Stage Analysis & Discussion Thread

[Thinkaman]

I already have 5 stages that aren't exactly popular to take a look at. If the gameplay here isn't really good already, I'd rather let these few that either have large player support (Luigi's Mansion, Mushroom Kingdom U) Have been legal elsewhere (Windy Hill Zone and Mario Circuit U) or is an odd anomaly that people at least want tested a bit (Norfair). I spose, is this stage on the same level as Norfair in worth of testing?

Imo, no.

 

[wildvine47]

I was thinking the problems compounded together is what hurts the stage. Even for a testing tournament I wasn't sure it was worth possibly spoiling it with a really bad stage. If you guys think Wooly World deserves a shot though, I spose I can make an exception.

I vote that for such an early tournament like this, and one designated almost specifically for "testing" some suspect stages, I think Woolly World, as one of the most controversial, disagreed upon, and divisive stages, ought to be included on that basis alone. I think the fact that Woolly World really has no 100% consensus on it, where there's both those very in favor of it, and those very against it, means that testing it in a situation like a experimentation tournament like this is the best way to get a good solid opinion on it.

If it ends up being a problem like anticipated, then oh well, we strike it down now and never see it again. But if it ends up not being a problem and a great stage for some currently undermatched characters? Better that we at least saw it in action and have a few ugly matches, than kill a really unoffensive and potentially workable stage simply because people have bad feelings about it.

I spose, is this stage on the same level as Norfair in worth of testing?

Considering the comparison here is a stage where you can be literally pigeonholed onto one tiny platform of five with lava in most every direction, and a stage where the biggest factors against it are "weird platforms" and tilting, I think it's definitely on the same level.

 

[Thinkaman]

I vote that for such an early tournament like this, and one designated almost specifically for "testing" some suspect stages, I think Woolly World, as one of the most controversial, disagreed upon, and divisive stages, ought to be included on that basis alone. I think the fact that Woolly World really has no 100% consensus on it, where there's both those very in favor of it, and those very against it, means that testing it in a situation like a experimentation tournament like this is the best way to get a good solid opinion on it.

If it ends up being a problem like anticipated, then oh well, we strike it down now and never see it again. But if it ends up not being a problem and a great stage for some currently undermatched characters? Better that we at least saw it in action and have a few ugly matches, than kill a really unoffensive and potentially workable stage simply because people have bad feelings about it.

I mean, I welcome testing of this stage. (As I certainly did)

I just don't want to overload this single test, nor enable people to lump Norfair and the other stages being tested in this with Wooly World.

But hey, I don't even play online, including in this particular event. So my opinion should be taken as advisory at best.

 

[chipndip]

Now I know I've been somewhat controversial when it came to stage selection and what-not as a subject in the past. This isn't necessarily about that.

I just went to a tourney this Saturday (a surprisingly BIG one at that), and for some odd reason, walk-off stages like Wii Fit were included in the roster. My question is why. Are we seriously allowing walk-off stages, here? A lot of people were thinking that was some major bs, and it gave Diddy and Little Mac players absolute field days being magically liberated from their primary weaknesses of "falling". Even if we fight tooth and nail to the end of time on conceptual matters like word definitions and what-not, can we AT LEAST agree that walk-off stages should NOT be a thing in tourney play?

 

[wildvine47]

I mean, I welcome testing of this stage. (As I certainly did)

I just don't want to overload this single test, nor enable people to lump Norfair and the other stages being tested in this with Wooly World.

But hey, I don't even play online, including in this particular event. So my opinion should be taken as advisory at best.

I would agree with you, but at the same time, I feel that with a tournament designated specifically for testing, if people see that Woolly World is instantly banned at a tournament for testing borderline stages, most people will take that as an indication that it's not even worth bothering with, and that could easily sway opinions in a hypothetical later test tournament where Woolly World comes up as an option again.

"Well _______ tournament didn't think it was worthwhile and that tournament allowed MARIO CIRCUIT 8." or something along those lines is what I can see happening. I feel in order to prevent sway of opinions like that, in a tournament where obviously dangerous, controversial and possibly worse stages are going to be allowed in, to disallow Woolly World would basically be deciding public opinion on it before test matches allowed it to even get it's own say in the matter.

 

[LiteralGrill]

I just don't want to overload this single test, nor enable people to lump Norfair and the other stages being tested in this with Wooly World.

That's sort of how I'm feeling, but @ wildvine47 you raise a fair point. I will not put it directly on the list for now HOWEVER as during the last tournament my list was flexible. I will bring this one up specially within the thread for discussion and see if participants are willing to try playing on this stage. If they're up for it, I'll put it in.

As a side note, the research thread for Windy Hill Zone is up. Since we're hitting so many tame stages in an effort to have them properly analyzed, Kongo Jungle 64 is next on my list. I'm going to see to it that EVERY stage is covered with the help of @ ParanoidDrone doing something no other game has actually done, have a large thread on EVERY stage even the out there ones (Palutena's Temple should be fun).

