Stage Analysis & Discussion Thread

[The_Jiggernaut]

If they don't mind playing on stages already played on during the set, sure. If a player enjoys playing on stages they've already lost on in a set, I guess they do have 3 stage choices... out of 13.

Just because having 4 bans each creates this nice little symmetry doesn't mean it's the correct way to go about things. It certainly doesn't mean it's better competitively. You seem to be missing the point of Stage bans. They're a way to reduce the amount of polarizing stages in every single matchup without having to shrink the stage list at all. Stage bans are a way to lower the variance of the game a little bit.

By having 4 stage bans per player, you are stating that there exist matchups that have FOUR stages on which the matchup would be skewed, one-sided, or very unpleasant to the point that it would be a mistake to allow the stage to be used as a counterpick. This is clearly not the case, 2 stage bans is MORE than enough to account for these polarizing situations. Instead you are nullifying the point of counterpicks in the first place, allowing each player enough bans to completely remove any stage that would give their opponent a net advantage.

 

[DeLux]

There is a flawed misconception that the counterpick system ought to operate under the value of favoring the loser of the previous game.

I suggest the counterpick system is there to introduce a diversity of tactics used, whether this be characters or stages.

The former value ends up with situations which contribute to a mathematical trends towards overcentralizing winning game one as a prerequisite of the set. By mitigating the "advantage" of a player via nominal preference of stages, we help reduce said overcentralization. Ideally, a system of counterpicking introduces a variety of stages without skewing the matchups over the course of the set.

In practical terms:

If we wanted to mathematically decentralize winning game one as a prerequisite for winning the set as best as possible, the best option would be to strike to the most neutral stage by preference and play all the games on that stage. Advantages would inherently be determined by characters selection at that point. So hypothetically, assuming 50/50 probabilities of winning the ditto on all the games, you would have a 25% probability of winning the set after losing game one, with your opponent having a 75% probability.

Hypothetically speaking, let's take the matchups and probabilities on the next stages that my system causes over 5 stages. For the sake of the argument, let's say game one is struck to a 50/50 matchup since the people ditto and they have equal say on what stage it is. Let's say by stage preference alone, a person gets at 60/40 probablity of winning on their CP in games 2 and 3. If you do the math, if you lose game one, by skewing the probability via the counterpick system, you would now have a 24% probability of winning the set after losing game one, with your opponent having a 76%. In this case, you can see there is not that much of a change over the course of games. HOWEVER, we have tripled the number of stages used.

Let's say the point of the counterpick system, like you suggest, is to give the player a pronounced advantage (not an unwinnable one by any means, but a strong advantage) at the rate of say, 70/30 for the CP advantage. Assuming you lose game one, your chances of bringing back the set are now 21%, while your opponent now has a 79% chance of winning the set. You can see there is a greater centralization in this case of "if I want to win the set I HAVE to win game one". For example, assuming a 90/10 skew, you end up with a 9% probability of making a comeback. As the skew becomes more pronounced, so too does the ability to come back.

At the same time, the number of different stages you play on during the set does not increase. Assuming any skew at all because of different stages, you will still play on three stages assuming DSR is in effect.

So you have a value system that to a logical conclusion makes the game literally unplayable on one hand in the name of testing a variety of skills (imagine a 100/0 stage skew situation for the sake of the argument). At the same time, you have a system that maintains the same practical variety (both systems would ultimately use 3 stages on a 3 game set or 5 stages on a 5 game set) while being as close to competitively viable as possible.


So I understand where you're coming from. I just submit that your method of examining what stages to use is kind of outdated. I feel like the increased ban system carries the decentralization of needing to win game 1 to win the set as a prerequisite (the strength of stage striking), while still carrying the practical variety of number of stages used which is the strength of having a counterpick system.

 

[The_Jiggernaut]

I do appreciate what you're trying to do with this system, as there's not much point in a Bo3 that's dictated by its first game. However, this system doesn't actually accomplish what it sets out to do.

