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

[iRJi]

This is healthy for the community. No trolling comment either. It is good that people are finally voicing how they feel about everything.

 

[Overswarm]

@SL, if it makes those three characters worse and does nothing else, what's the point? You never said why 9 is actually better than 7 other than it makes those characters worse and they shouldn't be allowed to start on stages remotely good for them game 1.

OS, I see what you're saying, I just disagree with you that you should ignore the degree of how bad X stage is for a character on their neutral.



That's where I disagree, because yes you're starting on Diddy's 3rd or 4th best stage, but it's also a good stage for many characters, is for many characters a 3rd or 4th best stage in many counterpicks, and no one is completely hindered by the stage. As compared to Norfair, not only is MKs advantage on the stage many degrees larger than Diddy's advantage on BF, but it's less doable for a lot more characters, especially against ones like MK.

I don't agree the logic of BF being the same amount of bad as a near auto-win (Norfair) because its their respect character's nth best stage. Because of this you probably can't convince me or those that a 9 or 11 stage starter is better than a 7, because I as well as many other people disagree with that core principle.

There's only one "core principle", and that's that no character should get an automatic advantage or disadvantage. If Battlefield is a "good stage" for Diddy, he should never start on it. The only exception is when someone else says it is a good stage for them.

What ADHD is saying is that Diddy deserves to start on stages that are good for him simply because other stages are not good for him. That is absurd.

 

[Chuee]

I do think you're missing the point of it.
You should not have a CP as a starter.
You start off ona stage that is neutral for both characters. Or as close to neutral as one can get.

The stage shouldn't boost a matchup to 5-5 for the losing character outside of a CP.
It defeats the purpose of stage striking.
ADHD might as well suggest pre-determined stages.
Which is basically what you have with a 5 stage starter.

lol so his 5th best stage is a CP?
Well, in that case there's characters that can get a CP in a 9 stage starter.

 

[Nefarious B]

lol so his 5th best stage is a CP?
Well, in that case there's characters that can get a CP in a 9 stage starter.

Yes this is true. I don't really agree with what SL said about how a character shouldn't get a good stage for them persay, even if I fall on the same side of the argument as he does.

A better character will have more options in a well done striking system; this reflects the flexibility of a character. However, they should never go on their best stages, aka the ones that they would CP.

SO Diddy should not be going to FD, SV

MK should not be going to RC, Brinstar

However, in a more open starter list, it's not like those will start happening. Those will be the first stages to be struck. If MK vs Diddy ends up on a stage that is considered slightly in MK's favor, that is the median of bias in this matchup and reflects the fact that MK overall is a better character and is more flexible. However, we should never see cases of a character playing on their first, second, or even third best stage.

This is why I proposed that we should just remove the distinction between CP and starter in game 1. Striking will eliminate the crazy advantageous stages anyways, might as well allow the players to decide which stage is best out of the allowed stages instead of creating some arbitrary starter list that no one can agree on. Then it becomes a matter of the TO simply deciding what stages are worth playing on in the first place.

 

[ShadowLink84]

@SL, if it makes those three characters worse and does nothing else, what's the point? You never said why 9 is actually better than 7 other than it makes those characters worse and they shouldn't be allowed to start on stages remotely good for them game 1.

So, its okay to make those 3 characters better? Why?
Shouldn't they be left alone like every other character?
Why bolster them?
The reason for 9 is because 7 was too few. not arbitrarily, but that similar to a 5 stage starter list, it began to favor less than a handful of characters, which shouldn't occur.
That defeats the purpose of having stage striking, since the attempt is to come to the most neutral stage.

Truth be told, the only one that really defeats this concept is MK.

OS, I see what you're saying, I just disagree with you that you should ignore the degree of how bad X stage is for a character on their neutral.

How so?

That's where I disagree, because yes you're starting on Diddy's 3rd or 4th best stage, but it's also a good stage for many characters, is for many characters a 3rd or 4th best stage in many counterpicks, and no one is completely hindered by the stage. As compared to Norfair, not only is MKs advantage on the stage many degrees larger than Diddy's advantage on BF, but it's less doable for a lot more characters, especially against ones like MK.