 

[ParanoidDrone]

I still think for one of your tournaments (maybe a grand finale after you're mostly done), simply ban Battlefield, FD, and Smashville. Everything else is fair game.

I'm only half serious but it would be interesting to see what stages people flock to.

 

[Arcadenik]

Damn... Smash 4 seems to have too many walk-off stages and scrolling stages and transforming stages and traveling stages and too big stages than Brawl...

 

[LiteralGrill]

Damn... Smash 4 seems to have too many walk-off stages and scrolling stages and transforming stages and traveling stages and too big stages than Brawl...

We still have a large amount of really good stages, moreso then any other of the games really.

Anyways Kongo Jungle 64 thread is up. Tomorrow I'll probably put up Mario Circuit (Brawl) because it's another fairly simple stage.

 

[smashmachine]

I would agree with you, but at the same time, I feel that with a tournament designated specifically for testing, if people see that Woolly World is instantly banned at a tournament for testing borderline stages, most people will take that as an indication that it's not even worth bothering with, and that could easily sway opinions in a hypothetical later test tournament where Woolly World comes up as an option again.

"Well _______ tournament didn't think it was worthwhile and that tournament allowed MARIO CIRCUIT 8." or something along those lines is what I can see happening. I feel in order to prevent sway of opinions like that, in a tournament where obviously dangerous, controversial and possibly worse stages are going to be allowed in, to disallow Woolly World would basically be deciding public opinion on it before test matches allowed it to even get it's own say in the matter.

what, as opposed to "wow that tournament had ****ty stages, just ban them all"?

so many people here would rather argue for 10 stages and get 0 of them than just get 5 stages in

 

[Thinkaman]

what, as opposed to "wow that tournament had ****ty stages, just ban them all"?

so many people here would rather argue for 10 stages and get 0 of them than just get 5 stages in

And ideally we can think carefully about how things are communicated/presented, and move forward without having to make such a choice.

 

[Johnknight1]

I don't see why a stage banned in a past smash game should be legalized. I mean, it was banned for very good reasons, and the smartest and biggest TO's, players, and so on agree with it for good reasons.

Of the "Familiar Stages" in Smash Wii U, the following are neutral stages in past Smash games at APEX, which is seen as the Super Bowl from Smash (even if it's missing the 2nd most played Smash game):
-Final Destination (all games)
-Battlefield (all games)
-Congo Jungle 64 (Smash 64)
-Smasvhille (Brawl)
-Lylat Cruise (Brawl

The following are counter-pick stages in past Smash games at APEX:
-Battleship Halberd (Brawl)
-Castle Siege (Brawl)

Aside from stages that suffered from being "too big" (not stage hazards) that could work in teams play and just teams play (Delfino Plaza is basically the only "Familiar Stage" that fits this billing), there's no reason to even discuss other past stages, and it is why top competitive players don't do such things.

There's clear design issues on all the other stages that prevent it from being a fair competitive stage or to have matches finished on time (so we can get home from tournaments on time and not almost 8 hours late like the latest KTAR; TO's care about time and efficiency above all else) that have been exploited, discussed, and covered.

Melee as a national game didn't grow as fast as it could because its' stage list was too big and thus the game had camping issues for too long, mostly caused by having too many legal stage. A big reason Brawl disappeared from all majors outside of APEX is because majors wouldn't carry it because sets went too long (which has happened at APEX a lot, lol), which was in part due to a huge stage list.

Let's not let history repeat itself, especially when all the top smash minds (specifically THE BEST TO's) are telling us to be conservative with the stage list at majors. It's because they run tournaments, they know what's beset for the scene, and they know having certain stages legal is a problem for time at majors.

(this post was all about majors BTW. I don't really care about other tournaments' rulesets unless I'm attending them or watching them, lol)

 

[wildvine47]

what, as opposed to "wow that tournament had ****ty stages, just ban them all"?

so many people here would rather argue for 10 stages and get 0 of them than just get 5 stages in

No, as opposed to "Well this tournament specifically for testing questionable stages sure had some questionable stages, but wow some of them that I thought would be problems were actually ok."

Also, I'd much rather argue to have ten stages tested and given a fair chance, than to just test five "safer" ones and potentially pre-emptively ban a possibly worthwhile stage.

 

[Pazx]

I played all day today, with mates and then my local scene and I genuinely think that is the only way to pass judgement on a stage list. Despite being a great advocate of Wii Fit Studio, Coliseum, Woolly World I think I'm willing to let those go for now.

One stage that I would like to see discussed in depth is Pokemon Stadium 2. It transforms far less frequently than other transformation stages (excluding Siege... I think), has a fantastic base platform layout and only has 1 bad transformation in my opinion.

