Stage Information Database and Q&A

[Grim Tuesday]

That's arguable.

Say that MK was proven ban-worthy. Would you suggest that we ban MK, even if not a single other area in the world has?

 

[Ghostbone]

Yea basically

Pretty much everyone here mains/seconds MK, it really hurts character diversity but we keep him legal as we would be worse compared to other states if we banned him.

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

Okay seriously.

http://www.smashboards.com/showpost.php?p=12482536&postcount=170

Seriously. I'm going to ***** and moan bitterly about stage discussion not being moved into competitive brawl, and I'm going to recommend any other stage discussion regulars do the same. It makes us seem like we're a marginalized, non-competitive group, as opposed to, say, the crux of stage data, guides, and philosophy (which is, believe it or not, fairly important when designing a ruleset, especially when pretty much the only things that change from ruleset to ruleset are stagelist-related!).

 

[WindMajor]

Stage Discussion is fine under Brawl In-Depth. It makes more sense that we're here than under Competitive, even if we share qualities from both sub forums. If it's that big of a deal though, just subscribe to the forum for the mean time.

 

[T-block]

For once I'm on BPC's side =D

I think Competitive is a better place for this board..

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

Stage Discussion is fine under Brawl In-Depth. It makes more sense that we're here than under Competitive, even if we share qualities from both sub forums. If it's that big of a deal though, just subscribe to the forum for the mean time.

Bull****.

Look, Brawl In-Depth has this... thing to it. It seems to imply the things that are completely unrelated with competitive gameplay. The things that only a casual or a completionist or a freak would care about. I mean for ****'s sake, look at what we're grouped with! Wifi and One-Player mode! We're placed on a similar level of importance to random wifi bull**** and the goddamn Subspace Emissary.

Let me outline the most important part of the above. It seems to imply that we are completely unrelated with competitive gameplay. THIS IS NOT THE CASE!!!

 

[WindMajor]

Oh c'mon, just because it isn't in the Competitive Discussion forum, doesn't mean that we have absolutely nothing to do with competitive play. Just look at the Character Boards, Wi-Fi discussion (saying that it's not competitive is foolish), or hey, the Brawl Backroom if you don't already see my point.

I already acknowledged that Stage Discussion shares qualities that belong in both sub-forums, and because of this, I said that it's fine that it's here (seeing as it's not alien to the current location it's placed in), while indirectly hinting that it's also fine there. I also said that it makes more sense for it to be here because if you were to divide the Stage Discussion into sections, it would look like this:

1. Stage Analysis/Guides
2. Stage/Stage List related rules
3. Stage Builder/Custom Stages

If we were to put the Stage Discussion forums in the Competitive Subforum, discussions about Stage Analysis/Guides and Stage Builder/Custom Stages would feel out of place, rather than just listing it under "Brawl In-Depth", which is vague enough to loop all three of them in.

As for what sub-forums we're next to, who cares. It's about what we're labeled as that's important.

And I already said this before, but if you don't like the change, then you can just subscribe to the forum and forget all about it for the mean time.

 

[T-block]

Stage Analysis certainly does belong in Competitive... the data and commentary provided are all geared towards the competitive player.

 

[WindMajor]

Well mostly everything in the Brawl forums is geared toward the competitive player (the only exception I can think of off the top of my mind is 1 Player modes, but even then, that's competitive in itself. It's just a different competitive scene we're talking about), which is pretty much my point. Just because it can be applied for competitive discussion, doesn't mean that it should automatically be listed under the Competitive Brawl sub-forum.

Perhaps the phrase "out of place" was a bad choice of words on my part. You can consider Stage Research/Analysis/Guides to be geared for the competitive player, but I still think that it fits more under "In-Depth" Brawl than "Competitive" Brawl.

And regardless, I'm indifferent of which room it actually ends up in, since I'm subscribed to the forum. Where it moves to won't majorly affect me.

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

Oh c'mon, just because it isn't in the Competitive Discussion forum, doesn't mean that we have absolutely nothing to do with competitive play. Just look at the Character Boards, Wi-Fi discussion (saying that it's not competitive is foolish), or hey, the Brawl Backroom if you don't already see my point.

Wi-Fi discussion is worth something? I have never visited that forum. Why? Because wifi is not that great, and most "wifi tournaments" are kinda crappy. There's just nothing useful there for a competitive player that they couldn't get better from the AiB ladder. The Brawl Backroom implies competitiveness. Stick it in as a subforum of the disco room and all of a sudden it seems a little silly.

I already acknowledged that Stage Discussion shares qualities that belong in both sub-forums, and because of this, I said that it's fine that it's here (seeing as it's not alien to the current location it's placed in), while indirectly hinting that it's also fine there. I also said that it makes more sense for it to be here because if you were to divide the Stage Discussion into sections, it would look like this:

1. Stage Analysis/Guides
2. Stage/Stage List related rules
3. Stage Builder/Custom Stages

If we were to put the Stage Discussion forums in the Competitive Subforum, discussions about Stage Analysis/Guides and Stage Builder/Custom Stages would feel out of place, rather than just listing it under "Brawl In-Depth", which is vague enough to loop all three of them in.