I don't believe Norfair would ever be available outside of a CP, same thing for Delfino IMO.
The counterpicks are intended to bolster that matchup ratio, to improve it and make itneutral, or to your advantage.
Currenly, the 5 stage starter system bolster Diddy,Falco and IC's.
Yes, FD,BF,SV aren't bad for most characters, but it defeats the purpose of having those stages if 3 characters are being bolstered.
The attempt is to get a stage that is as close to neutral as possible.
Withthe current 5 stage starter, such a purpose is defeat.

I don't agree the logic of BF being the same amount of bad as a near auto-win (Norfair) because its their respect character's nth best stage. Because of this you probably can't convince me or those that a 9 or 11 stage starter is better than a 7, because I as well as many other people disagree with that core principle.

I don't believe anyone has asserted that starting out on BF is an autoloss like it would be on Norfair or Brinstar.
That the principle itself, that a character should not have a CP as a starter is what defeats the purpose of stage striking.
It gives characters a boost where they shouldn't gain a boost.
It should be kept as close to neutral as possible.
of course it is impossible to have any stage be perfectly neutral for all 700+ matchups, but it shouldn't be giving a predetermined advantage either.

 

[-Ran]

If you remove the distinction between CP/Starter then this is what you get, per MLG.

MK-> Final Destination
Diddy Kong -> Rainbow Cruise
Mk -> Smashville
Diddy Kong -> Brinstar
Mk -> PS1
Diddy Kong -> Norfair
Mk -> Pictochat
Diddy Kong -> Delfino Plaza
Mk -> Halbred
Diddy Kong -> Green Greens
Mk -> PS2
Diddy Kong -> Yoshi's Island
Mk -> Castle Siege
Diddy Kong -> Gets to pick between two stages with angles on it, that are better for MK. Diddy spends the entire time having to strike out stages that are flat out bad, while MK focuses on removing any stage with even a hint of a stable flat platform. There's no reason for such a system, since the outlier Counter Picks are always going to hurt one of the characters more than the other, and so their mentality shifts to removing everything that could potentially destroy them stage wise, while the other player is in complete control of the process.

 

[Masky]

There's only one "core principle", and that's that no character should get an automatic advantage or disadvantage. If Battlefield is a "good stage" for Diddy, he should never start on it. The only exception is when someone else says it is a good stage for them.

What ADHD is saying is that Diddy deserves to start on stages that are good for him simply because other stages are not good for him. That is absurd.

I think ADHD is saying that the advantage for Diddy comes from his advantages as a character, not features of Battlefield or other flat stages. Characters SHOULD get an automatic advantage/disadvantage based on the characters themselves, because anyone can pick any character they want no matter who their opponent picks. If there was a Sandbag character, would it make sense to make all sets start on Port Town so that Sandbag was at less of a disadvantage? It's not fair to ignore the worse characters, right?

Apparantly that sense went away over the years.

The community, regardless of its bulk or not if supported by people for random factors such as janky stages and starting out on legitimate counterpicks (other than neutrals, because neutrals are at least mostly balanced) then we will die shortly soon. We want skill to shine through, not who got the luckiest during the set or who mains the best suited character to the most of situations. Neutrals are the last hope to preventing this.

Get over this spotlight "changing me," we didn't have stupid issues like this back then.

100% agree

 

[Overswarm]

I think ADHD is saying that the advantage for Diddy comes from his advantages as a character, not features of Battlefield or other flat stages. Characters SHOULD get an automatic advantage/disadvantage based on the characters themselves, because anyone can pick any character they want no matter who their opponent picks. If there was a Sandbag character, would it make sense to make all sets start on Port Town so that Sandbag was at less of a disadvantage? It's not fair to ignore the worse characters, right?

You just justified a starter list that has Meta Knight start on Brinstar or Norfair.

You're looking at this backwards.

You're saying "Here are our stages" then "So what if Diddy gets an advantage? He's good on the starter stages, why didn't you pick Diddy?"