Rock is alright, ice completely favours aerialists, electricity has allegedly been toned down from Brawl and promotes good stage control (that along with the recovery boost to all characters makes it a non issue) but wind is... Bad?

Interesting results, I assumed Norfair's lava was all randomized. I'll verify it firsthand and then I can get a Norfair topic up pretty quickly. When's your tournament?

Getting snapshots off the SD card is super easy. Pop it in, take screenshots, and they're saved automatically. Take it out, put it in your computer, and open up the DCIM folder. There should be subfolders in the form 100NIN01. Inside are .jpg files named HNI0001 and matching .bin files. The .jpg is what you're after, you can copy them out and do whatever. Each subfolder holds up to 100 screenshots, it makes a new one for each batch of 100. AFAIK there's no way to "reset" the numbering.

You can also delete the files and subfolders from the SD card without real issue, but there's some sort of residual metadata lingering around that tells Smash there should be a file here but no actual data to go with it, it registers in the album as large red slashes through empty slots. L to select all and - to delete them from the Album menu clears that up in a jiffy.

Tad off-topic but is there a way to do this with replays as well?

 

[Big-Cat]

I have no issues with Wooly World. To me, if the walk off portion of the stage is temporary, then it's considerable counterpick material. The same goes for MK8, a stage that I personally like. If it's a stage like Wii Fit Studio where it's always there, then we have to ban it sadly.

Norfair I really don't like, even if the hazards come periodically. I'm somewhat conservative with stages as you can see.

 

[Thinkaman]

Tad off-topic but is there a way to do this with replays as well?

Nope, replays are input list files.

 

[Fenrir VII]

I really wish they had incorporated Mario Kart's upload to Youtube functionality. That's actually my biggest complaint with the game so far.

 

[LiteralGrill]

I don't see why a stage banned in a past smash game should be legalized. I mean, it was banned for very good reasons, and the smartest and biggest TO's, players, and so on agree with it for good reasons.

You need to remember something. Top players are looking out for their own interests, not what is best for the game. Guess what, many top players have advocated for stages to be banned (and other things now like custom moves) simply so they have less to learn and have an easier chance to win. This is not uncommon, and without breaking confidence of some people I have talked to, players DO do this on purpose.

Plus, stages were banned in the past for different reasons then they are now. If a stage has significantly changed, or maybe some things have been removed (no chaingrabs), or physics changes have made the stages work better they need to be evaluated.

Of the "Familiar Stages" in Smash Wii U, the following are neutral stages in past Smash games at APEX, which is seen as the Super Bowl from Smash (even if it's missing the 2nd most played Smash game):
-Final Destination (all games)
-Battlefield (all games)
-Congo Jungle 64 (Smash 64)
-Smasvhille (Brawl)
-Lylat Cruise (Brawl

The following are counter-pick stages in past Smash games at APEX:
-Battleship Halberd (Brawl)
-Castle Siege (Brawl)

Aside from stages that suffered from being "too big" (not stage hazards) that could work in teams play and just teams play (Delfino Plaza is basically the only "Familiar Stage" that fits this billing), there's no reason to even discuss other past stages, and it is why top competitive players don't do such things.

Are you kidding? Maybe we're discussing other stages because they 100% work in a tournament setting and have massive player support. I can say every stage we're currently running for Hypest Tournaments have causes ZERO issues thus far. Delfino especially work just fine in singles, along with it's "brothers" Skyloft and Wuhu (though some people are on the fence about the latter). Where is Duck Hunt on this list, a stage ran in loads of tournaments that have been highly successful? Where is Pokemon stadium 2 which has been toned down considerably from Brawl and is not only being successfully legal in tournaments but is a counterpick on Anther's Ladder, the largest online matchmaking place for Smash 4 and has yet to cause a single issues depite hundreds of matches being played on it? (Speaking of stages that have changed, Kongo Jungle has had adjustments to size and how high the rotating platforms go to prevent camping issues even).

Especially with stages literally changing in front of us, you can't say "It was banned before, ban it again" without be highly irresponsible as a tournament organizer and actually learning about these stages.

There's clear design issues on all the other stages that prevent it from being a fair competitive stage or to have matches finished on time (so we can get home from tournaments on time and not almost 8 hours late like the latest KTAR; TO's care about time and efficiency above all else) that have been exploited, discussed, and covered.

Melee as a national game didn't grow as fast as it could because its' stage list was too big and thus the game had camping issues for too long, mostly caused by having too many legal stage. A big reason Brawl disappeared from all majors outside of APEX is because majors wouldn't carry it because sets went too long (which has happened at APEX a lot, lol), which was in part due to a huge stage list.

Let's not let history repeat itself, especially when all the top smash minds (specifically THE BEST TO's) are telling us to be conservative with the stage list at majors. It's because they run tournaments, they know what's beset for the scene, and they know having certain stages legal is a problem for time at majors.

