Requesting Feedback - A Potential Alternate Rule Set

[Max?]

FD only. Only characters allowed in this game are Fox and Doc, and I'm the only one who can play Doc.

Let's go.

 

[Veetaak]

otg to win nationals?

 

[Max?]

It's gonna happen regardless of the rule change or not.

Sooner or later

 

[oliman]

varist you are really dumb.

depths has ledges

 

[Citizen Snips]

I like to imagine that everyone who fervently opposes trying this ruleset looks like this:
http://media1.break.com/dnet/media/2011/11/28/eb9a051f-4b9e-45bd-a966-276cc4b1f248.jpg

 

[Dogysamich]

-hops out of grave-

Man I remember years ago, like 05 or 06 when I suggested this. Got called a ****ing ****** like every other suggestion I make. Now this is a good idea?


¯\_(ツ)_/¯ better late than never, I guess. I still think it's too late for this.

-hops back in grave-

 

[huMps]

First off - very against this Idea.
Second - M2k would be undefeated if there were only 3 stocks. He's kinda like Lebron that way.

 

[Pmac]

I don't understand why people bother posting in opposition of this proposal without giving legitimate reasons why it is "***** stoopid." There's obviously a lot of thought put into this proposal. If you've got real beef with it, make a real analysis of what its flaws are. Same goes for proponents too though, really.

 

[Kal]

Luckily, proponents can just say "I agree with the stuff Cactuar said." Though I agree that you should give it some serious thought, and keep in mind that the stage list and the number of stock are separate aspects of the ruleset (i.e., you can play on only the starter stages and still play with two stock). If you have a problem with the ruleset, you should address both things so that we can know exactly where the problem lies.

Also, this:

I like to imagine that everyone who fervently opposes trying this ruleset looks like this:
http://media1.break.com/dnet/media/2011/11/28/eb9a051f-4b9e-45bd-a966-276cc4b1f248.jpg

 

[Slashtap]

If we ever do seriously consider making this change, we should disable new accounts for a day and have an anonymous poll, it would be sad if one overeducated intellectual elitist made such an obviously undesirable change come to fruition because he's better at arguing than the whole community combined.

Also if people are comfortable with the idea of 4 stock matches and want them to continue being the standard, that's a perfectly acceptable reason not to amend the ruleset. We shouldn't have to win a debate with ****n clarence darrow just to get what we want

there is no way that over half the community would be okay with this ridiculous ruleset.

Let's reframe what you're essentially saying. It's "sad" to do something if it is the most logically defensible choice, but it is totally acceptable to do something if it is the majority's preference. Wow. Just wow.

 

[CanISmash]

at the very least we should do 3 stocks. I can't sit here and accept that a spacey gets grabbed twice in a match and the match is over in under 1 minute.

I like the idea but i say bring down the stocks and add a match. which definitely does not make things shorter but probably longer but I think its more fun and competitive.

I'm 100% for opening up more stages, really hated when we lost all those stages due to the pound ruleset. all we've done is put more and more restrictions on us. i also think a lot of stages were banned early on and simply put never explored as an option again. also a ledge rule may be needed in the future but i don't know how that would work.

And we never had back to back gfs with fox shooting lasers at each other refusing to approach.

What annoys me is throughout the entire years of smash the whole ruleset has been catered against fox

Fox has never been the dominant force running the scene but we always have to worry about what he can possibly do.

ken ran the scene, m2k came up with fox but didn't dominate until marth. pc chris came out with falco / fox. mango broke out with jiggs then ***** with everyone. armada ***** everyone with peach. like who was playing fox that makes everyone always cry he's god tier broken when he gets chaingrabbed, and edge guarded all day like cake, and he has like no range thus he has to get close and be prone to making mistakes.

ps i miss corneria and mute city

 

[SSBMaster11]

That actually sounds like a really cool idea! I think it definitely deserves testing, but I think it could potentially work. However, I still disagree with your proposed stage list. Now, I hate how restrictive the current stage list is, but your proposed stage list might be a bit too much. Personally, I would go with banning (at the very least):

Icicle Mountain
Hyrule Temple (although, with 3 minutes, there isn't really as much time to be camping, so, maybe not)
Flat Zone
Brinstar Depths
Mushroom Kingdom (I and II)
Poke Floats
Rainbow Cruise

Other than the stage list, I think this at the very least deserves some playtesting.

