SMASHPOCALYPSE:: SPOC IX in February? Link to SPOC VIII results in OP

[Scar]

lol Velocity go to page 1 and read the first post w/ my ban rules, they are the exact same as what you want to do. Prob b/c we are Minibosses and know so much about fairness and equality.

Pocky what is that? I don't like letting people change bans, it's ******** IMO.

 

[Velocity]

It doesn't get any better. I need to practice we need to defend home turf.

 

[pockyD]

you get an odd number of starter stages, and each player takes turns striking them out until there's only one left, and you play that for game 1

the only problem with that is most people are idiots and have trouble wrapping their minds around the concept, but with people familiar with it, it takes like 5 seconds or less, and it is clearly more fair in the goal of getting a "neutral" stage for the first game, in that both players approve of it

 

[Scar]

Oh wow. That really does sound awesome for a stage 1 rule. I guess we would do the 6 neutrals - Fountain or + Rainbow Cruise. Shame too many people are idiots, I could see that being way too hard for people to understand.

 

[slikvik]

I'd like my chance to having my favorite neutral appear on random first match, considering my char is disadvantaged against most of high/top tiers on the other neutrals. Either way, its your tourney so you can do whatever. At least its not excessive like the "changing your ban midway through the set wtf" other rule

 

[Velocity]

I don't think it would work but I like it.

 

[pockyD]

well here (WEST COAST), I strike out stages vs competent people, and just random vs. people i deem too stupid to understand it

 

[teh_spamerer]

I've only been playing the game since 2007 though. And I encourage others in the same position to not have to be gayed by people knowing stupid **** about PokeFloats *cough*SPAM*cough* or Mute City or Brinstar.

The Pokemon go in the same exact pattern every single time. It's less random then Stadium and FoD. The cars are slightly random on Mute City but it goes through the exact same path every time.

Granted this knowledge is important, but if the other person is smart enough to ban Mute vs Jiggs or Peach he shouldn't have to endure round 1 on Dreamland

Nah. Peach and Jigglypuff lose enough matchups that having a slight advantage from Dreamland 64 is perfectly fair.

you get an odd number of starter stages, and each player takes turns striking them out until there's only one left, and you play that for game 1

So what are you going to take off the neutrals? There is currently FoD, Stadium, BF, FD, YS, and DL64 = 6. Getting rid of any single one of them just for the sake of this rule would be heavily biased imo. Also, this rule massively helps out the characters who are already the best in the game since they barely care what stage they're playing on.

 

[Scar]

**** you Spam I already made the rule and that's how it's going, the rest is all just discussion.

 

[pockyD]

So what are you going to take off the neutrals? There is currently FoD, Stadium, BF, FD, YS, and DL64 = 6. Getting rid of any single one of them just for the sake of this rule would be heavily biased imo. Also, this rule massively helps out the characters who are already the best in the game since they barely care what stage they're playing on.

Why would it be biased?

This rule actually helps the characters who care what stage they play on, because they effectively get 2-3 "neutral" (just for the record, the current stages aren't really "neutral" in any sense, so the assumption that they are is something that needs to be overcome when considering rule changes) stage bans

The general hope for the first match is not to provide each character with the random chance of being at an advantage; it's to find a stage where neither player has an explicit advantage, or where that advantage due to the stage is minimized

 

[Scar]

I pretty much completely agree with both Velocity and Pocky here, but I am admittedly HEAVILY biased towards stage selection having minimal impact on the outcome of the match.

I guess I am of the opinion that 26 character matchups is enough stuff you have to learn before being a competitive player, each of those characters' exploits on each of the neutral stages is again a feat, and then which CP stages they are excellent on so we can ban them is yet another thing we all NEED to know.

But I don't think we should need to know how to play on those CP stages, just why we should ban them. But the more I think about it, we are trying to get good at SSBM and these stages are in SSBM so... idk. Maybe we should know how to play on those stages.

That said, I still think some matchups on some stages are unfair and anti-competitive.

 

[SwiftBass]

I pretty much completely agree with both Velocity and Pocky here, but I am admittedly HEAVILY biased towards stage selection having minimal impact on the outcome of the match.