(this post was all about majors BTW. I don't really care about other tournaments' rulesets unless I'm attending them or watching them, lol)

I can say my stagelist causes NO issue with tournaments running on time. You want to know what makes tournaments go long? Bad TOs. Yes, Brawl was a long game at times, but Smash 4 is no where near as slow. These top TOs you mention are the same kinds of folks who ban stages just because friends who are top players say they don't like it there, or ban a stage because a glitch on a video that can't even be reproduced showed up, or who are running tournaments with terrible inefficiency. Going to call out KTAR pretty hard here: HE RAN HIS TOURNAMENT BADLY. He didn't have enough setups, didn't even have a backup plan for if more people showed up then expected, and couldn't adapt on the fly to make it work, AND matches that should have been on stream were lost forever. I'm a TO for reddit and we have backup plans EVERY week for if player attendance is past what is expected, you mean to tell me a highly respect TO hosting an Apex qualifier didn't think about that? Plus when was the last time ANYONE said Apex was well organized and ran correctly? I have heard nothing but complaints about organization at Apex since, well, forever.

Some TOs also need to grow a pair and start actually DQing players who are making things run slow too, even if they are top players. I saw a stream where they waiting 45 minutes for a player just because the stream wanted to see him. He had left the venue, told no one where he was going, and it was in the middle of the event. He never was DQd. I don't care if M2K enters my tournaments, if he pulled that crap he'd be in loser's bracket or more likely out the door. Top TOs need to stop sticking up for top players or friends who act like they run every event they go to and make special accommodations for them. This happens WAY too much and it also makes new players feel like crap when they lose a match or get DQd but if the privileged player does something they're off the hook. You wanna kill off new players joining our scene, that's a great way to start.

All of that, and you will have events running on time. Don't make up garbage about banning stages to make events go faster, it's utterly ridiculous.

I run tournaments too, you want to know what is best for the scene? Not banning things for no good reason. We have loads of new blood and talent coming in for Smash 4 (I've wanted to somehow pay out of pocket to sponsor some players at my events to go to Apex, THAT good of talent) and a lot of these folks are going to be driven away if we start banning perfectly good things for no reason. They're going to think we're stupid, and they will be 100% correct in calling us morons if we do.

TLDR: Never ban until proven banworthy. Don't trust top players who have an interest in continuing to win money vs making the game the best it should be, TOs need to not john and actually run their events properly, all stages deserve proper testing, enough with knee jerk reactions, and people need to not be scrubs and just ban what they don't like or get away from my competitive scene.

 

[Piford]

One stage that I would like to see discussed in depth is Pokemon Stadium 2. It transforms far less frequently than other transformation stages (excluding Siege... I think), has a fantastic base platform layout and only has 1 bad transformation in my opinion.

Rock is alright, ice completely favors aerialists, electricity has allegedly been toned down from Brawl and promotes good stage control (that along with the recovery boost to all characters makes it a non issue) but wind is... Bad?



Tad off-topic but is there a way to do this with replays as well?

Pokemon Stadium 2 spends 1 minute on the basic layout, a couple seconds transforming, then about 45 seconds (subtract the time it takes to transform) on the transformation before turning back. The transformation seem to come up not evenly, but this is not based on data but experience. It seems like Ground is the most common, followed by Electric, Ice, and Air. I could try to actually test this later. A transformation can never happen twice in a row. Ground just has a slant with platforms. Ice has the slippery floors, which allow you to do cool slides with tilts and smashes, but it increases the length of the turn around animation. Air increases jump heights and speed, but decreases fall speed. Electric has a basic platform layout with conveyer belts that move outward on both sides. I'd say wind is okay, not necessarily bad. It allows for better aerial follow-ups but it does slow the game down. Sorry its not a full-fledged one like @ ParanoidDrone makes, but its the best I can do right now.

I don't see why a stage banned in a past smash game should be legalized. I mean, it was banned for very good reasons, and the smartest and biggest TO's, players, and so on agree with it for good reasons.

Of the "Familiar Stages" in Smash Wii U, the following are neutral stages in past Smash games at APEX, which is seen as the Super Bowl from Smash (even if it's missing the 2nd most played Smash game):
-Final Destination (all games)
-Battlefield (all games)
-Congo Jungle 64 (Smash 64)
-Smasvhille (Brawl)
-Lylat Cruise (Brawl

The following are counter-pick stages in past Smash games at APEX:
-Battleship Halberd (Brawl)
-Castle Siege (Brawl)

Aside from stages that suffered from being "too big" (not stage hazards) that could work in teams play and just teams play (Delfino Plaza is basically the only "Familiar Stage" that fits this billing), there's no reason to even discuss other past stages, and it is why top competitive players don't do such things.

There's clear design issues on all the other stages that prevent it from being a fair competitive stage or to have matches finished on time (so we can get home from tournaments on time and not almost 8 hours late like the latest KTAR; TO's care about time and efficiency above all else) that have been exploited, discussed, and covered.