 

[RaphaelRobo]

Why is it Big Blue and Brinstar Depths that you banned? You went into a lot of detail on your thoughts about everything else, but you didn't talk at all about your experience using it and why you chose those two stages to be banned.

I know it doesn't mean much coming from a nobody who's been playing for 3 months, but I liked all the thought you put into this, and definitely want to give this ruleset a try. I honestly think that even if 2 stocks is best for the game we should go to 3 stocks, just because I believe the jump from 4 to 2 would be too much of a shock for people.

 

[Metal Reeper]

This is turning into Marvel (Don't drop that combo)
Combos/techchases are gonna be soooo much important. If you can't punish them super well.....rawr.

 

[N.A.G.A.C.E]

How come i feel like if someone not well known made this thread he would be called an idiot and people would just lol at him?

Also i dont like your proposed changes but i have only looked at page 1 so until i read more of this thread (which i dont plan to do atm) i am going to hold of on reasons why i dont like it

 

[phish-it]

at the very least we should do 3 stocks. I can't sit here and accept that a spacey gets grabbed twice in a match and the match is over in under 1 minute.

I like the idea but i say bring down the stocks and add a match. which definitely does not make things shorter but probably longer but I think its more fun and competitive.

I'm 100% for opening up more stages, really hated when we lost all those stages due to the pound ruleset. all we've done is put more and more restrictions on us. i also think a lot of stages were banned early on and simply put never explored as an option again. also a ledge rule may be needed in the future but i don't know how that would work.

And we never had back to back gfs with fox shooting lasers at each other refusing to approach.

What annoys me is throughout the entire years of smash the whole ruleset has been catered against fox

Fox has never been the dominant force running the scene but we always have to worry about what he can possibly do.

ken ran the scene, m2k came up with fox but didn't dominate until marth. pc chris came out with falco / fox. mango broke out with jiggs then ***** with everyone. armada ***** everyone with peach. like who was playing fox that makes everyone always cry he's god tier broken when he gets chaingrabbed, and edge guarded all day like cake, and he has like no range thus he has to get close and be prone to making mistakes.

ps i miss corneria and mute city

You make it sound like fox is a bad character on neutrals.

 

[DerfMidWest]

I don't understand why people bother posting in opposition of this proposal without giving legitimate reasons why it is "***** stoopid." There's obviously a lot of thought put into this proposal. If you've got real beef with it, make a real analysis of what its flaws are. Same goes for proponents too though, really.

I think we have been talking about this actually...
Like how Fox laser camps the hell out of everybody.
And it really doesn't serve its purpose of eliminating camping and encouraging offensive play.
Nor does it benefit low tiers too much.

The idea of having more stages is nice, but the matches are just too short. And banned stages have a reason for being banned (I don't agree with all of those reasons, but for the most part, I see the logic behind it).

I believe that a ruleset similar to this would work, but not 2 stock 3 min.
It needs to be at least 3 stock 4 min. Bo5.

At first I thought that the Bo7 would make up for the 2 stock matches but it really doesn't.
Games are just done right away.

 

[SypherPhoenix]

copypasta my post from another forum:

The biggest problem I see is that we can measure skill only in the context of a given ruleset. His goal seems to be getting the better player to win the set, but by changing the ruleset so drastically he is also altering exactly what skills the game tests.

He also states that the current ruleset is more forgiving to the better player, making it harder for the worse player to win. But isn't the point of the ruleset to increase the likelyhood that the better player will win?

 

[Heart Break Kid]

First off - very against this Idea.
Second - M2k would be undefeated if there were only 3 stocks. He's kinda like Lebron that way.