I guess I am of the opinion that 26 character matchups is enough stuff you have to learn before being a competitive player, each of those characters' exploits on each of the neutral stages is again a feat, and then which CP stages they are excellent on so we can ban them is yet another thing we all NEED to know.

But I don't think we should need to know how to play on those CP stages, just why we should ban them. But the more I think about it, we are trying to get good at SSBM and these stages are in SSBM so... idk. Maybe we should know how to play on those stages.

That said, I still think some matchups on some stages are unfair and anti-competitive.

can onett be made legal @ the exchange of two gay stages?.....like lets say rainbow cruise and japes?

 

[pockyD]

well the determination that "fair"/"neutral" stages have edges, possibly platforms, minimal movement, etc is an arbitrary (loooool) determination

who's to say the "fair" way isn't on a stage with hazards and no edges like mute city or poke floats?

i think the current system of a smaller set of starter stages combined with the "full" stage list for subsequent matches is plenty fair

if you're clearly a better player, you will easily take games 1 and 3, and not have to worry about the janky stages

if you're close in skill, then stage knowledge determining a winner isn't really unfair, imo

edit: and if it's up to me, i either remove pokemon stadium, or add kongo jungle 64

it's not really relevant that you remove a stage from one of the extremes (i.e. yoshi's story or dreamland); one might argue that you remove the least extreme stage (battlefield?); the beauty is that it doesn't matter, because even if you choose flatzone or icicle mountain as an extra stage, someone WILL ban it (i.e. when we do this in brawl, lylat is pretty much NEVER played)

 

[Scar]

Fair/Neutral stages are first and foremost stages with very few or no random elements.

Second, they minimize character or matchup advantages or disadvantages, such as Battlefield being gay for Fox/Falco's recovery, Marth being able to utilt and tipper on YS platforms, cgs in general on FD.

I wish that underneath Battlefield was constructed like YS. That would be so neutral.

 

[pockyD]

it's more to avoid stage interference than to avoid randomness; stadium has much more randomness than most counterpicks, but it's deemed acceptable for whatever reason

but once again, the determination that a "fair" stage doesn't affect the matchup is just a concept that we are all conditioned to accept, but is not a true certainty imo -_-

 

[Alukard]

i just thought that my way would work out so i did it that way

 

[teh_spamerer]

**** you Spam I already made the rule and that's how it's going, the rest is all just discussion.

All I did was give you my opinion. Talking about the rule = discussion. It's not like this even matters to me since I can't make it to the next SPOC due to you being an evil ******* and putting this on a Saturday between my finals.

Why would it be biased?

Different people dislike different stages. A lot of space animal players ban FoD because of the platform setup while some ban FD because of the CGing. A lot of people ban Battlefield because of the ledges. Pokemon Stadium is commonly banned by people when they play space animals because they don't like it. Dreamland 64 is frequently banned because some people don't like fighting floaties there. Yoshi's Story is banned when people don't like that the stage is small and the platform/ledge setup against Marth.

Different tournament hosts would obviously have different opinions on this matter. A space animal player would probably take either FoD or FD off the neutrals, someone who hates space animals would probably take PS off the neutrals, a Peach player might take Battlefield off the neutrals, someone who hates floaties would probably take DL64 off, a Jigglypuff player might take Yoshi's Story off the neutrals.

This rule actually helps the characters who care what stage they play on, because they effectively get 2-3 "neutral"

No, it doesn't help them at all. Let's take Fox vs Peach for example. With normal rules, Fox would ban FD so he doesn't get CGed and the Peach player would ban Yoshi's Story.

The worst case scenario for the Fox(either BF, YS, or PS removed from neutrals) with this rule would be him striking FD and let's take FoD because DL64 is slightly better for the matchup since he can camp Peach to hell and back there. Does this benefit the Fox player? Yes, since there is no chance for him to get taken to any stage that remotely mitigates the matchup advantage he has.

The worst case scenario for the Peach(either DL64, FD, or FoD removed from neutrals) with this rule would be to strike YS and either PS or BF. With this, she is GUARANTEED to have to deal with either PS or risk getting battlefielded. Does this benefit the Peach player? Nope.