First and foremost, your system only works as intended in an environment where characters can't be changed. If I win my first game and lose the second, I can counterpick a stage AND my character such that it's a "70-30 CP" situation in my favor. In fact, this system actually increases the dependence on game 1, as my opponent only got the advantage of a "60-40 CP" situation if they didn't switch characters.

Also, your system also skews matchups away from characters that have a few good stages towards characters that have more than 5 strong stages. You can't just say that 4 bans takes away every stage in every matchup that gives one character a distinct (70-30) advantage over the other. In this environment, you are simply handing the advantage over to a select group of fighters, rather than nullifying it as you would hope.

Additionally, saying that a 4-ban system removes the over-centralization of first-game dependence is a really bold claim that isn't backed even by your theoretical numbers. Having a 24% chance of making a comeback compared to the standard 21% is hardly a huge change. It's certainly not a large enough change to justify this overly-complex method in my opinion. Not to mention that 70-30 vs 60-40 are numbers you pulled out of a hat for argument's sake, so the percent differential is likely even less than you have claimed.

While I do think reducing first-game dependance is important (though the winner of game 1 SHOULD receive and advantage due to winning) and I do support regions trying new and interesting rulesets (within reason, of course), your ruleset doesn't function in the way you claim it does. If you were using it for the express reason of reducing first-game advantage, I would suggest trying out a different system.

 

[Ulevo]

So, @ DeLux , exactly how is offering players 4 bans each diversifying tactics exactly?

 

[webbedspace]

Interesting - a potential sacrificial KO is prevented on Skyloft. How many of its departures behave like this?

(Also, never noticed that the Gym/Evolution music was synched up to Pokémon Stadium 2's transformations before.)

 

[Krysco]

Quite a few behave that way. Most of them go from being ground to being air while a few (maybe even just one) go from being ground to being a hazard. I don't recall any staying as ground as the stage changes but I could be wrong...

 

[Omegaphoenix]

So, I would like to thank this thread for helping me avoid getting rekt. Facing a Sonic in game three of Losers Semis, convinced him to Gentlemen's to Kongo, the high blastlines helped me survive long enough to eek out a win. Thanks

Also, I need help on convincing my college group to expand their stage list. They're north easters, so they are very conservative, but this is crazy.

Starters: FD BF SV.

Counterpicks: T&C, Lylat, one other I can't remember.

I do remember the three travel stages, (Wuhu, Skyloft, Delfino) were banned, as were Castle Siege and KJ.

Hell, at this point I'd take just getting T&C and Lylat to starters. Any arguments that might convince the guys in charge would be appreciated

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

So, I would like to thank this thread for helping me avoid getting rekt. Facing a Sonic in game three of Losers Semis, convinced him to Gentlemen's to Kongo, the high blastlines helped me survive long enough to eek out a win. Thanks

Also, I need help on convincing my college group to expand their stage list. They're north easters, so they are very conservative, but this is crazy.

Starters: FD BF SV.

Counterpicks: T&C, Lylat, one other I can't remember.

I do remember the three travel stages, (Wuhu, Skyloft, Delfino) were banned, as were Castle Siege and KJ.

Hell, at this point I'd take just getting T&C and Lylat to starters. Any arguments that might convince the guys in charge would be appreciated

Ask them how they determined their stagelist. Point out that T&C and Lylat are just as much "simple flat+plat" as Smashville is, and show them clips of people abusing the layout of Smashville. Point out that EVO, KTAR, Smash Attacks, and basically every other larger tournament in the region they might want to go to will run stages they have banned, and if they don't know how to fight on those stages, they'll be at a major disadvantage. Point out that the TOs of those tournaments have been running tournaments for ages, and that they know what they're doing, and wouldn't allow those stages without good reasons. Point out that traveling stages are an integral part of the game, and that adapting to them is an important gameplay mechanic. And, if all else fails, point them to this thread and I'll call them scrubs for you.

At the end of the day though, I get the feeling you're going to get "We just don't like moving stages" as an answer (the last one is almost certainly Duck Hunt), at which point there's not really much arguing - they're using a horribly uncompetitive standard, and there's not much budging that.

