Event - MLG Anaheim 2014 So now that we know MLG hosts ridiculous smash tournaments...

[AlMoStLeGeNdArY]

If you think utilt is Marth's primary use for abusing/controlling platforms, you shouldn't be talking about Marth. I have a very slight hint that you didn't learn anything in the whole time that you tortured the Marth boards.

There's plenty of things Marth can do with platforms I just named utilt. Everything else is obvious and should be known. I didn't even get into the buffered things he could do on platforms or any of that stuff but *shrugs* whatever.

 

[Raziek]

So you're going to tell me that you've never CP BF or SV as Marth?

I've CP'd BF, but never SV. I prefer stages that my opponents aren't used to, like Norfair, Brinstar, etc.

 

[Flayl]

What characters are we catering to when we don't want Diddy to play on BF? Can somebody answer this?

sdguiasdophsaoprg

 

[ShadowLink84]

Yet, with that last line, you still need to have the last word in the argument.

You sound stupid, I suggest you stop.

 

[Inui]

MLG's starter stages are heavily biased towards MK and other characters that can handle the counterpicks well. Diddy, Falco, ICs, etc. have issues with the system.

The normal five starter stages are fine. What's imbalanced about a match starting on Battlefield or Smashville? Nothing.

 

[-Ran]

The more stages on a starter list, the further away from neutral you're going to be. This is because you're going to include more stages that are traditional counter-picks. I have found that in the tournaments I have been in or ran, that players will first strike the stages that aren't in the original five, and then go from there. However, you cannot deny that MK is on a better footing because of this, since he is more so picking stages based on personal preference, outside of a few levels such as FD/Smashville.

 

[T-block]

How many times do you see Castle Siege counterpicked? How many times do you see Final Destination counterpicked?

 

[-Ran]

From my experience, both are going to be struck quickly as Starters, unless both players feel they have a an equal shot on FD. The standard method of stage striking FD is a matter of "am I out camped on FD?" At that point, you strike it. Castle Siege is usually struck due to the unforgiving edge at the start, the ease of kills at the second stage, and the overall odd placement of platforms. Now, if you're MK you're going to benefit, or be able to easily cope with Castle Siege, since at the second stage, the top platforms allow you to air dair camp the entire transition, and shuttle loop at low percentages can yield incredible quick kills.

 

[ADHD]

On second thought, no need for a wall of text. I am rather done trying to argue with people who have already made up their mind.
Or people who keep repeating the same thing over and over while ignoring what is told to them.

It's cuz ur bad.

 

[Nysyarc]

The normal five starter stages are fine. What's imbalanced about a match starting on Battlefield or Smashville? Nothing.

I really hope you're trolling.

The more stages on a starter list, the further away from neutral you're going to be.

Tell me one stage that is 'neutral' for every MU in the entire cast. You can't, there are none. There are, however, some stages that are closer to being neutral in certain MUs. Some of these stages are not the normal five starters, so by adding more available starter stages, you give the players more options to narrow down.

When my local smash scene experiments with a 9-stage striking system, we see a very wide range of those stages being used. I, as Ike, most often started on Frigate or Halberd against many of the other players.

Besides, your logic is backwards in the sense that if the only starters are FD, BF and SV, it's going to be SV 95% of the time, and SV is not a neutral stage for the entire cast. In fact it's worse than a lot of other stages for some of the cast.

 

[ADHD]

I really hope you're trolling.



In fact SV is worse than a lot of other stages for some of the cast.

How so? I don't see anything wrong with smashville at all.

Marth ain't bad on smashville and FD, either. He'd rather start there than delfino, lol.

 

[-Ran]

The starters I'm accustomed to being used in both Texas and Louisiana are:
FD
Smashville
PS1
Yoshi's Island
Battlefield

Each one of those levels provides a different way to play the game, and most characters will have one or more stages where they preform better at than the other stages. A Diddy isn't going to be playing on FD, and a Marth isn't going to be getting Battle Field. This is unless, the player they are against thinks that they are able to play just as well on that level. PS1 provides a varied level of topography to play upon with its changes. FD provides a level for characters to attempt to camp each other be it with grabs or projectiles. Yoshi's provide a level that due to its slants throw off aerial approaches while having a chance to save poor recoveries or edge guards. Battle field is more geared to characters that are able to control their spacing above them, while Smashville tends to feel the most balanced out of all the levels.

Five starters give enough room to get to what the players consider neutral without having to rely on stage gimmicks that shouldn't exist in the first match of the set.

I can't think of any character that would do poorly on enough starters that would benefit from playing on additional starters. Typically the characters that do poorly on starters, are the ones that are do worse on CPs worthy levels.

Halbred, Delfino, Castle Siege, and Lylat all have angles that further exacerbate characters that rely on level surfaces to perform properly. Knowledge of this allows characters that aren't reliant on level surfaces to counter pick entire play-styles easily.