LMAO, this made me laugh so much and the immediate match that came to mind was him v armada at pound 4 lolol. Thats a good comparison

And again we get to play on flatzone...thats awesome

 

[Kal]

copypasta my post from another forum:

The biggest problem I see is that we can measure skill only in the context of a given ruleset. His goal seems to be getting the better player to win the set, but by changing the ruleset so drastically he is also altering exactly what skills the game tests.

This doesn't invalidate anything. It's like saying that, in Poker, the odds of the better player winning are lower than in Chess. Obviously, a new ruleset means a potentially different skill set, but that is not necessarily a bad thnig.

He also states that the current ruleset is more forgiving to the better player, making it harder for the worse player to win. But isn't the point of the ruleset to increase the likelyhood that the better player will win?

I think it's more that we want to discourage this mentality in which it's ok to make a mistake because you have enough stock to compensate for it. Whereas the better player is arguably more likely to win when you increase the number of stock, you also have the case where players who are more accident-prone receive a benefit.

 

[-ShadowPhoenix-]

mute city.

brinstar depths.

POGEEFLOTS

IDK how puff does on floats, but Mute City and Brinstar depths are both really good counterpicks for her so that would only make her stronger

Remember: Don't fix something that is not broken.

This. Sooooo much

 

[Kal]

To suggest that we should keep a rule that is arbitrarily chosen in the first place just because it's not broken is nonsense.

 

[Qlaw]

Dont fix something that isn't broken

by that logic we should all still play segas

The current ruleset is outdated. I propose a bo5 3 stock 5 min setup.

 

[Cactuar]

Did anyone play around with 3 stock and 2 stock? I haven't gotten a chance to do 3 stock 5 minute yet, but next time I play I'll try it out.

 

[Qlaw]

3 stock is how i play casually. It keeps people honest. i also feel that to an extent most stages should be playable. it's apart of being "skillful" to handle the stage. Of course if one char has a huge advantage it changes things

 

[Metal Reeper]

We should all try 3 stock 5 mins. regroup and move from there.

 

[Smasher89]

3 stock is how i play casually. It keeps people honest. i also feel that to an extent most stages should be playable. it's apart of being "skillful" to handle the stage. Of course if one char has a huge advantage it changes things

Basicly, the rules now makes puff get guarantied wins in a easier way then fox on for example onett/corneria (ICs beats him on both those stages, Nana cant get gimped). And while there is no stageban, peaches should always lose 2 matches in every best of 5 set by guarantied safe play.

 

[Pmac]

To suggest that we should keep a rule that is arbitrarily chosen in the first place just because it's not broken is nonsense.

This is exactly on point with what I meant. Does anyone know the origins of the first rule set? It was unanimously accepted and hasn't been seriously challenged in, what, >5 years?

 

[Kal]

Do you mean the number of stock? For the most part, people figured "one minute per stock" was a good idea. Some people realized that allocating one minute per stock was technically excessive, since the loss of seven stock would mean the end of the match, and instead allocated one fewer.

However, the fact that the initial decision is arbitrarily chosen is important, in my opinion. There is a difference between changing the rule on number of stock, which is totally arbitrary, and banning a character or a stage.

 

[Jolteon]

Did anyone play around with 3 stock and 2 stock? I haven't gotten a chance to do 3 stock 5 minute yet, but next time I play I'll try it out.

I've been thinking that 3 stock 5 min would be best, but I haven't tried it out yet. :[

 

[KrIsP!]

Did anyone play around with 3 stock and 2 stock? I haven't gotten a chance to do 3 stock 5 minute yet, but next time I play I'll try it out.

I tried 3 stock Bo5, honestly felt n different from what we have now other than the fact that matches are shorter. I am not opposed to it.

 

[DerfMidWest]

3 stock Bo5 works pretty well, like I said...
Also a lot of stages still need to be banned... because they suck donkey ****.

 

[Dan Salvato]

3 stock Bo5 works pretty well, like I said...
Also a lot of stages still need to be banned... because they suck donkey ****.

Stages should be slowly added instead of all reinstated and subsequently banned again. Different stages, even strange ones like Mushroom Kingdom II, call for different strategies and techniques that add new depth to competitive play. But, this doesn't stop a good number of stages being broken and/or unfair.