If you think that this particular matchup is too bad then let's take a look at Fox vs Sheik.

Worst case scenario for Fox with this rule would be either YS, PS, or FD banned and the Sheik player striking the other two stages. He strikes FoD and BF. Dreamland 64 is pretty good for the matchup because while the ceiling is slightly higher the platform setup is pretty good and there is plenty of space to camp. It's also harder to get taken to the ledge because by the Sheik because there is more space on the stage. If the Sheik player can't consistently SDI to escape waveshining it's also a pretty spacious stage and lets you get a few more shines off then on BF or FoD. Overall it helps him because he doesn't have to deal with any minor stage benefits Sheik gets on R1. In the worst case scenario for Sheik player he has to deal with minor stage benefits as well as already losing the matchup.

(just for the record, the current stages aren't really "neutral" in any sense, so the assumption that they are is something that needs to be overcome when considering rule changes) stage bans

No, the stages are pretty neutral overall. The advantage that characters get based off of any neutral is rather minimal and can be overcome by slightly outplaying your opponent, which you would have to do on any stage that would theoretically be 100% fair anyways otherwise you'd lose.

The general hope for the first match is not to provide each character with the random chance of being at an advantage; it's to find a stage where neither player has an explicit advantage, or where that advantage due to the stage is minimized

It'd be AMAZING if a stage was completely 100% fair to all matchups and was the only neutral. However, that kind of stage just doesn't exist. As it stands the current neutral stages give a minimal advantage to players.

 

[pockyD]

Different people dislike different stages. A lot of space animal players ban FoD because of the platform setup while some ban FD because of the CGing. A lot of people ban Battlefield because of the ledges. Pokemon Stadium is commonly banned by people when they play space animals because they don't like it. Dreamland 64 is frequently banned because some people don't like fighting floaties there. Yoshi's Story is banned when people don't like that the stage is small and the platform/ledge setup against Marth.

Different tournament hosts would obviously have different opinions on this matter. A space animal player would probably take either FoD or FD off the neutrals, someone who hates space animals would probably take PS off the neutrals, a Peach player might take Battlefield off the neutrals, someone who hates floaties would probably take DL64 off, a Jigglypuff player might take Yoshi's Story off the neutrals.

i still don't understand how this makes it "biased". This puts more power in the hands of the players, and takes away the power of the random number generator

or maybe i'm (or you are?) misunderstanding what "biased" means?

No, it doesn't help them at all. Let's take Fox vs Peach for example. With normal rules, Fox would ban FD so he doesn't get CGed and the Peach player would ban Yoshi's Story.

The worst case scenario for the Fox(either BF, YS, or PS removed from neutrals) with this rule would be him striking FD and let's take FoD because DL64 is slightly better for the matchup since he can camp Peach to hell and back there. Does this benefit the Fox player? Yes, since there is no chance for him to get taken to any stage that remotely mitigates the matchup advantage he has.

The worst case scenario for the Peach(either DL64, FD, or FoD removed from neutrals) with this rule would be to strike YS and either PS or BF. With this, she is GUARANTEED to have to deal with either PS or risk getting battlefielded. Does this benefit the Peach player? Nope.

If you think that this particular matchup is too bad then let's take a look at Fox vs Sheik.

Worst case scenario for Fox with this rule would be either YS, PS, or FD banned and the Sheik player striking the other two stages. He strikes FoD and BF. Dreamland 64 is pretty good for the matchup because while the ceiling is slightly higher the platform setup is pretty good and there is plenty of space to camp. It's also harder to get taken to the ledge because by the Sheik because there is more space on the stage. If the Sheik player can't consistently SDI to escape waveshining it's also a pretty spacious stage and lets you get a few more shines off then on BF or FoD. Overall it helps him because he doesn't have to deal with any minor stage benefits Sheik gets on R1. In the worst case scenario for Sheik player he has to deal with minor stage benefits as well as already losing the matchup.