What I'm saying is "Here's Diddy, he gets an advantage on these types of stages. We shouldn't set up a starter list to where he gets an auto-advantage anymore than we should have an auto-advantage for Meta Knight, despite the fact taht MK is good on like a zillion stages and Diddy only a handful". This is followed by me facepalming when people say it isn't fair for Diddy to start on a stage that makes him better.

 

[DaomarIsBear]

You just justified a starter list that has Meta Knight start on Brinstar or Norfair.

You're looking at this backwards.

You're saying "Here are our stages" then "So what if Diddy gets an advantage? He's good on the starter stages, why didn't you pick Diddy?"

What I'm saying is "Here's Diddy, he gets an advantage on these types of stages. We shouldn't set up a starter list to where he gets an auto-advantage anymore than we should have an auto-advantage for Meta Knight, despite the fact taht MK is good on like a zillion stages and Diddy only a handful". This is followed by me facepalming when people say it isn't fair for Diddy to start on a stage that makes him better.

But Brinstar and Norfair both affect how the match will end up by interacting. FD and SV don't interact at all.

 

[demonictoonlink]

Or we could just do the usual five starters and let people choose their CP stages when they lose.

Just me?

 

[T-block]

But Brinstar and Norfair both affect how the match will end up by interacting. FD and SV don't interact at all.

That's rather arbitrary if you think about it on a deeper level. Why is stage interaction a bad thing for a starter?

 

[DaomarIsBear]

That's rather arbitrary if you think about it on a deeper level. Why is stage interaction a bad thing for a starter?

I thought we used the term neutral, not starter.

 

[-Ran]

That's rather arbitrary if you think about it on a deeper level. Why is stage interaction a bad thing for a starter?

The more a stage interacts, the more it can potential benefit one character over another. Characters with multiple jumps deal with stage interactions far easier than ground based characters.

 

[Nysyarc]

I thought we used the term neutral, not starter.

Some people do, but no stage is 'neutral'. Some stages are close to being balanced for some MUs, but no stage is 100% neutral for even a single MU, let alone every MU.

 

[DaomarIsBear]

Some people do, but no stage is 'neutral'. Some stages are close to being balanced for some MUs, but no stage is 100% neutral for every MU, let alone one MU.

With that said, shouldn't we choose stages that have the least to do with affecting gameplay in order to let the victor of the match be decided by the quality of the player?

 

[Nysyarc]

With that said, shouldn't we choose stages that have the least to do with affecting gameplay in order to let the victor of the match be decided by the quality of the player?

The 'quality of the player' can include stage knowledge and an ability to manipulate or avoid stage gimmicks. Besides, even static stages affect gameplay, just not as obviously as dynamic ones. The easiest example for me is Ike playing on FD versus BF. On FD, there are no platforms for Ike to shark or otherwise use to his advantage, so his play-style will be much different than on BF.

 

[DaomarIsBear]

So the platforms of BF are artificially boosting Ike, therefore we should get rid BF, right?

 

[Nysyarc]

So the platforms of BF are artificially boosting Ike, therefore we should get rid BF, right?

Not entirely sure what you mean by that. Ike is a bad character and Battlefield is arguably his best all-around stage, rivaled only by PS1 and a few others for specific match-ups. If you're facing an Ike, Battlefield should be the first starter you strike. Ike being good on BF is no reason to entirely remove it from the starter list however, because it is among the closest stages to being universally neutral.

 

[DaomarIsBear]

I mean Ike is gaining an advantage on BF the same way as Diddy on FD, so both should be changed to counterpicks not neutrals, right?

 

[Nefarious B]

So the platforms of BF are artificially boosting Ike, therefore we should get rid BF, right?

Completely missed the point and sound stupid for being snarky, good job. If you're facing an Ike and you feel BF is one of his best stages you strike it. Obviously.

If you remove the distinction between CP/Starter then this is what you get, per MLG.