 

[Omegaphoenix]

Ask them how they determined their stagelist. Point out that T&C and Lylat are just as much "simple flat+plat" as Smashville is, and show them clips of people abusing the layout of Smashville. Point out that EVO, KTAR, Smash Attacks, and basically every other larger tournament in the region they might want to go to will run stages they have banned, and if they don't know how to fight on those stages, they'll be at a major disadvantage. Point out that the TOs of those tournaments have been running tournaments for ages, and that they know what they're doing, and wouldn't allow those stages without good reasons. Point out that traveling stages are an integral part of the game, and that adapting to them is an important gameplay mechanic. And, if all else fails, point them to this thread and I'll call them scrubs for you.

At the end of the day though, I get the feeling you're going to get "We just don't like moving stages" as an answer (the last one is almost certainly Duck Hunt), at which point there's not really much arguing - they're using a horribly uncompetitive standard, and there's not much budging that.

Actually, no. The last stage wasn't Duck Hunt. I'll need to ask what it was next time I see him. But yeah. I'll try that and see if it can convince them to run more stages. Thanks BPC

 

[The_Jiggernaut]

Another useful way to sway ultra-conservatives is by pointing out that certain characters receive a very large advantage with 3 starters (and the small list in general), like Sheik and Diddy or Sonic. If some character that has two very good stages out of BF SV FD and is dominating in your region in a way the organizers feel even a little bit frustrated about, it can do a lot to convince them if you point out that their losses aren't legitimate Just be sure to choose a character to discuss that isn't played by the majority of the organizers.

 

[Omegaphoenix]

Another useful way to sway ultra-conservatives is by pointing out that certain characters receive a very large advantage with 3 starters (and the small list in general), like Sheik and Diddy or Sonic. If some character that has two very good stages out of BF SV FD and is dominating in your region in a way the organizers feel even a little bit frustrated about, it can do a lot to convince them if you point out that their losses aren't legitimate Just be sure to choose a character to discuss that isn't played by the majority of the organizers.

Yeah, the guy who came in first has a great Sheik, I came in second with Pikachu, fourth placer had Sonic. They're all pretty good with tiny starter lists, so I'll try that too, thanks

 

[Ansou]

Could someone tell me what this discussion has lead to? Like which stages are generally agreed should be legal and what the major arguments are? I really don't feel like reading through more than 100 pages, but maybe I'll do it if I really have to. I feel like some kind of summary should be included in the OP ( Raziek ) but apparently there isn't.

 

[Omegaphoenix]

Could someone tell me what this discussion has lead to? Like which stages are generally agreed should be legal and what the major arguments are? I really don't feel like reading through more than 100 pages, but maybe I'll do it if I really have to. I feel like some kind of summary should be included in the OP ( Raziek ) but apparently there isn't.

Here's a list I think most of us would agree is pretty good. Borrowed from Paranoid Drone's list on page 98.

• Battlefield

• Final Destination

• Delfino Plaza

• Kongo Jungle 64

• Halberd

• Lylat Cruise

• Pokemon Stadium 2

• Castle Siege

• Town & City

• Smashville

• Duck Hunt

• Wuhu Island

• Windy Hill Zone

• Skyloft

Subtract 1, and you have a nice 13 stage list, perfect for Full List Stage Striking.

Other stages that might be worth fighting for are Mario Circuit 8, Mushroom Kingdom U, Kalos, OGA, and Norfair

I don't feel like putting up an argument for every stage, but if you have a problem with a stage, or don't understand I'll do what I can to elucidate,

 

[Ansou]

Here's a list I think most of us would agree is pretty good. Borrowed from Paranoid Drone's list on page 98.

• Battlefield

• Final Destination

• Delfino Plaza

• Kongo Jungle 64

• Halberd

• Lylat Cruise

• Pokemon Stadium 2

• Castle Siege

• Town & City

• Smashville

• Duck Hunt

• Wuhu Island

• Windy Hill Zone

• Skyloft

Subtract 1, and you have a nice 13 stage list, perfect for Full List Stage Striking.