 

[Nysyarc]

How so? I don't see anything wrong with smashville at all.

Marth ain't bad on smashville and FD, either. He'd rather start there than delfino, lol.

I'm not talking about Marth. Smashville is basically just a second FD for some lower tier characters or characters who lack projectiles (... including Marth). The only thing it has that's better than FD is the lack of a lip, but that aids a lot of characters. The moving platform isn't too much of a factor in most match-ups because it can't be effectively sharked and isn't even above the stage half the time.

I main Ike and also use Donkey Kong and I would much prefer to go to a stage like Battlefield than Smashville. As far as I'm concerned, if I'm not armed with a projectile and my opponent is, SV is just another FD.

while Smashville tends to feel the most balanced out of all the levels.

The most balanced in what match-ups? Because there are certainly a lot of MUs for which it is not at all balanced. If you can somehow prove that it is the stage which has the most unaffected MUs, fine. For now it's just theory-craft.

 

[-Ran]

If Smashville is traditionally picked last, it means that it was deemed as the most balanced for the players there during that set, against the player that they are against. I have talked to numerous players over the years about stage selection, and almost all feel that Smashville is the most balanced stage in the game, for most characters. Now, as with every stage certain character do better there, but the ones that do aren't going to get picked to go there. -.-;

Just because low tiers perform poorly against characters that are statistically better than them in all categories, and thus better at every stage, doesn't mean that we should widen the stage selection to take the precarious balance that we have found in the five starter list between the high+top tier characters.

 

[ADHD]

If Smashville is traditionally picked last, it means that it was deemed as the most balanced for the players there during that set, against the player that they are against.

That was a good point.

 

[Gnes]

Just because low tiers perform poorly against characters that are statistically better than them in all categories, and thus better at every stage, doesn't mean that we should widen the stage selection to take the precarious balance that we have found in the five starter list between the high+top tier characters.

This.

10Thisisthepoint

 

[Blacknight99923]

load of crap.

you are probably the biggest idiot to theory craft about marth I have ever scene. Rei-gun and Razeik answered EVERY QUESTION YOU HAD AND YOU STILL REFUTED IT WITHOUT ANY REAL BASIS OR LEGITIMATE FACT TO THE CONTRARY.


I also agree with Ran Ji in regards to smashville, and why we don't cater to low tiers

 

[Nysyarc]

That was a good point.

No, it was an obvious point. And what do you mean "high tiers are better on every stage"? WTF? If that were true why do we have counter-picking? This topic isn't worth my time.

 

[ADHD]

No, it was an obvious point. And what do you mean "high tiers are better on every stage"? WTF? If that were true why do we have counter-picking? This topic isn't worth my time.

Well we shouldn't cater to characters that aren't the center of the metagame. We don't make the stagelist revolve around lucas, lol. Am I the only one that grab releases him against walls? MUAHAHA.

 

[6Mizu]

Well we shouldn't cater to characters that aren't the center of the metagame. We don't make the stagelist revolve around lucas, lol. Am I the only one that grab releases him against walls? MUAHAHA.

Evil laugh is evil.

 

[-Ran]

I'd hate to drag you back in, since you're oblivious to reason, but let's be honest here. A high tier is going to preform well in 80-90% of the stages that are legal at a tournament. Now, there are characters that are capable of playing better on certain stages [I was referring to the starter stages] than them, but most of the time you are going to see the high tier perform well unless there is a gimmick or the stage contrasts drastically to their actual play-style.

 

[Nysyarc]

Well we shouldn't cater to characters that aren't the center of the metagame. We don't make the stagelist revolve around lucas, lol. Am I the only one that grab releases him against walls? MUAHAHA.

So instead we cater to characters that are at more of an advantage anyways? Pretty soon the stage list is going to consist of Brinstar, Delfino and Rainbow Cruise. Have fun playing MK dittos all the way to GFs.

Besides, how is adding more starters 'catering' to lower tiers? If high tiers are good on every stage like one of you dimwits directly implied, why should it matter if the starter ends up being some janky stage?

 

[Flayl]

Since nobody has answered why Diddy playing on BF first game is unfair I'm going to assume it's because it isn't and this whole argument is stupid.

 

[ADHD]

Since nobody has answered why Diddy playing on BF first game is unfair I'm going to assume it's because it isn't and this whole argument is stupid.

Shadowlink, whom I thought was about to mention it brought up the same annoying points over and over until he raged and left because he knew he was wrong.

Sunshade where you at?

 

[Overswarm]

I used to think ADHD was trolling all the time, but after I learned he was still in high school it made soooooooo much more sense reading his posts. He seriously just doesn't understand the difference between "fair" and "good for ADHD". Just ignore him.