Melee as a national game didn't grow as fast as it could because its' stage list was too big and thus the game had camping issues for too long, mostly caused by having too many legal stage. A big reason Brawl disappeared from all majors outside of APEX is because majors wouldn't carry it because sets went too long (which has happened at APEX a lot, lol), which was in part due to a huge stage list.

Let's not let history repeat itself, especially when all the top smash minds (specifically THE BEST TO's) are telling us to be conservative with the stage list at majors. It's because they run tournaments, they know what's beset for the scene, and they know having certain stages legal is a problem for time at majors.

(this post was all about majors BTW. I don't really care about other tournaments' rulesets unless I'm attending them or watching them, lol)

First off things change between games. You clearly realize this or you would have Kongo Jungle 64 listed as legal. As a extremely clear example, Lylat's main problem in Brawl was that it hid Snake's mines and C4s. Clearly thats not a problem anymore. Second, Delphino Plaza isn't even big and wasn't banned for being too big. It was banned because picking Meta Knight was considered a near free win and sharking in general. That problem has been fixed as Meta Knight is not OP and Sharking has basically been removed as a viable strategy because of the removal of glides. Most people on here know that overpowerful camping is a reason to ban a stage, but no ones arguing for stages that have such obviously powerful camping. Stages like Delphino do not have overpowerful camping that would make games take too long.

 

[LiteralGrill]

AT LONG LAST WE HAVE FOR YOU THE LINK TO THE STAGE TESTING TOURNAMENT!!!​

Whew! Okay guys, this is gonna be this Wednesday at 6PM EST. So seriously consider coming out if you want to test some of these stages.

On that note, I buckled down and made the stagelist. I worked the rules a bit as well. I didn't want to go all random like last time, but it felt wrong forcing players to play certain stages each round as well. So to compromise, I allowed players to strike from the 7 legal stages for their first match. I know this means the more likely stages will probably see more play, but I am okay with that as the more likely stages are more likely to be legal and all Then I made it so there were NO stage bans. I want the CPs tested properly. I also said you cannot return to the same stage twice in a set under any circumstances to encourage variety.

The stagelist ended up as this:

Luigi's Mansion
Norfair
Mario Circuit (Wii U)
Mushroom Kingdom U
Wii Fit Studio
Windy Hill Zone
Wooly World

I wrote my explanations for each stage here.

Does this look all good to everyone?

 

[TLMSheikant]

In a monthly here, the TOs had Pilot Wings for testing. And oh boy, a Megaman picked it vs a Ness and nothing happened during the whole first minute. Everyone was watching because it was funny. Camping under the wings of the first plane is dumb. I don't think there's a safe way to enter vs someone in the wings. Surprisingly, it barely didn't go to timeout and the ness still won 2-0. But Pilot Wings is probably never gonna come back in Puerto Rico as a counterpick.

 

[Jaxas]

In a monthly here, the TOs had Pilot Wings for testing. And oh boy, a Megaman picked it vs a Ness and nothing happened during the whole first minute. Everyone was watching because it was funny. Camping under the wings of the first plane is dumb. I don't think there's a safe way to enter vs someone in the wings. Surprisingly, it barely didn't go to timeout and the ness still won 2-0. But Pilot Wings is probably never gonna come back in Puerto Rico as a counterpick.

Same thing happen on the Yellow plane, or did they not know about the engines?
Either way, yeah I'd say that's a good choice.

 

[Piford]

I made a research thread on Wii Fit Studio since it was the only one in the tournament without a thread.

 

[Big-Cat]

You need to remember something. Top players are looking out for their own interests, not what is best for the game. Guess what, many top players have advocated for stages to be banned (and other things now like custom moves) simply so they have less to learn and have an easier chance to win. This is not uncommon, and without breaking confidence of some people I have talked to, players DO do this on purpose.

Without proof, why should I believe you?

 

[Johnknight1]

Some TOs also need to grow a pair

Someone here in this conversation needs to grow a pair and not pretend to be someone else's brother or slander top players' reputation, and let me tell you, that person isn't me.

Top players, top TO's, and top voices in the community like D1 and Prog and Scar and Jugglyguy and PPMD are top voices for a reason. They helped achieve growth, push growth, and make growth, and they will continue to do so. To act like you're better or smarter than them when you have no real experience is quite simply foolish.

All of that, and you will have events running on time. Don't make up garbage about banning stages to make events go faster, it's utterly ridiculous.

Tell that to Jugglyguy, the most efficient TO in Smash. He's run a 600+ and 300+ entrant Melee/Project M event and finished EARLY when both games had loads of long, epic, incredible sets. He claims smaller stage lists = faster times.

No offense, but I'll take the opinion of the proven top tier TO over you any day of the week.