I'm not reading this, but based on the first sentence, i'm fairly certain that your point would be that certain characters are only good on like two "neutrals"

well, too bad. that's a shortcoming of your character. it's just as likely that some characters are only bad on two "neutrals", and thusly, it would favor them to strike two. If you're only good on two neutrals and one of them is stricken (struck?), then you're only in a 20% chance of getting your stage anyway.

if the goal is to remove randomness and increase determinism, then (i'm sure i read this from somewhere else, but i don't remember who posted it, so no credit given) why are tournament matches started by pressing a big button marked "random"?

No, the stages are pretty neutral overall. The advantage that characters get based off of any neutral is rather minimal and can be overcome by slightly outplaying your opponent, which you would have to do on any stage that would theoretically be 100% fair anyways otherwise you'd lose.

The stage not having an effect doesn't mean the stage doesn't provide an "advantage"... for example, fast fallers get hurt by things like acid (brinstar) and cars (mute city)... not having to deal with that is an advantage for them. Basically, I theorize that the absence of disadvantage can be construed as an advantage in a matchup-based game such as smash.

some characters gain an obvious advantage from having walls/edges as opposed to no walls/edges (link/samus come to mind)... why is it assumed that walls/solid edges are naturally part of the game?

Personally, I like the stage set, but the notion that they are inherently "neutral" seems to be holding back how people view the starting/random stages relative to counterpick stages (and relative to banned stages)

It'd be AMAZING if a stage was completely 100% fair to all matchups and was the only neutral. However, that kind of stage just doesn't exist. As it stands the current neutral stages give a minimal advantage to players.

...but the randomness hurts this

what's the point of having 6 neutral stages?

i'm fairly certain that a game on yoshi's story almost universally favors the opposite characters that dreamland caters to; random is given too much power with stages this varied. Why have the floaties ban story and silently pray that stadium isn't randomed or something like that? why not provide them with an opportunity to eliminate the stages they hate the most?

the thing is, it seems that you want players to have a chance to play on stages that favor them. I want players to have a chance to NOT play on stages that are detrimental to them. whichever option is more important is open for some debate, but given that you agree that the goal of the 1st stage is to not provide an advantage, then we should be suppressing shortcomings, not encouraging advantages




EDIT: I'd like to make it clear that these are two differing arguments at play (are neutrals really neutral? and should people get multiple stage strikes on game 1 instead of randoming?), so I'd really prefer that you don't confuse them, though i'm not optimistic that you'll be able to keep them separated. Ideally to me with regards to "fairness", all legal stages would be in a list and be stricken out systematically, with no smaller subset of 'starter' stages, but this is logistically non-viable... if you want to argue completely in theory, then yes, my opinion would combine both arguments, but in practice, i can't honestly encourage a significant expansion/alteration of the starter stage set

EDIT2: if this isn't the place for theoretical stage discussion, I'll stop if Scar asks me to

 

[Scar]

Stage discussion is very interesting IMO so no, please continue. If I had time to contribute I would.

 

[(*Jman*)]

take out FoD XD


THAT STAGE BLOWS

 

[Scar]

It does blow, I ****in hate that stage.

 

[CT Chia]

i agree with scars new stage idea. normally being able to strike and ban always seemed like a lot for me if ppl decided to ban a neutral and strike one, but only letting ppl strike if they ban a cp instead of a neutral solves that issue. im all for it.

lol sorry about that jfox, here it is fixed:

 

[Oorah-Kabra]

Ok im sorry i just want to clarify... So -

- You get 1 ban and 1 stage strike.
- You can not use both on neutrals at the same time.
- You may ban a CP and strike a neutral.
- You may ban a neutral and forfeit your strike.

Just want to make sure this is clear to me being that striking and banning is VERY important to how I win matches and play. I have won some major matches because i tend to practice on many levels and can be more versatile than most people when it comes to levels.

If that is how it goes, perfect. The way I see it, people should be able to work around levels and stuff. I know people think CP's are gay, but they are part of the game. If they were THAT bad they wouldnt be allowed in CP. You would also be surprised what a little work in some counterpick stages can do. I am finding out that ganon has some nice tricks in jungle japes. Scar, you should work on that stage. I think it would be beneficial for you. When DJ brought you there i didnt think it was the best CP. I saw why he did it, but i thought that with a little knowledge of the level falcon can be very good there. If you want we can work on some of that stuff one day.