One thing to keep in mind that character advantage isn't a problem on counterpicks, as long as 50% of the counterpicks don't favor one character (lol fox)

 

[DerfMidWest]

Fox has no bad stages though

anyway, I agree that we should have more stages added. But that doesn't need to be done too slowly.

 

[Kal]

In my opinion, we just need to be clear on what criteria make something ban worthy. I think we should follow Kish Prime's example:

Spoiler

The No-Johns Ruleset

Objective: Preserve as much of the game of Melee as possible while keeping the ruleset competitive. When it is not an issue of competitiveness, select the option that promotes more game knowledge and required ability.

Aside: Competitive in this context simply means that the ruleset applies equally to all players before they begin to place their own input into the game (character selection), with winners consistently determined according to their relative skill levels. The actual word one should use is fair, but so many people abuse that word that I hate to invoke it.

Rational Criteria for Ruleset: To accomplish the objective, this ruleset is based on three pieces of arbitrarily-selected criteria.
1. Prevent overly randomized results – One primary objective of any competitive ruleset is to ensure consistent results. Consistent does not mean that the same/best person wins every time - consistent is just consistent. There is always variation in results, even before random factors come into play. Melee is a game that includes a degree of randomness in many of its facets, and decisions under this criteria have to meet some arbitrary threshold. In this case I’ve selected something that is considered widely acceptable by the community - the results randomization generated by the computer’s selection of Peach’s turnip pull - as my standard (referred to as the Turnip Threshold). Any effect that is less significant than this, then, should be allowable.
2. Bans distributed only against single-character or single-strategy brokenness – Stages such as Hyrule, with run-away projectile camping being unbeatable, fall into this category. If two characters are viable, then clearly neither is broken and you have options available to you.
3. Unavoidable glitches that impede gameplay – Stages like Brinstar Depths, through which your character can randomly fall through any part of the stage, were banned for this reason. FoD is usually banned in teams because the frame drop messes with people. I never thought the Mute frame drop was bad enough to warrant it, but some do.

Best of 3 Sets, played as follows:
First round – Characters may be double-blind selected. Players then stage strike, using the whole stage list. Players may elect to start with a smaller list of 5 or 6 standard stages (chosen by the TO) to speed up the process if both agree.
Second/Third rounds – Advanced slobs - loser picks stage, winner changes character, loser changes character. A stage may not be repeated (under the criteria that this requires most ability/game knowledge).
Bans - Bans are optional, but it does little to "balance" anything. It just makes characters better or worse depending on their number of counters.

Team Attack ON – Falls under objective of “select option that requires most ability/game knowledge.”
Items OFF – In the distant past while this was still a debate, we even experimented with Items-On during only round robin play as a means of keeping them in the tournament scene. Despite this, it seemed to clearly violate the Turnip Threshold (if only because of exploding boxes), and exited the tournament scene. Anyone disagree?
Timed out matches will be determined by the remaining number of lives, then percentage of the current stock. In the event of an exact percentage tie, play out sudden death (preserve original game where logical).

Stage Analysis – Please be aware that most of this is opinion based on the criteria listed above. You may choose to discount or disagree with any of this, but I feel that I have been very strict in adhering to my own criteria so as to preserve the logical coherency outlined above.

Should be included – Stages that fail none of the criterion are listed here
Final Destination – Fails no test.

Battlefield – Fails no test.

Dream Land – Fails no test. Random wind effect is minimal.

Fountain of Dreams – Fails no test. Random platform movement has affected matches, but is well below the Turnip Threshold. Many viable characters.

Pokemon Stadium – Fails no test. Transformations occur randomly, but players are warned well in advance. All odd stage characteristics are consistent and can be learned.

Yoshi’s Story – Despite having some of the most severe random effects of any “neutral” stage (Shyguy-induced extended hitboxes/bonus DI and Randall), it still seems pretty clearly below the Turnip Threshold.