 

[AlMoStLeGeNdArY]

I used to think ADHD was trolling all the time, but after I learned he was still in high school it made soooooooo much more sense reading his posts. He seriously just doesn't understand the difference between "fair" and "good for ADHD". Just ignore him.

OS is MK vs Diddy on BF fair ? Better yet what MU isn't fair on BF. Diddy vs X character ?

 

[ADHD]

I used to think ADHD was trolling all the time, but after I learned he was still in high school it made soooooooo much more sense reading his posts. He seriously just doesn't understand the difference between "fair" and "good for ADHD". Just ignore him.

Overswarm is the example of a mediocre player who tells us how we should play. He backs up ridiculous points with great vocabulary and other ridiculous points in ways that makes them worded so they appear logical.

But then again, so do most of the elitist pricks on these forums.

 

[Nysyarc]

OS is MK vs Diddy on BF fair ? Better yet what MU isn't fair on BF. Diddy vs X character ?

Define 'fair', because obviously some characters have advantages over Diddy on BF and vice-versa. 'Fair' is a very abstract term and can be taken to mean one of many different extremes of the general implication.

Overswarm is the example of a mediocre player who tells us how we should play. He backs up ridiculous points with great vocabulary and other ridiculous points in ways that makes them worded so they appear logical.

But then again, so do most of the elitist pricks on these forums.

Hypocrite is hypocritical. If you wanted to prove you were 'better than him' or something you should have just ignored his post; instead you immaturely attacked him right back.

 

[ShadowLink84]

It's cuz ur bad.

6th place makes a bitter monkey.

Shadowlink, whom I thought was about to mention it brought up the same annoying points over and over until he raged and left because he knew he was wrong.

Actually, I left because of idiots like yourself who have yet to actually read what is being said.
So why waste my time if my points are simply going to be ignored?
Normally I am not one to agree with OS when he makes witty comments, but I am very sure that you being in high school explains this topic.

Since nobody has answered why Diddy playing on BF first game is unfair I'm going to assume it's because it isn't and this whole argument is stupid.

That isn't what the argument is about, and this is part of the frustration.
It isn't that Diddy has a major advantage.
It isn't that Diddy is super duper spectacular on the stage.
I will put this in bold since apparently people can't seem to understand.


A neutral stage, is a stage that neither character will gain a benefit. So a neutral stage in MK vs Diddy would not be FD, because this stage isn't very good for MK(its his worst stage.), but is good for Diddy.

Understand better?
The attempt is to make sure that BOTH player's end up on a stage that neither of their character's are benefiting.

So Luigi vs Sonic would be starting on a different stage.
Marth vs Ice Climbers would not be starting out on FD or SV.

That is the point of stage striking.
To knock out stages your opponent would do well on, and for him to do likewise, thus resulting in a stage that neither of you would be benefitting from.
Of course this is more of an issue for Diddy than MK.
Diddy doesn't do well on many stages like MK.
Same for Ice climber's.

The 5 stage starter caters to IC, Diddy and Falco, in that it ensures they will always start off on a stage to which they perform well.
Which isn't the point of a neutral stage.


In fact, the issue at hand is the definition of neutral.
neutral means no one benefits.
Not "the stage is flat with no platforms so it is neutral", because this is obviously false when you take into account that there are characters who do better on such stages than others. So of course it wouldn't be neutral if one character is deriving a benefit over the other.

Overswarm is the example of a mediocre player who tells us how we should play. He backs up ridiculous points with great vocabulary and other ridiculous points in ways that makes them worded so they appear logical.

But then again, so do most of the elitist pricks on these forums.

I laughed at the irony.

 

[Nefarious B]

I'm gonna debate this because I think you actually make good points, even if I disagree.

If Smashville is traditionally picked last, it means that it was deemed as the most balanced for the players there during that set

I want you to consider the term "median of bias", because it's very important when talking about the striking system. As you point out, the reason why people choose SV (or any stage) for game one is because it is deemed the most balanced for that matchup. That is how the striking system should function, by allowing the players to find a "median of bias" in the matchup, so as to reduce advantages granted by stages as much as possible, and thus have the first stage benefit either player as little as possible.

The problem is, in a lot of matchups, the starter list is narrow enough that the first game will end up on stage that one of the players would have counterpicked because it gives strong advantages to his character. Game 1 should never end up on a stage where one player would prefer to counterpick, because that is not finding any median of bias. We are not, in that case, reducing stage made advantages enough, and because of that the striking system is not functioning correctly.

Just because low tiers perform poorly against characters that are statistically better than them in all categories, and thus better at every stage, doesn't mean that we should widen the stage selection to take the precarious balance that we have found in the five starter list between the high+top tier characters.

It has nothing to do with low vs high tier. It also has nothing to do with the "precarious balance" you mention between the high tiers, and this should not play into deciding what makes a better rule set. The whole point of reexamining the ruleset is because many people have realized that such a narrow starter set has created the current metagame that has artificially inflated some of the high tiers by allowing them to play on stages they would counterpick on game 1.