 

[Piford]

Even if you don't have proof you have to assume Top Players look out for their selfs. It's like the tragedy of the commons in a way; you do whats better for you in the short run not whats better for the community in the long run. If you want an example on how it'd work, lets pretend we have a smash game where the 4 stages are Battlefield, Smashville, Pokemon Stadium, and Brinstar. The only two characters in this game are Fox and Jigglypuff. Now they want the stage list to consist of 3 stages so they can strike from them, so they need to ban (pretend there's no counterpick stages) either Pokemon Stadium or Brinstar. Now we get the Top 5 players of this game to decide which to ban. If 3 or more of the Top Players play Jigglypuff, Pokemon Stadium will get banned because they want to win more since winning = money. If 3 or more of the Top Players play Fox, Brinstar is going to be banned. The players will do whatever is in their own self interest because it benefits them.

 

[Fenrir VII]

Even assuming no bias or foul play, the call for limiting a stage list as much as possible is pretty common... I hear that all the time and disagree pretty strongly with it

 

[KlefkiHolder]

Even if you don't have proof you have to assume Top Players look out for their selfs. It's like the tragedy of the commons in a way; you do whats better for you in the short run not whats better for the community in the long run. If you want an example on how it'd work, lets pretend we have a smash game where the 4 stages are Battlefield, Smashville, Pokemon Stadium, and Brinstar. The only two characters in this game are Fox and Jigglypuff. Now they want the stage list to consist of 3 stages so they can strike from them, so they need to ban (pretend there's no counterpick stages) either Pokemon Stadium or Brinstar. Now we get the Top 5 players of this game to decide which to ban. If 3 or more of the Top Players play Jigglypuff, Pokemon Stadium will get banned because they want to win more since winning = money. If 3 or more of the Top Players play Fox, Brinstar is going to be banned. The players will do whatever is in their own self interest because it benefits them.

Sorry, but can you show me any precedence of this?

tbh it seems like you're just... putting top players on blast for stuff they haven't done, or at least haven't done to my knowledge.

Also btw with the current Melee ruleset, Pokemon Stadium got CP status as they had 6 stages fine for starters (the six legal rn, FD, FoD, Yoshi's, BF, DL64, PS1) but needed to cut it down to 5 for striking. They made PS1 the CP as it is the most random of them all.

 

[wildvine47]

top players

Top players, top TO's, and top voices ... top voices.

top tier TO.

You really want to pull the whole "top _____s" thing again after your last outburst with it? Because it worked out for you so well then, huh.

Look, you have an opinion on what we should do about stages. Wow great! You know what your opinion on stages isn't? The be-all end-all.

If you read through the rest of this thread, people are thrilled that we have SO MANY potentially competitively good stages in this game compared to past titles where there was about three or four stages you'd really ever see used in a tournament. Now we've easily got 10+ stages that can absolutely work, and you barge in and go "nah you're all wrong idiots do the TOP PLAYERS thing just use old ones we know are good lolz kbye".

You claim to be doing this for the good of the community but what you're saying we do is literally holding the community back. "NO DON'T TEST OLD STAGES LIKE NORFAIR AGAIN EVEN THOUGH THE ONLY REASON IT WAS ACTUALLY BANNED WAS COMPLETELY REMOVED." "NO DON'T USE PERFECTLY FINE STAGES LIKE DUCK HUNT BECAUSE TOP PLAYERS HAVEN'T TESTED IT."

Look buddy we get it. You're hella conservative on stages and that's fine. But keep the rampant elitism and vitriol out of here, because before you brought your whole "top members" shtick in here and decided that in your infinite wisdom you'd decide for everyone else, we were all discussing this stuff pretty civilly. You alone aren't the community pal, and neither are your top whatevers. The community is the community, and if we unanimously want a stage list of 30+ stages and decide that Great Cave Offensive is the best stage to ever grace the Smash competitive scene, then you and your top player posse won't be able to do a thing about the tournaments we'll run on that set.

 

[Big-Cat]

If you read through the rest of this thread, people are thrilled that we have SO MANY potentially competitively good stages in this game compared to past titles where there was about three or four stages you'd really ever see used in a tournament. Now we've easily got 10+ stages that can absolutely work, and you barge in and go "nah you're all wrong idiots do the TOP PLAYERS thing just use old ones we know are good lolz kbye".

Key word being "potentially".

 

[LiteralGrill]

Without proof, why should I believe you?

Since I wont break a promise I have made to someone, I will say use logic. Top players want to play to win. Why would they want to keep anything on that makes it harder for them to get money? If you want, go ahead and dig into old Brawl threads, you can actually see such things happening and players even being somewhat open about it. It's a bit depressing.

Someone here in this conversation needs to grow a pair and not pretend to be someone else's brother or slander top players' reputation, and let me tell you, that person isn't me.