MK-> Final Destination
Diddy Kong -> Rainbow Cruise
Mk -> Smashville
Diddy Kong -> Brinstar
Mk -> PS1
Diddy Kong -> Norfair
Mk -> Pictochat
Diddy Kong -> Delfino Plaza
Mk -> Halbred
Diddy Kong -> Green Greens
Mk -> PS2
Diddy Kong -> Yoshi's Island
Mk -> Castle Siege
Diddy Kong -> Gets to pick between two stages with angles on it, that are better for MK. Diddy spends the entire time having to strike out stages that are flat out bad, while MK focuses on removing any stage with even a hint of a stable flat platform. There's no reason for such a system, since the outlier Counter Picks are always going to hurt one of the characters more than the other, and so their mentality shifts to removing everything that could potentially destroy them stage wise, while the other player is in complete control of the process.

Remove Green Greens, Picto, PS2, and Norfair from you example first off. We can't change MLG's ******** stage list, so let's look at how a stage list that an actual TO might propose yeah?

It still evens out however. I don't play Diddy, but I think he'd be much more likely to strike CS over Yoshis. MK vs Diddy on Yoshi's doesn't sound too in favor of either side, which is exactly what this is supposed to accomplish.

Why is your last comment relevant at all? An advantage is an advantage. In the case of striking, you do your best to remove your opponent's advantages, starting from your worst stage and moving down to their lesser CPs. I don't see how it matters how terrible a CP it is if the Diddy can strike it and go to a stage that is already on the current 5 stage starter list. Just because it isn't BF/SV/FD, Diddy suddenly can't compete?

 

[ShadowLink84]

I mean Ike is gaining an advantage on BF the same way as Diddy on FD, so both should be changed to counterpicks not neutrals, right?

You're intentionally strawmanning.

 

[Hanzhou]

Imo I think almost all characters have are not heavily disadvantaged or given a hugh advantage on "neutral" stages like FD,BF,YI,SV, and maybe even PS1 and Lylat. Stages like Frigate,Delfino,Brinstar, Halberd, or norfair for example heavily sways to a certain characters advantage. That's just from what I see. If anything I think a 7 stage starter list would prolly be the best with it being frigate or maybe halberd idk.

 

[DaomarIsBear]

I'm just wondering how a 9-stage starter list that contains 8 stages with platforms, considering that I now know Ike is benefited and artificially boosted by platforms, is in the slightest bit more "fair" or "neutral" than a 5-stage list.

Edit: The hostility of some of the people on this forum is lovely.

 

[Nysyarc]

*Sigh* You're probably trolling but I'll explain anyways >_>

What would you replace them with then? Norfair? Luigi's Mansion? Port Town? Battlefield and FD are, like I said in my last post, relatively close to being universally neutral when compared to other stages in the game. FD, SV, BF, YI and PS1 (or sometimes Lylat) were ruled to be the five closest stages to being neutral. I don't necessarily agree with those five myself, but obviously the decision was made somehow.

Some characters' best counter-pick stages are used as starters, that's a fact. That does not mean, however, that these stages should be counter-picks and not starters, it's much more complicated than that.

Edit: Ike doesn't benefit from all platforms. Many stages have moving platforms, different transitions, platforms that are too high, etc... and many stages that have platforms have other gimmicks that negatively affect Ike in some or most MUs.

 

[Masky]

You just justified a starter list that has Meta Knight start on Brinstar or Norfair.

You're looking at this backwards.

You're saying "Here are our stages" then "So what if Diddy gets an advantage? He's good on the starter stages, why didn't you pick Diddy?"

What I'm saying is "Here's Diddy, he gets an advantage on these types of stages. We shouldn't set up a starter list to where he gets an auto-advantage anymore than we should have an auto-advantage for Meta Knight, despite the fact taht MK is good on like a zillion stages and Diddy only a handful". This is followed by me facepalming when people say it isn't fair for Diddy to start on a stage that makes him better.

I didn't justify a starter list that has Meta Knight start on Brinstar or Norfair (though the MLG starter list comes close to this with Delfino). You somehow misunderstood what I was saying. The stage list should be determined by the attributes of the stages themselves, not by which characters do well on them. I think everyone agrees that a neutral stage (a stage that does not interfere in competition) should start the set. It's pretty obvious to tell which stages interfere and which don't.