Other stages that might be worth fighting for are Mario Circuit 8, Mushroom Kingdom U, Kalos, OGA, and Norfair

I don't feel like putting up an argument for every stage, but if you have a problem with a stage, or don't understand I'll do what I can to elucidate,

Thank you! I guess I would take away Windy Hill Zone then. I kinda like the list, maybe I'll try to push my local scene to use it together with FLSS. In that list, we currently don't have Kongo Jungle 64, Wuhu Island, Windy Hill Zone nor Skyloft allowed. One of the TOs wants to allow Gamer and Mario Circuit 8, but then he would never accept FLSS as he has some strange opinions on counterpick stages.

 

[Omegaphoenix]

Thank you! I guess I would take away Windy Hill Zone then. I kinda like the list, maybe I'll try to push my local scene to use it together with FLSS. In that list, we currently don't have Kongo Jungle 64, Wuhu Island, Windy Hill Zone nor Skyloft allowed. One of the TOs wants to allow Gamer and Mario Circuit 8, but then he would never accept FLSS as he has some strange opinions on counterpick stages.

Ehh, Gamer kinda rubs me the wrong way. Not because of Mom, but because either you have to reset over and over or risk getting a Cave of Life.

Mario Circuit 8 though, fight for that ****. That stage is awesome.

 

[Ansou]

Ehh, Gamer kinda rubs me the wrong way. Not because of Mom, but because either you have to reset over and over or risk getting a Cave of Life.

Mario Circuit 8 though, fight for that ****. That stage is awesome.

I must admit that I have very limited experience of Mario Circuit 8, so I won't be pushing for that until maybe after I have read the stage research thread about it (which I have not yet done) and played around with it more.

 

[ParanoidDrone]

I love Gamer. Cave of life issues aside, it's amazingly atmospheric if you get the regular "Gamer" BGM instead of Ashley's Song or something.

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

Here's a list I think most of us would agree is pretty good. Borrowed from Paranoid Drone's list on page 98.

• Battlefield

• Final Destination

• Delfino Plaza

• Kongo Jungle 64

• Halberd

• Lylat Cruise

• Pokemon Stadium 2

• Castle Siege

• Town & City

• Smashville

• Duck Hunt

• Wuhu Island

• Windy Hill Zone

• Skyloft

Subtract 1, and you have a nice 13 stage list, perfect for Full List Stage Striking.

Other stages that might be worth fighting for are Mario Circuit 8, Mushroom Kingdom U, Kalos, OGA, and Norfair

I don't feel like putting up an argument for every stage, but if you have a problem with a stage, or don't understand I'll do what I can to elucidate,

I was not under the impression that WHZ was under wide consideration. The springs are essentially a random instant death hazard, which seems like a bit of a no-no. Mario Circuit is considerably better, but given that there's not a good 15th for stage striking, that becomes an issue.

 

[Raziek]

Here's a list I think most of us would agree is pretty good. Borrowed from Paranoid Drone's list on page 98.

• Battlefield

• Final Destination

• Delfino Plaza

• Kongo Jungle 64

• Halberd

• Lylat Cruise

• Pokemon Stadium 2

• Castle Siege

• Town & City

• Smashville

• Duck Hunt

• Wuhu Island

• Windy Hill Zone

• Skyloft

Subtract 1, and you have a nice 13 stage list, perfect for Full List Stage Striking.

Other stages that might be worth fighting for are Mario Circuit 8, Mushroom Kingdom U, Kalos, OGA, and Norfair

I don't feel like putting up an argument for every stage, but if you have a problem with a stage, or don't understand I'll do what I can to elucidate,

Co-signing this, this is pretty much the list I ended up settling on at this point.

 

[ParanoidDrone]

I was not under the impression that WHZ was under wide consideration. The springs are essentially a random instant death hazard, which seems like a bit of a no-no. Mario Circuit is considerably better, but given that there's not a good 15th for stage striking, that becomes an issue.

This reminded me, I was messing around with the CPU today and default DK hit the spring but immediately used Spinning Kong, as if there was no hitstun at all attached to the effect. May be worth looking into?