Brinstar – Fails no test. On rare occasions, lava will randomly save players, but this effect is minimal and comparable to widely-accepted stages like Yoshi’s Story. At least three characters are strong on this stage (Peach/Puff/Ganon), with a couple of additional characters able to hold their own.

Jungle Japes – Fails no test. Klaptrap is in fixed zones of the stage that are completely avoidable until high % knockaways. I’m not aware of a single character or strategy ever dominating this stage, though some did attempt to play a lot of keep-away with moderate success.

Mute City – Fails no test. No randomness. It could be pretty strongly argued that the stage has a “two-character dominance” issue, but that doesn’t meet my criteria, since neither character is broken. In my opinion, it is one of the best stages for terrain adaptation and utilization and risk/reward play.

Rainbow Cruise – Fails no test. May have same “two-character dominance” that Mute has, but can’t ban it by my criteria.

Kongo Jungle 64 – Fails no test. Barrel is minimal in its random effects. Stage has unique geography that seems to have the potential to both cause major problems and give many benefits for a large number of characters. Run-away camping may, in fact, be a stage-breaking strategy, but it’s hard to see how multiple characters can’t use it to some extent.

Mushroom Kingdom II – Fails no test. No one ever effectively made a case for stage brokenness. It was removed by most solely for walk-off edges, which is a stage property that no one ever proved to be broken as a rule, just high-risk, high-reward. We kept it on at FCs even through 2007.

Borderline – A lot of opinion and judgment involved, otherwise known as "TO's choice"
Corneria – Tough in multiple cases. At the very least, two characters seem to be viable here. Arwing lasers can come close to the Turnip Threshold, but I don’t think it crosses that line. Camping the right side of the stage was never proven to be broken, but Ness/YLink gun camping is still up in the air (though as Big D has noted, you can always go down and destroy the gun if you are that scared of it, forcing a fight on stage for the rest of the time).

Green Greens – Mildly struggles with randomized results. However, I have played on this stage quite a bit in my tournament career, and I do believe that for the most part the randomness is not as bad as it seems. Players’ bad decisions on positioning are usually much more impactful. There is a lot of potential for clever use of terrain, so I do still like it as an option, but I wouldn’t die for it. May be single-character dominance issues as well (who else but Fox?).

Poke Floats - Does Fox break this stage? I know that this is one of two stages where I have landed two space animal slayers without getting hit and still lost the round, but that’s very anecdotal. No stage randomness, and the two spots you can fall through are widely known and easily avoidable, so single-character dominance is really the only possible issue.

Onett – Does Fox break this stage? Quite a few felt that he did.

Peach’s Castle – Does Fox break this stage? Quite a few felt that he did. Random effects seem well short of Turnip Threshold, but can be quite present.

Should be removed – To the best of current knowledge, these stages have unavoidable issues
Icicle Mountain – Stage movement severely and regularly impacts players at random times, often costing full stock. Fails Turnip Threshold.

Brinstar Depths – The causes of stage warping were never found. Even then, some have suggested that Fox breaks this stage.

Pipes – A rare case of single-character domination. Before it was banned, some players wisely started countering to this stage, even if they did not play Fox, and scored wins over better opponents by switching to him. Between the low ceiling and the walk-off edge-shine potential across the entire stage, it seemed to be too much. This was before most of the dominant Falcos showed up, so it would be interesting to examine further in light of that.

Great Bay – A similar stage to Pipes. Fox showed the ability to pull off “mini-Hyrule” run away camping around the stage, and the low ceiling only added to his control over the stage.

Yoshi 64 - Run away camping is an extremely dominant strategy

Hyrule Temple – Run away camping is an extremely dominant strategy

Flat Zone – Randomized results induced by falling items fails Turnip Threshold

Big Blue – I want to say randomized results cause a Turnip Threshold problem, but I’m not sure that’s true. For now, I lean that way.

Completely unsure
Kongo Jungle (Rock) – Not sure any random factor is enough to randomize results in any meaningful way. It was banned early, so there is no evidence of a single character being dominant. It was hypothesized that the rock was too strong of a location to approach. I’m not convinced that this is true in the modern game. To me, the extreme verticality of the stage may pose more problems, but that may only make it a counterstage against slow movers.

