dreams
Kanto: Pokemon Stadium
Mushroom Kingdom: Rainbow Cruise *
Past Stages: Dream Land
Past Stages: Kongo Jungle
Special Stages: Final Destination
Special Stages: Battlefield
Yoshi's Island: Yoshi's Story
---

Just FYI. The stage legality project was way more ban happy than SBR.
That being said, I liked the stage legality project stage list better, which is why I implemented it for QBB.

Although, I think we're (I am) being too traditionalist to Melee. This is a different game, so, we should look at the stages differently.

(Again, not defending the SBR or anything >.>)

 

[Sieg]

Feh, Corneria was neutral in my heart.

Why did they get rid of Dreamland 64 and Kongo Jungle 64.

Those were some of the best stages.

EDIT: Seriously though, I thought it was neutral.

You know what this means.

We need to play more Melee.

 

[Paff]

@vyse: What was this "stage legality project" and how is it related/not related to the SBR stage recommendations?

Regarding the SBR's criteria: Again, as vyse pointed out, the starter stages are called "starter" instead of "neutral" because basically everyone agrees that they are not neutral (and that basically no stages are truly neutral). I presume that everyone in the SBR agrees that they are not neutral, and so I'm wondering what criteria the SBR used to declare them as good "starter" stages, since the criteria presumably could not include "fairness".

@CAOTIC: You're in the SBR? And do you know what criteria they were using for the starters?

I concur that we need to all agree on criteria for our starter stages. I pointed out my thoughts above, and it seems like it would be useful for us to discuss any disagreements anyone has with those points or has any additional criteria that anyone else might have.

 

[Scrubs]

I have been thinking about this and I have some reccommendations:

1. We did this in melee, but each player should get one cancel... Not a ban but a cancel, if a stage comes up on random that you don't want to play on you can cancel and try your luck again, only applies for the first match of a set your opponent can still counterpick with this stage, if it comes up on random again you have to play it, this becomes especially relevant as you increase the amount of stages on random select

2. DDD rule should not apply in teams.... Yes occasionally you will get a 1 v 1 at the end of the match that DDD would just tear up, but during the match your team mate should dissrupt any infinites, if they don't well bad luck and work on your team work

3. I think we should implement the rules that Dave came up with regarding teams for ' Don't come ' i.e no meta - snake or meta - meta teams

 

[Vyse]

@vyse: What was this "stage legality project" and how is it related/not related to the SBR stage recommendations?

Regarding the SBR's criteria: Again, as vyse pointed out, the starter stages are called "starter" instead of "neutral" because basically everyone agrees that they are not neutral (and that basically no stages are truly neutral). I presume that everyone in the SBR agrees that they are not neutral, and so I'm wondering what criteria the SBR used to declare them as good "starter" stages, since the criteria presumably could not include "fairness".

@CAOTIC: You're in the SBR? And do you know what criteria they were using for the starters?

I concur that we need to all agree on criteria for our starter stages. I pointed out my thoughts above, and it seems like it would be useful for us to discuss any disagreements anyone has with those points or has any additional criteria that anyone else might have.

The stage legality discussion project is found here.

An example of the way they laid it out is here.

Basically, people who participated in this discussion worked together to create a tournament legality list, and was pretty much independent from the SBR.

In retrospect, it's no longer an appealing list.

I have been thinking about this and I have some reccommendations:

1. We did this in melee, but each player should get one cancel... Not a ban but a cancel, if a stage comes up on random that you don't want to play on you can cancel and try your luck again, only applies for the first match of a set your opponent can still counterpick with this stage, if it comes up on random again you have to play it, this becomes especially relevant as you increase the amount of stages on random select

2. DDD rule should not apply in teams.... Yes occasionally you will get a 1 v 1 at the end of the match that DDD would just tear up, but during the match your team mate should dissrupt any infinites, if they don't well bad luck and work on your team work

3. I think we should implement the rules that Dave came up with regarding teams for ' Don't come ' i.e no meta - snake or meta - meta teams

1. Agreed

2. This has always been agreed I think. Though not everyone would have known that. My rules for QBB explained that anyhow.

3. Sitting on fence.

 

[undead_moose]

Anthony what team came second in qbb

meta meta

3 seems viable

Edit: Someone host something!!!!!!!! this weekend so boooored wanna smash I ACTUALLY WANT TO SMASH

 

[Vyse]

3. Still sitting on fence. Waiting for others to provide decisive proof/communal agreeance. Just because I may think it's a good idea, doesn't mean others could be unhappy with it (Although, evidently, people don't seem to mind).

 

[Scrubs]

Maybe for no. 3 we should wait and see how it goes in Sydney