 

[Ulevo]

I cannot see Windy Hill being legalized with the problems with the springs alone.

Wuhu I've already went over. Pokemon Stadium 2 I feel should not be legal based on the electrical transformation, which I covered a while back.

Skyloft does not feel like healthy legal material to me, but I am not inclined to say.

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

I cannot see Windy Hill being legalized with the problems with the springs alone.

Wuhu I've already went over. Pokemon Stadium 2 I feel should not be legal based on the electrical transformation, which I covered a while back.

Skyloft does not feel like healthy legal material to me, but I am not inclined to say.

When Ulevo speaks of having "gone over" Wuhu, he refers to a bunch of theorycraft that was soundly refuted by two TOs.

 

[Ulevo]

When Ulevo speaks of having "gone over" Wuhu, he refers to a bunch of theorycraft that was soundly refuted by two TOs.

Soundly refuted by anecdotal evidence and contrasting theory craft from two Tournament Organizers. One of which is you, no less. Good for you.

Within any given reputable experiment, it is important to gather data (not opinions) from multiple sources in order to reach reasonable conclusions.

You haven't done anything. I gave my opinion, backed with data, and presented it as opinion. You, on the other hand, arrogantly present your limited opinion, with no data, as fact, and hypocritically call me out on position.

Do me a favour and refrain from debating with me unless you have substance in your post. If you have any legitimacy to what you've argued in this thread then there is no reason for you to be wasting my time like this for the mere sake of appearances.

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

Soundly refuted by anecdotal evidence and contrasting theory craft from two Tournament Organizers. One of which is you, no less. Good for you.

Within any given reputable experiment, it is important to gather data (not opinions) from multiple sources in order to reach reasonable conclusions.

You haven't done anything. I gave my opinion, backed with data, and presented it as opinion. You, on the other hand, arrogantly present your limited opinion, with no data, as fact, and hypocritically call me out on position.

Do me a favour and refrain from debating with me unless you have substance in your post. If you have any legitimacy to what you've argued in this thread then there is no reason for you to be wasting my time like this for the mere sake of appearances.

What? You're appealing to that theorycraft to try to discredit Wuhu Island, and I'm pointing out quite rightfully that appealing to theorycraft with no results behind it is questionable, and that appealing to theorycraft when results refute it is just plain stupid. The fact is that every region that has Wuhu legal is direct proof that your claims about the stage are wrong. Theorycraft like yours is the only thing keeping the stage from being legal everywhere, at which point we'd immediately see how wrong this is.

 

[Ulevo]

What? You're appealing to that theorycraft to try to discredit Wuhu Island, and I'm pointing out quite rightfully that appealing to theorycraft with no results behind it is questionable, and that appealing to theorycraft when results refute it is just plain stupid. The fact is that every region that has Wuhu legal is direct proof that your claims about the stage are wrong. Theorycraft like yours is the only thing keeping the stage from being legal everywhere, at which point we'd immediately see how wrong this is.

1) You can't discredit a stage. This isn't some damsel in distress that needs your rescue.

2) What results? What did you give me as results? Tournament bracket winnings with specific sets on when Wuhu was used and with who? Videos? Reputable tournament player analysis? No. You gave me your hearsay. Not even your tournament attendee's opinions. Your opinion, to me, has no validity. Amazing Ampharos on the other hand is much more reliable of a source, yet his single opinion (he provided no evidence either) is not enough to solidify any argument you might make.

3) Telling me every region has Wuhu Island doesn't mean anything. Most of the big name tournaments are not using the stage. Most of the reputable tournament organizers are not using the stage in most regions. Just because some random nobody (i.e. you) happens to use Wuhu Island does not mean you represent the collective total for your region or that it holds anything of value.

4) I am extremely flattered that you think someone like me can alter an entire communities consensus over a stage legality debate using theorycraft.