 

[Nysyarc]

Imo I think almost all characters have are not heavily disadvantaged or given a hugh advantage on "neutral" stages like FD,BF,YI,SV, and maybe even PS1 and Lylat. Stages like Frigate,Delfino,Brinstar, Halberd, or norfair for example heavily sways to a certain characters advantage. That's just from what I see. If anything I think a 7 stage starter list would prolly be the best with it being frigate or maybe halberd idk.

That's a very shallow point of view though; without really thinking through different MUs and the small differences between stages, of course they'll appear that way in the big picture. No stage is 100% neutral in any MU. That is a fact. You can try to refute it but you wouldn't be successful. FD in particular gives considerable advantages to some characters over others.

 

[-Ran]

It still evens out however. I don't play Diddy, but I think he'd be much more likely to strike CS over Yoshis. MK vs Diddy on Yoshi's doesn't sound too in favor of either side, which is exactly what this is supposed to accomplish

According to GNES, Diddy has issues with stages with Angles, and so he would avoid Yoshi's because of that. It's also harder for Diddy to maintain banana's on the stage due to the large platform in the center of the stage. Power shields will normally result in the banana being on the top of the platform, which removes a ton of Diddy's options.

 

[DaomarIsBear]

That's a very shallow point of view though; without really thinking through different MUs and the small differences between stages, of course they'll appear that way in the big picture. No stage is 100% neutral in any MU. That is a fact. You can try to refute it but you wouldn't be successful. FD in particular gives considerable advantages to some characters over others.

Does it give them advantages, or are they simply not hindered to the point where their true character viability can shine?

 

[Nysyarc]

Does it give them advantages, or are they simply not hindered to the point where their true character viability can shine?

Sigh... you're missing the point completely. You can call it whatever you want. But that's not what's happening anyways, because how do you define their 'true viability' when their style of play and effectiveness varies from stage to stage? You can't base every character's potential on one stage when there so many in the game.

 

[Ussi]

I mean Ike is gaining an advantage on BF the same way as Diddy on FD, so both should be changed to counterpicks not neutrals, right?

Ike is a terrible character and shouldn't effect what stages are there. He doesn't even make the MU his favor going BF, cause his problem MUs do good(better) on BF

 

[DaomarIsBear]

Ike is a terrible character and shouldn't effect what stages are there. He doesn't even make the MU his favor going BF, cause his problem MUs do good(better) on BF

I was using him as an example for the argument, but whatever.

 

[Nefarious B]

According to GNES, Diddy has issues with stages with Angles, and so he would avoid Yoshi's because of that. It's also harder for Diddy to maintain banana's on the stage due to the large platform in the center of the stage. Power shields will normally result in the banana being on the top of the platform, which removes a ton of Diddy's options.

What point is this making though? A lot of characters have issues with different things. My character personally has issues on stages with little/no platforms (SV/FD) because juggling is the core of her damage wracking. She also cannot grab or space as easily on slants, and her suit piece game is absolutely wrecked by slants.

Do you see how using specific characters for an argument like this is absolutely pointless? A good character is more adaptable, and thus will be able to deal with playing on stages that aren't their first or second choices. If anything, the fact that Diddy is #3 on the tier list despite the fact that fact that he is very unflexable stage wise should be highlighting the core problem that this debate is trying to address.

 

[Ussi]

I was using him as an example for the argument, but whatever.

the best example I would say is Marth for the sake of the argument but I know nothing about Marth and his stages.

 

[AlMoStLeGeNdArY]

Not entirely sure what you mean by that. Ike is a bad character and Battlefield is arguably his best all-around stage, rivaled only by PS1 and a few others for specific match-ups. If you're facing an Ike, Battlefield should be the first starter you strike. Ike being good on BF is no reason to entirely remove it from the starter list however, because it is among the closest stages to being universally neutral.