 

[Scar]

Exactly right Oorah. Just think of it as you get one ban as usual, but if you decide to ban a non-random stage you also get a neutral strike.

 

[Oorah-Kabra]

Awesome...

 

[Pakman]

Are you allowed to reserve banning a stage until after the first match is done? Like, lets say someone from OOS shows up and has no idea of anyone's play style. Could he use the first match to see how his opponent plays and decide his ban before the second match?

 

[Mew2King]

don't take off FoD lol that'd be stupid

but if you do take off FoD, take off YS, that stage BLOWS

imma take jman to poke floats, because I'm a true pokemon master and he's not! I can't imagine how good Mow is on that stage. What of Mow and UltimaScout teamed and picked Poke Floats? OMFG!

 

[Mogwai]

Questions, comments?

You got Dave's Stupid Rule wrong.

It states that you cannot counterpick the last stage that you won on in the given match, not that you cannot counterpick any stage that you won on in the given match. In best of 3s, that's the same thing, but when you get to best of 5s and the match continuation thing that MLG did, it makes a difference.

As to stage discussion, I agree 100% with Pocky. If determinism is what we're shooting for with tournaments, taking the randomizer out of the mix and allowing players to minimize detrimental stages is strictly better than letting matches get determined by a roll of the dice. Logistically it's harder since people are stupid, but if you're aiming to eliminate randomness's effect on the outcome of matches, it's the way to go.

EDIT: Also, as to what Pakman said, you should just do 1 stage strike for game 1 and then allow bans after that, cause it's easier than doing conditions on if you banned neutral do A and if you didn't do B.

 

[Scar]

Well that's why it's DSR (modified).

 

[Mogwai]

Why modify a perfectly good stupid rule?

 

[Scar]

Good point, I shall change it immediately.

 

[(*Jman*)]

don't take off FoD lol that'd be stupid

but if you do take off FoD, take off YS, that stage BLOWS

imma take jman to poke floats, because I'm a true pokemon master and he's not! I can't imagine how good Mow is on that stage. What of Mow and UltimaScout teamed and picked Poke Floats? OMFG!

FoD blows... YS is the best stage next to PS ^_^

M2K your so gay if u take me to poke floats.... like i would be so upset.. i still cant believe u took to to Rainbow Cruise your so gay...

 

[Magus420]

Both of those are modified =P

The original DSR is the same stage can't be played on twice in a set, period.

 

[Mogwai]

Both of those are modified =P

The original DSR is the same stage can't be played on twice in a set, period.

damnit magus, why you got to know everything? The one I stated was the one that was most commonly used when I hit the scene, so I guess I just assumed it was an original. I think it's the best implementation of DSR, but I'm pissed to learn that it's not the original.

Also, your sig (as always) is pretty much the badest of all asses.

EDIT: and somehow changed between me writing and posting this post, wth...

 

[Scar]

Mine is modified better. I still love seeing your sig.

 

[BrawlLover]

either way, i think it's good

 

[pockyD]

when random is being usedi prefer the simpler version of 'set your ban before each game'

ban before game 1

for subsequent games...

winner bans stage
loser chooses stage
winner chooses character
loser chooses character

same result (except you get to defer your ban i guess, if that wasn't already the case), but much easier to think about than "you may or may not get one ban, or a ban and a strike"

 

[(*Jman*)]

i like scars rule set ^_^

i still think u should take FoD out of random make it a CP stage XD

 

[Cia]

Uh.. If FoD is going to be banned, plz tell me so now and I will go to a brawl tournament instead. FoD is like the ONLY neutral that isn't working against me. and if I'm going to be camped out of a tournament, I'd like some smaller stages to give me a fighting chance.

 

[SwiftBass]

It'd be AMAZING if a stage was completely 100% fair to all matchups and was the only neutral.

onett done deal

i like scars rule set ^_^

i still think u should take FoD out of random make it a CP stage XD

if anything should be off random it should be battlefield. theres already a shortage of small stages so I would keep FoD even tho I dislike it