Mushroom Kingdom – Bricks are completely disruptive, but I’m not certain that they are competitive issues at all. They may actually interfere with the ability of some top-tier characters to execute that which makes them top-tier. Regarding character balance, no idea. None.

Venom – I don’t know of any clear reason why this would be banned, save for potential Fox-dominance (which may not even be true). Arwing lasers pose the same problem that they do on Corneria, which is to say a minimal one, and cave-saves are similar. The combined effect pushes it close to ban territory.

Fourside – Was originally among some of the first stages banned for several reasons, including fears of Peach Bomber stalling and camera issues, especially during doubles on smaller TVs. Truthfully, I have no idea if it fails any of my given criteria or not. Run away camping could well be dominant here – there’s a lot of room.

So, while I don't agree with banning Mute City because Peach is good, but not broken, there, or because the cars are random, what I do think is that some stages, such as Hyrule, should be banned anyway. With Hyrule legal, the metagame will degenerate into at least one counterpick always being Fox-dittos on Hyrule.

I am also of the opinion that the stage list would be independent of whether we run two or four stock, which just reinforces my opinion that we should use Kish Prime's ruleset. Of course, given that the community absolutely hates anything that isn't "0-death x4," I expect that we will either avoid Cactuar's suggested ruleset altogether, or run it with only the six starter stages legal.

 

[Mew2King]

I think we should try out your 4 "unsure" stages

DK's rock stage is not broken btw. If you land on the edge or shield on the rock then you get a free punish on any char. Even bowser becomes viable (mid tier) on that stage which is kinda cool

 

[Varist]

varist you are really dumb.

depths has ledges

show me.

because i would say i'm 99% sure that no, no it doesn't.

oliman you are really ignant

IDK how puff does on floats, but Mute City and Brinstar depths are both really good counterpicks for her so that would only make her stronger

DON'T TALK ABOUT MY MUTE. IT STOPS PLANKERNING AND NO PUFF HAS EVER COUNTERPICKED TO DEPTHS AS FUR AS I KNOW

 

[DerfMidWest]

The stages I think should be legal are as follows:
-Final Destination
-Battlefield
-Dreamland
-Fountain of Dreams
-Yoshi's
~~~
-Pokemon stadium
-Kongo Jungle (rock)
-Musroom Kingdom II
-(?)

not sure what else for a counterpick...
Venom? KJ64 (lotsa camp though)? Green Greens? Corneria? Mute city? Idk.

I like the KJ rock land though :3
Of course I like the idea of having lots and lots of stages, but for bare minimum (but more than we currently have) I think something similar to this would work.

Neither Mushroom Kingdom II nor the KJ deserve to be banned. There isn't too much bull**** that goes on there, and a lot of the stuff is avoidable. The walk off ledges on MushlandII are only a problem if you go up there. Birdo isn't a big problem either.
KJ has the rock which really isn't that bad and the mini claptrap every once in awhile, but they aren't very problematic imo. The ledges can screw spacies over sometimes, but thats a good thing, imo.


Also for KJ, if somebody camps on a rock, there are lots of characters who can just smack them with arched/angled projectiles without needing to actually go down there (Pika/Pichu, Mario, Doc, Y.Link/Link, Peach, Zelda, Sheik, Bowser[?], Yoshi) and there are some people who can just jump down there and smack *****es (Marth, Sheik, etc)

 

[Varist]

Except for Aesir's post, I'm glad we've been able to say, "okay, these are the stages we should BAN" instead of "okay, here are the stages we should have legal".

That's a giant leap forward into the funzone. lots of spinning.

 

[CloneHat]

I think we should try out your 4 "unsure" stages

DK's rock stage is not broken btw. If you land on the edge or shield on the rock then you get a free punish on any char. Even bowser becomes viable (mid tier) on that stage which is kinda cool

This is true, I don't know why it's banned (the alligator?). It's a very normal stage with the addition of a cannon. Trying to camp the rock is like trying to camp Randall with ledges; it doesn't work.