 

[webbedspace]

Just as a refresher for everyone present, here's a summary of the discussion on the previous page, starting from what I believe is Ulevo's central argument:

And stage size is a problem in competitive play. It's less ideal for tournaments given time restraints, and it's very unfair in specific match ups with characters that either have high speed and mobility, strong camping game, or both versus a character with low mobility. While there are large stages like Battlefield, there is such a thing as too big. If there wasn't, we would have legalized Big Battlefield by now.

Oh, and Big Battlefield isn't banned because it's "too big", it's because it's both huge and has the pyramid layout, allowing one player to circle-camp.

At the end of the day what that translates in to is "I can't kill my opponent."

No, it translates to "I can't hit my opponent", which is a very different issue entirely.

At this point the thread devolved to ad hominem, leaving this rebuttal otherwise unanswered. So let's consider it anew: Are there invincible arguments that stage size, in the abstract, isolated from other aspects of stage topology, is a problem in competitive play? Or, to put it another way:

If Bridge of Eldin was the same relative size as it is now, but had ledges at the end instead of walk offs and no exploding transformation in the middle, do you really believe the stage would be permitted?

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

Just as a refresher for everyone present, here's a summary of the discussion on the previous page, starting from what I believe is Ulevo's central argument:

At this point the thread devolved to ad hominem, leaving this rebuttal otherwise unanswered. So let's consider it anew: Are there invincible arguments that stage size, in the abstract, isolated from other aspects of stage topology, is a problem in competitive play? Or, to put it another way:

It depends. Is time a huge factor? Obviously, we don't want every match to go to time, and your hypothetical Eldin-but-not-a-walkoff would lead to people living absurdly long, and probably to most matches going to time. But beyond that? Runaway would be obnoxious but not unbeatable. Again, we have the difference between "I can never touch my opponent or come close to them without putting myself in an awful position" and "I have to catch him as he crosses past me". Whether or not the latter is actually degenerate is something we actually need to test, as we haven't had any obscenely large stages whose topology hasn't been problematic in other ways.

However, it is fair to say that none of this applies to Wuhu Island, as actual playtesting in numerous regions (hey Ulevo? I didn't say that it's legal everywhere, what I meant was that each and every individual region that has the stage legal is a big fat "you're wrong" to your theorycraft) has shown that none of these problems actually exist there.

 

[Ulevo]

However, it is fair to say that none of this applies to Wuhu Island, as actual playtesting in numerous regions (hey Ulevo? I didn't say that it's legal everywhere, what I meant was that each and every individual region that has the stage legal is a big fat "you're wrong" to your theorycraft) has shown that none of these problems actually exist there.

That doesn't prove me wrong. All that tells me is that there is an exception to the rule everywhere you go. It doesn't tell me that regions are collectively accepting Wuhu Island, which is what you seem to imply, and that's wrong.

Also, you once again have yet to show me anything.

Reputable player analysis.

Tournament footage.

Data, numbers (you know, like how I provided.)

I don't care about your opinion, BPC.

 

[The_Jiggernaut]

Just as a refresher for everyone present, here's a summary of the discussion on the previous page, starting from what I believe is Ulevo's central argument:

At this point the thread devolved to ad hominem, leaving this rebuttal otherwise unanswered. So let's consider it anew: Are there invincible arguments that stage size, in the abstract, isolated from other aspects of stage topology, is a problem in competitive play? Or, to put it another way:

The answer to this question is a strong "No." There is nothing solid to say what effect, if any, large blastzone size has on competitive play. What would data one way or another look like? I don't think any of us knows, so asking for it seems a bit like moving the goal posts at this point. I also feel the need to note that matches running longer and possibly going to time has nothing to do with the competitive nature of the stage, but the logistical nature. As in, if we ban big stages because tournaments are running too long if big stages definitively show a longer run time, that has nothing to do with how fair a match is.

@ Budget Player Cadet_ , @ Ulevo , in case you didn't notice, webbedspace's post re-framing the argument was also a subtle hint that the two of you should stop arguing with each other. It's destructive at this point, and it's accomplishing nothing except making people abandon this thread.

So in case the subtlety was lost, this is me saying STOP RESPONDING TO EACH OTHER

Thank you, and have a nice day.