What it does have to do with allowing the striking system to function as it should, by neutralizing advantages given by stages in the first game.

 

[ADHD]

A neutral stage, is a stage that neither character will gain a benefit. So a neutral stage in MK vs Diddy would not be FD, because this stage isn't very good for MK(its his worst stage.), but is good for Diddy.

FD is NOT metaknight's worst stage.

While it is good for diddy, the matchup remains even on all 3 of his best stages. They are neutral by your definition, since neither character gains the benefit.

 

[ShadowLink84]

FD is NOT metaknight's worst stage.

He gains the LEAST advantage on FD.
You are taking what is said out of context.

While it is good for diddy, the matchup remains even on all 3 of his best stages. They are neutral by your definition, since neither character gains the benefit.

Correct.
The first matchup should NEVER begin on a stage in which one character, or another benefits.

 

[Eddie G]

But then again, so do most of the elitist pricks on these forums.

Lol yeah, we're the ones telling everyone and their mother that they suck or that they're wrong because they suck. Shut your trap already man.

 

[ADHD]

Correct.
The first matchup should NEVER begin on a stage in which one character, or another benefits.

And yet they both do not have any valuable or out-of-the-ordinary tools against eachother on these three stages. 50-50. That is neutral, no?

Lol yeah, we're the ones telling everyone and their mother that they suck or that they're wrong because they suck. Shut your trap already man.

I'm sorry, it's just the better players know how to play the game.

 

[AlMoStLeGeNdArY]

Define 'fair', because obviously some characters have advantages over Diddy on BF and vice-versa. 'Fair' is a very abstract term and can be taken to mean one of many different extremes of the general implication.

I can agree with you on this I don't understand when the term fair started being thrown around or why it's being used or why I'm even using it. Also people are taking confusing MU's with a stage being fair or unfair. Like for example people keep bringing up diddy and BF as if that's a CP like d3 on delfinio dk of japes mk on RC and G@W on brinstar.

@ SL what benefits does diddy gain on FD?

 

[Nefarious B]

FD is NOT metaknight's worst stage.

While it is good for diddy, the matchup remains even on all 3 of his best stages. They are neutral by your definition, since neither character gains the benefit.

You're missing the point. Diddy is gaining an advantage because forcing the matchup to a stage that he goes neutral/has an advantage on makes his normally disadvantaged matchup against MK neutral. If you're buffing the true matchup ratio from (arbitrary but hopefully you get the point) 45-55 to 50-50, you gave diddy an advantage.

This is where some people are not understanding that the goal of a neutral first game is not to even out matchups, but to allow the real matchup to happen.

 

[ShadowLink84]

And yet they both do not have any valuable or out-of-the-ordinary tools against each other on these three stages. 50-50. That is neutral, no?

Yes and I know where you are going with this as well.

Unfortunately, you are trying to justify an entire stage striking system about one matchup.

So you're still ***** out Diddy.
You cannot justify having a 5 stage starter, JUST for Diddy. That isn't how it works at all.
Let alone that these stages buff Diddy so that it can BE a 5-5 matchup. Hell even then I would still argue Diddy doesn't go even with MK.
A Cp's function is to improve the performance of your character against another.
This is what those 3 stages do for Diddy.


Edit: TO clarify. Yes, it does push the matchup as 5-5 for the matchup. That does not mean the stage is neutral.
A neutral stage will not modify the matchup.
FD modifies the matchup for Diddy vs MK.
A neutral stage would not modify it.

 

[Overswarm]

I'm sorry, it's just the better players know how to play the game.

Ally says ban MK!

 

[AlMoStLeGeNdArY]

Yes and I know where you are going with this as well.
Unfortunately, you are trying to justify an entire stage striking system about one matchup.

So you're still ***** out Diddy.
You cannot justify having a 5 stage starter, JUST for Diddy. That isn't how it works at all.

I don't think it's just for diddy....but it's funny how everyone has a problem with dddy having a stage he can cp be picked in game one yet no one seems to care that MK has CP in the MLG stage list game one so does Ness Wario Marth d3 Snake Link and other characters. There's no harm in CP a neutral. PLz make brinstar a starter.

 

[ADHD]

You're missing the point. Diddy is gaining an advantage because forcing the matchup to a stage that he goes neutral on makes his normally disadvantaged matchup against MK neutral. If you're buffing the true matchup ratio from (arbitrary but hopefully you get the point) 45-55 to 50-50, you gave diddy an advantage.

his is where some people are not understanding that the goal of a neutral first game is not to even out matchups, but to allow the real matchup to happen.

But other characters gain an edge in the 9 "starter" stage-list. Then it can be argued the real matchup is not happening either, in this case. 7 is much more efficient, actually.