I would never strike BF against Ike because Ike's a bad character and no matter how good he is on BF my character is better. So We can go to Bf all day if you want I just have my character out performs yours on that stage. The same goes for if I was maining Snake Marth MK falco Diddy d3 or any other character that out performs Ike on that stage.

Ike is a terrible character and shouldn't effect what stages are there. He doesn't even make the MU his favor going BF, cause his problem MUs do good(better) on BF

What MU's change because diddy takes a character to BF?

 

[Hanzhou]

I don't see how my point is shallow lol. The stages I mentioned from what I saw don't majorly give an advantage or disadvantage any character while the other stages I mentioned for example do. Like for example Falco can do decent on say YI (may not be able to do lagless illusion) but that is bearable but falco starting on a stage like Delfino or halberd seems to be like a hugh disadvantage esp when it comes to recovering or during the various transformations on delfino.

FD you have a point but then again FD helps ALOT of characters camp not just like falco or stage control for diddy works for other characters too.

 

[Nefarious B]

I don't see how my point is shallow lol. The stages I mentioned from what I saw don't majorly give an advantage or disadvantage any character while the other stages I mentioned for example do. Like for example Falco can do decent on say YI (may not be able to do lagless illusion) but that is bearable but falco starting on a stage like Delfino or halberd seems to be like a hugh disadvantage esp when it comes to recovering or during the various transformations on delfino.

I don't understand why people think Falco would end up on stages like fino in the first place, that seems like it'd be a pretty early strike in most matchups. I'm not sure if Halberd is even that bad. You have to realize, in a 9 stage starter set, each character has 4 strikes. 11 stages=5 strikes. You can do a lot to get rid of your terribad stages. If you're still playing on a horrible stage after that many strikes, your character is balls or your matchup is balls, either way you shouldn't be handicapped so heavily that the matchup evens out for you.

FD you have a point but then again FD helps ALOT of characters camp not just like falco or stage control for diddy works for other characters too.

Like who?

FD is probably up there with RC as one of the most polarizing stages in the game. In a typical stage list these days (no japes, no greens, brinstar and RC legal), FD is almost universally banned against Falco. The same can be said for Diddy and ICs. Many people will either ban delfino or FD against a DDD if they are CGed. Snake is also **** on FD but Halberd is as well so that's usually banned instead.

RC is heavily banned against MK, GaW, Kirby, maybe Wario?

 

[Zero_Saber]

I didn't justify a starter list that has Meta Knight start on Brinstar or Norfair (though the MLG starter list comes close to this with Delfino). You somehow misunderstood what I was saying. The stage list should be determined by the attributes of the stages themselves, not by which characters do well on them. I think everyone agrees that a neutral stage (a stage that does not interfere in competition) should start the set. It's pretty obvious to tell which stages interfere and which don't.

Peoples interpretations on what "interferes" and what doesn't can be different. Would you say Pokemon Stadium 1 interferes because it transforms and doesn't stay stagnant the entire match? What about Frigate where the stage flips rarely after giving a long warning? Or Delfino where the stage change is different then Pokemon Stadium (a ride thing rather than just automatically changing).

I personally think the only one of the current starters that "interferes" is Halberd, but at the same time the interference is slight and not match changing (in most cases). Also I am curious as to why you think stages that "interfere" are bad. Do you think that the interference caused by these stages is extreme enough to allow a lesser skilled player to beat a greater skilled one?

 

[Hanzhou]

I was just stating examples lol wasn't going too in detail with striking etc.

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

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

I answered this one.
NO IT IS NOT.
Read the post, it explains it pretty **** well, IMO (and got completely ignored).

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.

Diddy does not have "one CP". He has literally every one of his best stages except pictochat. Metaknight has one stage that he might pick in a 5 or 7-game set if he doesn't like the other stages MK usually performs superbly on. See the post linked to above.

It would be comparable if the starter list looked like this:
-FD
-SV
-BF
-YI
-Brinstar
-Norfair
-RC

Then Diddy has all of his best stages, and MK has his very best stages.