 

[Ulevo]

The problem with this thread is that it dates all the way back to September, and is cluttered with discussion on both the 3DS and Wii U versions.

I feel what should be done is this thread should be locked, a new thread should be made as a directory that links to individual threads that cover a specific stage with a poll, like this one, so that we can get some concise, pertinent discussion as well as a general consensus on what the community thinks. It would be even better if the thread creator could take specific quotes from the generated discussion and paste them in the opening post to paraphrase the arguments for and against the stages' legality. Discussion regarding the stage would go in to its designated thread, and general stage talk would reside in the directory. At least this way we can make sure stages that really deserve attention receive some exposure, rather than dozens of people trying to argue for a multitude of stages and having nothing to show for it.

@ Raziek

 

[ParanoidDrone]

The problem with this thread is that it dates all the way back to September, and is cluttered with discussion on both the 3DS and Wii U versions.

I feel what should be done is this thread should be locked, a new thread should be made as a directory that links to individual threads that cover a specific stage with a poll, like this one, so that we can get some concise, pertinent discussion as well as a general consensus on what the community thinks. It would be even better if the thread creator could take specific quotes from the generated discussion and paste them in the opening post to paraphrase the arguments for and against the stages' legality. Discussion regarding the stage would go in to its designated thread, and general stage talk would reside in the directory. At least this way we can make sure stages that really deserve attention receive some exposure, rather than dozens of people trying to argue for a multitude of stages and having nothing to show for it.

@ Raziek

Alternately, @Shaya.

Also if a new thread is made then it may be a good idea for the OP to link to my threads as well, if only to ensure they're easy to find and everyone's more or less on the same page WRT what the stages actually do.

But yeah, the character thread is pretty trivially aimed at "how do the various characters perform" but the stage thread seems to lack direction at this point.

 

[Tinkerer]

That doesn't prove me wrong. All that tells me is that there is an exception to the rule everywhere you go. It doesn't tell me that regions are collectively accepting Wuhu Island, which is what you seem to imply, and that's wrong.

Also, you once again have yet to show me anything.

Reputable player analysis.

Tournament footage.

Data, numbers (you know, like how I provided.)

I don't care about your opinion, BPC.

Isn't this kind of an innocent-until-proven-guilty scenario? There is no footage of Wuhu Island being degenerate at all, i.e. what your theory is here. Stages don't get banned just because, they get banned because they've been proven to be problematic - which Wuhu Island hasn't (except for that one funny boat glitch video, which has since been fixed). The burden of proof isn't on BPC - they're right in saying that a stage being ran in multiple locations without any problems is proof in itself, and "proving" it has no problems just through spamming matches that went fine nets you nothing. The burden is on you.

 

[Ulevo]

Isn't this kind of an innocent-until-proven-guilty scenario? There is no footage of Wuhu Island being degenerate at all, i.e. what your theory is here. Stages don't get banned just because, they get banned because they've been proven to be problematic - which Wuhu Island hasn't (except for that one funny boat glitch video, which has since been fixed). The burden of proof isn't on BPC - they're right in saying that a stage being ran in multiple locations without any problems is proof in itself, and "proving" it has no problems just through spamming matches that went fine nets you nothing. The burden is on you.

Look, I'm not totally invested in to defending my position just because someone comes in late. Read back all the way to my original post. I'm perfectly aware of where the burden of proof lies regarding stage legality. My problem is that I'm being told that my theoretical argument, which I made no effort in masquerading as fact, is factually wrong with no supporting evidence to the contrary. The argument that Wuhu has not 'proven to be a problem' is ridiculous because Wuhu has very little exposure for us to draw a conclusion either way, which as you can clearly see is not the shared opinion of my opposition. If I put in an effort to construct an argument, I expect a proper rebuttal.