Top players, top TO's, and top voices in the community like D1 and Prog and Scar and Jugglyguy and PPMD are top voices for a reason. They helped achieve growth, push growth, and make growth, and they will continue to do so. To act like you're better or smarter than them when you have no real experience is quite simply foolish.

Tell that to Jugglyguy, the most efficient TO in Smash. He's run a 600+ and 300+ entrant Melee/Project M event and finished EARLY when both games had loads of long, epic, incredible sets. He claims smaller stage lists = faster times.

No offense, but I'll take the opinion of the proven top tier TO over you any day of the week.

How about pure evidence? You would blindly follow a top TO over someone who can point and say: "See all these stages that are legal? They have caused no problems. I can show you brackets, time events have taken, the whole works." People who are banning things before they are even tested are doing something WRONG. If Jugglyguy will show me proof that smaller stagelists are actually what is making the game go faster I may consider it. But even then, banning something that should be legal is WRONG in every base of logic. What excuse is that there to ban something perfectly legal? It takes a few more minutes? Let's run 1 stock because of how much faster it is even though having more stocks is superior if we're making our rules based on time now.

No one ever has the balls to actually criticize top players or TOs or question motives because doing so is "smash political suicide" and it's becoming silly. People need to start using their head and testing these things out themselves instead of just blindly following. Guess what, not everyone was around since Melee, it's not possible for everyone to have TOed and been with smash for loads of years. That doesn't invalidate your thoughts especially when you have evidence and proof things are working. It's a big problem when people are put up on a pedestal and no one actually tries to think for themselves and people wont listen to you unless you happened to be at the right place at the right time years ago.

But let's take a look at this comment:

Key word being "potentially".

We'll never know if everyone just bans them because they either don't like them or don't feel like using them. This may be harsh, but I will straight out call people scrubs when they act like scrubs.

I don't WANT to legalize many of the stages I'm testing Wednesday. I don't LIKE some of them, I don't LIKE playing on some of them but that has NOTHING to do with what the rules should be. I will test everything and have evidence for each stage even the wackiest so when people ask I have an actual answer. If others aren't going to do so they're being negligent and they need to step their games up to match this TO that @ Johnknight1 says isn't worth listening to.

P.S. Any top player or TO who sees this get in here and actually defend yourself. Why in the world do none of you actually come in and discuss things to enlighten us with you opinions? Hiding away from the world and never commenting on anything in hopes no one will ever come bug you doesn't fly. Why not participate in the discussion so we can all learn from each other?

 

[Piford]

Sorry, but can you show me any precedence of this?

tbh it seems like you're just... putting top players on blast for stuff they haven't done, or at least haven't done to my knowledge.

Also btw with the current Melee ruleset, Pokemon Stadium got CP status as they had 6 stages fine for starters (the six legal rn, FD, FoD, Yoshi's, BF, DL64, PS1) but needed to cut it down to 5 for striking. They made PS1 the CP as it is the most random of them all.

The precedent for that example is Game Theory. Like I explained, it's very similar to the tragedy of the commons. Also, I know the Melee ruleset, which is why I stated that there were no counterpicks in my example. Also I'm pretty sure PS is a counterpick because it's Fox's best stage. Top players could do whats in the best interest for the community, and I would be thrilled to think they would. But most likely, Top Players would do what best benefits them, because why wouldn't you wanna make your job easier? As another example, if I payed you $50 to clean up litter from a park, but payed you $50 regardless of if you cleaned up 1/4 of it or the entire thing, what would you do? I would guess that you would clean up the 1/4 and take your $50 even though cleaning up the entire park would be better for everyone.

 

[KlefkiHolder]

The precedent for that example is Game Theory. Like I explained, it's very similar to the tragedy of the commons. Also, I know the Melee ruleset, which is why I stated that there were no counterpicks in my example. Also I'm pretty sure PS is a counterpick because it's Fox's best stage. Top players could do whats in the best interest for the community, and I would be thrilled to think they would. But most likely, Top Players would do what best benefits them, because why wouldn't you wanna make your job easier? As another example. If I payed you $50 to clean up litter from a park, but payed you $50 regardless of if you cleaned up 1/4 of it or the entire thing, what would you do? I would guess that you would clean up the 1/4 and take your $50 even though cleaning up the entire park would be better for everyone.

now i gotta find that post about stadium as a cp lol...

Found these two (1) (2)

Anyways, the notion that we should automatically disregard top players because they're doing stuff for themselves bothers me. I don't think we should religiously follow what they say, but I also don't think we should expect them to be selfish either.

 

[Piford]

now i gotta find that post about stadium as a cp lol...

Found these two (1) (2)

Anyways, the notion that we should automatically disregard top players because they're doing stuff for themselves bothers me. I don't think we should religiously follow what they say, but I also don't think we should expect them to be selfish either.