???? What are you talking about ? Why doesn't MK have an advantage?

He doesn't have an advantage relative to the average advantage he gets on all stages.

delfino

not one of MK's best stages

lolol

I explained this. Seriously. It's not a counterpick for MK in the sense that an MK will take you there with a liberal stagelist. MK is better on Norfair, RC, Brinstar, Green Greens, and Orpheon. It's not even top 5 for MK (maybe borderline, okay).

You keep repeating the same points over and over without actually answering the question. What advantage does Diddy get from playing on BF?

Why is one of your main points that Diddy can play on this stage game 1?

http://www.smashboards.com/showpost.php?p=10556560&postcount=648

Yes this is true. I don't really agree with what SL said about how a character shouldn't get a good stage for them persay, even if I fall on the same side of the argument as he does.

A better character will have more options in a well done striking system; this reflects the flexibility of a character. However, they should never go on their best stages, aka the ones that they would CP.

SO Diddy should not be going to FD, SV

MK should not be going to RC, Brinstar

However, in a more open starter list, it's not like those will start happening. Those will be the first stages to be struck. If MK vs Diddy ends up on a stage that is considered slightly in MK's favor, that is the median of bias in this matchup and reflects the fact that MK overall is a better character and is more flexible. However, we should never see cases of a character playing on their first, second, or even third best stage.

This is why I proposed that we should just remove the distinction between CP and starter in game 1. Striking will eliminate the crazy advantageous stages anyways, might as well allow the players to decide which stage is best out of the allowed stages instead of creating some arbitrary starter list that no one can agree on. Then it becomes a matter of the TO simply deciding what stages are worth playing on in the first place.

I agree 100% with this.

If you remove the distinction between CP/Starter then this is what you get, per MLG.

MK-> Final Destination
Diddy Kong -> Rainbow Cruise
Mk -> Smashville
Diddy Kong -> Brinstar
Mk -> PS1
Diddy Kong -> Norfair
Mk -> Pictochat
Diddy Kong -> Delfino Plaza
Mk -> Halbred
Diddy Kong -> Green Greens
Mk -> PS2
Diddy Kong -> Yoshi's Island
Mk -> Castle Siege
Diddy Kong -> Gets to pick between two stages with angles on it, that are better for MK.

Know why this is? MK is a better character. Diddy has what I call a "massive failure to adapt". That is, he's only good on a few stages and is pretty awful in most other cases. MK is good everywhere, and absolutely ridiculous on a few stages.

Diddy spends the entire time having to strike out stages that are flat out bad, while MK focuses on removing any stage with even a hint of a stable flat platform. There's no reason for such a system, since the outlier Counter Picks are always going to hurt one of the characters more than the other, and so their mentality shifts to removing everything that could potentially destroy them stage wise, while the other player is in complete control of the process.

If the other character is metaknight (who does good EVERYWHERE! Do this with another character s'il vous plait). Basically the issue here is not that there are outlier stages that some character might have to strike (would a G&W strike RC? Would a DDD strike GGs? Probably not...). The issue is that some characters that were catered to ridiculously by the old system and who are terrible on a lot of stages are just not as good at dealing with stage variability. Tough ****.

Does it give them advantages, or are they simply not hindered to the point where their true character viability can shine?

Their true character viability is effected by how they fight on various stages. If a character auto-wins on FD and is about as good as ganon everywhere else, the character is still ****, and you wouldn't ban all the other stages to "let his true character viability shine".

 

[Supermodel From Paris]

What point is this making though? A lot of characters have issues with different things. My character personally has issues on stages with little/no platforms (SV/FD) because juggling is the core of her damage wracking. She also cannot grab or space as easily on slants, and her suit piece game is absolutely wrecked by slants.

Do you see how using specific characters for an argument like this is absolutely pointless? A good character is more adaptable, and thus will be able to deal with playing on stages that aren't their first or second choices. If anything, the fact that Diddy is #3 on the tier list despite the fact that fact that he is very unflexable stage wise should be highlighting the core problem that this debate is trying to address.

This post owns.