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

Look, I'm not totally invested in to defending my position just because someone comes in late. Read back all the way to my original post. I'm perfectly aware of where the burden of proof lies regarding stage legality. My problem is that I'm being told that my theoretical argument, which I made no effort in masquerading as fact, is factually wrong with no supporting evidence to the contrary. The argument that Wuhu has not 'proven to be a problem' is ridiculous because Wuhu has very little exposure for us to draw a conclusion either way, which as you can clearly see is not the shared opinion of my opposition. If I put in an effort to construct an argument, I expect a proper rebuttal.

Okay, here's the only rebuttal you need: "Videos or GTFO". You're trying to ban something using theorycraft. What other answer do you want?

 

[LiteralGrill]

The problem with this thread is that it dates all the way back to September, and is cluttered with discussion on both the 3DS and Wii U versions.

I feel what should be done is this thread should be locked, a new thread should be made as a directory that links to individual threads that cover a specific stage with a poll, like this one, so that we can get some concise, pertinent discussion as well as a general consensus on what the community thinks. It would be even better if the thread creator could take specific quotes from the generated discussion and paste them in the opening post to paraphrase the arguments for and against the stages' legality. Discussion regarding the stage would go in to its designated thread, and general stage talk would reside in the directory. At least this way we can make sure stages that really deserve attention receive some exposure, rather than dozens of people trying to argue for a multitude of stages and having nothing to show for it.

@ Raziek

Alternately, @Shaya.
Also if a new thread is made then it may be a good idea for the OP to link to my threads as well, if only to ensure they're easy to find and everyone's more or less on the same page WRT what the stages actually do.

But yeah, the character thread is pretty trivially aimed at "how do the various characters perform" but the stage thread seems to lack direction at this point.

I would happily make a new thread and take charge in making sure the OP is updated since it's a subject I'm very interested in and all, I could draft something up right now if people like the idea.

 

[Ulevo]

Okay, here's the only rebuttal you need: "Videos or GTFO". You're trying to ban something using theorycraft. What other answer do you want?

You went on about how your tournaments went along swimmingly. Why aren't you providing video footage? I presented my point of view as a means of providing perspective to the discussion because idiots like you kept making false factual claims, like how the blast zones aren't that big on Wuhu (when they are among the largest in the game). I'm not trying to single handedly ban the stage, I'm adding to the discussion. You are acting loud and obnoxious to further your personal interest, as usual.

Do me a favor and go back to playing Brawl Minus, will you.

@ LiteralGrill I'm fine with that either way, provided this one will be closed.

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

You went on about how your tournaments went along swimmingly. Why aren't you providing video footage?

Because @Vellocet deleted the archive from twitch and won't tell me if he has it anywhere else. **** if I know why.

 

[Ulevo]

This is how I feel an appropriate directory should be structured.

Essentially, the first stages are the legal stages no one is really going to bother arguing legal merit over, but there might be some discussion for a few revolving around whether or not say, Duck Hunt deserves to be a starter for TO's who are still adopting the five stage starter system. The second list is the one that should have the most attention, and contains what I would call the "suspects", or the controversial stages that should be discussed in detail. The third section are the stages with the least controversy, and most people would agree are not legal material.

For the 3rd and probably the 1st set of stages, probably just a link to the research thread will suffice, unless someone wants to make a specific case and makes a dedicated thread with good arguments to back it up. The 2nd set of stages need dedicated threads with information, discussion and polls for community votes, and the little vote section just displays what the latest community consensus would be based on said votes.

Stage | Vote | Research | Discussion

|

Stage | Vote | Research | Discussion

Stage | Vote | Research | Discussion

 

[LiteralGrill]

CONVERT ALL YE NON BELEIVERS!!!​

In other words, I decided to make that new thread after all, hopefully it'll turn out way better than this one, going to have all the information on stages there, plus links to any relevant stage discussion that are suggested. So like, abandon ship here and get moving :o

 

[Ulevo]

@ LiteralGrill , here is my thread for Mario Circuit. http://smashboards.com/threads/lets-talk-about-mario-circuit.400176/

Also, I think you should re-organize the stages in order, similar to what I have done above. The way you've structured it is rather cluttered, and an emphasis needs to be placed on discussing the controversial stages, not ones that are clearly legal or clearly illegal.