Oh I understand why we needed to make PS a counterpick, I was referring to how PS was a counterpick over Final Destination, despite the latter being a much more polarizing stage. Of course we shouldn't disregard the top players opinions, but when some of them say "I don't like Duck Hunt; we should ban it," we really can't take it seriously as that really means nothing. We should be looking for objective reasons to ban stages, not going off what people say regardless of the status of the players.

 

[LiteralGrill]

now i gotta find that post about stadium as a cp lol...

Found these two (1) (2)

Anyways, the notion that we should automatically disregard top players because they're doing stuff for themselves bothers me. I don't think we should religiously follow what they say, but I also don't think we should expect them to be selfish either.

We shouldn't disregard everything they do as just helping themselves, but you want to know what would severely help out with that? Them actually discussing things with the general populace. Them actually telling us why they think the way the do. Posting explanations as to why they make decisions they make that are well thought out, and responding to them once said questions are asked.

I've been stalking the tournament boards and trying to engage TOs in open discussions to try and understand why they are making decisions they are on certain stages and sometimes it really has turned out to be they just didn't know about a stage or understand how it worked. Sometimes they have thoughts and they stick to them too and I admire that, but at least they are presenting evidence to me. Doing this has gotten me into friendly discussions with a few TOs now and honestly it's been great getting perspectives from people. I think it's helping me grow on my ideas as well.

 

[KlefkiHolder]

Oh I understand why we needed to make PS a counterpick, I was referring to how PS was a counterpick over Final Destination, despite the latter being a much more polarizing stage. Of course we shouldn't disregard the top players opinions, but when some of them say "I don't like Duck Hunt; we should ban it," we really can't take it seriously as that really means nothing. We should be looking for objective reasons to ban stages, not going off what people say regardless of the status of the players.

Ah, yeah. I also forgot to mention that Spacie Dominance on PS doesn't help it, but its not the main reason .

Everything else, I agree. It might be worth noting that I wasn't necessarily referring to stages only in the top player comment. I just feel uncomfortable saying that top players will choose themselves over others when given the chance. I don't think you mean that, just sorta throwing my opinion out.

We shouldn't disregard everything they do as just helping themselves, but you want to know what would severely help out with that? Them actually discussing things with the general populace. Them actually telling us why they think the way the do. Posting explanations as to why they make decisions they make that are well thought out, and responding to them once said questions are asked.

I've been stalking the tournament boards and trying to engage TOs in open discussions to try and understand why they are making decisions they are on certain stages and sometimes it really has turned out to be they just didn't know about a stage or understand how it worked. Sometimes they have thoughts and they stick to them too and I admire that, but at least they are presenting evidence to me.

First paragraph: But they do? While they may not post on the boards, they talk a lot on streams, twitter, tournaments, etc. They tell us what they think and why, just not on the boards (which tbh isn't all that important in the end. No one should really care what an inexperienced random like me has to say. I know that invalidates everything I have said, but I'm just trying to be real here).

Second paragraph: interesting, and I agree with what you have to say. TOs should be testing things and relaying that info to other TOs, but also not be rash and uneducated on their decisions.

 

[LiteralGrill]

First paragraph: But they do? While they may not post on the boards, they talk a lot on streams, twitter, tournaments, etc. They tell us what they think and why, just not on the boards (which tbh isn't all that important in the end. No one should really care what an inexperienced random like me has to say. I know that invalidates everything I have said, but I'm just trying to be real here).

But when they says things on titch, twitter, etc that leaves almost no way for us to respond. That pretty much leaves us in the position of just listening. If they came on the boards we could have a real back and forth which would help a lot.

Second paragraph: interesting, and I agree with what you have to say. TOs should be testing things and relaying that info to other TOs, but also not be rash and uneducated on their decisions.

Thank you

 

[KlefkiHolder]

But when they says things on titch, twitter, etc that leaves almost no way for us to respond. That pretty much leaves us in the position of just listening. If they came on the boards we could have a real back and forth which would help a lot.



Thank you

Well, on Twitter, we can respond, but yeah, you're right, it can get washed down.

It would certainly be better if they did post on the boards (some do. I've seen Nakat and Nairo on multiple occasions drop by the impressions thread), however.

 

[ParanoidDrone]

Well, on Twitter, we can respond, but yeah, you're right, it can get washed down.

It would certainly be better if they did post on the boards (some do. I've seen Nakat and Nairo on multiple occasions drop by the impressions thread), however.

It's actually kind of weird that they seem to be the exception. Is there a reason I haven't seen a lot of well-known players in this subforum? You'd think they would have oodles to say.

 

[KlefkiHolder]

It's actually kind of weird that they seem to be the exception. Is there a reason I haven't seen a lot of well-known players in this subforum? You'd think they would have oodles to say.

As far as I know (and don't quote me on this), a lot of them don't frequent the boards, or at least these parts.

Also some like Zero and JTails have Youtube/Twitch channels w/active comment/chat sections that they use to get their opinions across. Nakat does have a rather active stream tho, idk about Nairo.