Uh... Stage Builder would go under 1-player; Stage rules... well, look at this:

Metagame and Ruleset discussion

As for what sub-forums we're next to, who cares. It's about what we're labeled as that's important.

Yes, but we're a forum which is, well, fairly fluid in meaning. Stage discussion can range from "This is exactly how Halberd decides who to aim at" (someone plz do this?) to "CHECK OUT MY AWESOME NEW TEMPLE REPLICA I MADE IN STAGE BUILDER IT'S SO COOLZ!!!1". Placing us with forums that seem to indicate the latter implies the latter. Placing us with forums that imply the forum implies the former. Getting my point? If our label was "Competitive Stage Data/Ruleset discussion", then you'd be 100% right: it wouldn't matter where we are.

...Except it does. Imagine a player does not know where we are in the first place. We no longer show up on the front of the forum listing. If you are looking from FORUMHOME (the main page of the forum), we're not there. If you are looking from the Brawl category, we are at the very bottom, where most people will just TL;DR and find their favorite forum. Hell, unless you either know where to look (not likely if you're new) or visit Wifi or One-Player forums regularly (), you may never have to see us again. Think about that for a moment. We've been implied as noncompetitive, shoved where nobody has to see us, and determined "unwanted". This doesn't piss you off? They might as well stack 50 subforums in each other and put stage discussion at the end, for how accessible we are.

And then there are people like Grim Tuesday and you who seem like they are actively trying to discredit us. Yeah, that's what I'd call advocating Mario Bros's legality for 30 pages. Never mind that it's essentially mental masturbation because if any tournament ever legalizes that stage, it will get around 5 serious entrants because people would just say, "Yeah, this TO has lost it". Making a thread saying "post your stagelists with no discussion" and then posting monstrosities with stages like Skyworld and Summit (refer to Mario Bros example). That's called "begging for ad hominem generalizations" and it throws an outright terrible light on sane people who will argue on stagelists like me, RR, and T-Block and makes us look like "just another one of those noobs with no idea what they're talking about" or worse, "just another one of those loonies".

 

[WindMajor]

I feel like I already explained most of this, but I'll go at it again.

Wi-Fi discussion is worth something? I have never visited that forum. Why? Because wifi is not that great, and most "wifi tournaments" are kinda crappy. There's just nothing useful there for a competitive player that they couldn't get better from the AiB ladder. The Brawl Backroom implies competitiveness. Stick it in as a subforum of the disco room and all of a sudden it seems a little silly.

Wi-Fi is worth something, because it has it's own forum. Even though AiB handles Wi-Fi better, SWF still handles Wi-Fi, so it's imporant. Wi-Fi, as horrible as it is, is competitive (as in people actually compete over Wi-Fi), and thus, if you wanted to, you could label it under Competitive Brawl.

The BBR forum implies competitiveness or can be useful to competitive players, but is it in the Competitive Brawl forum?

Replace "BBR" with character discussion, stage discussion, and video discussion. Do you see my point?

Just because we aren't under that forum, doesn't mean that we aren't competitive. Practically everything under the Super Smash Bros. Brawl forum screams "useful to the competitive player". Not being in the Competitive Brawl Discussion forum won't change that fact.

Uh... Stage Builder would go under 1-player; Stage rules... well, look at this:

Metagame and Data Ruleset

As for what sub-forums we're next to, who cares. It's about what we're labeled as that's important.

Yes, but we're a forum which is, well, fairly fluid in meaning. Stage discussion can range from "This is exactly how Halberd decides who to aim at" (someone plz do this?) to "CHECK OUT MY AWESOME NEW TEMPLE REPLICA I MADE IN STAGE BUILDER IT'S SO COOLZ!!!1". Placing us with forums that seem to indicate the latter implies the latter. Placing us with forums that imply the forum implies the former. Getting my point? If our label was "Competitive Stage Data/Ruleset discussion", then you'd be 100% right: it wouldn't matter where we are.

In short, what I got from this was:
-Brawl Stage Discussion has a lot of variety in terms of discussion.
-Dividing Brawl Stage Discussion is an alternative.

I'm gonna tackle the first one first, and just say that I'm not gonna discuss that now. That's a completely different subject, we'll do it later. For now, assume that Brawl Stage Discussion will stay together, and don't worry about dividing it and putting it in different places.

Now, the first point I wrote is true. BSD has a lot of variety, however, if we're gonna keep all the discussion in one place, Brawl In-Depth nets them all fairly well, IMO better than Competitive Brawl. I already explained my reasons, and I already covered how we're not "uncompetitive" by being a part of the Brawl In-Depth forum.

And then there are people like Grim Tuesday and you who seem like they are actively trying to discredit us. Yeah, that's what I'd call advocating Mario Bros's legality for 30 pages. Never mind that it's essentially mental masturbation because if any tournament ever legalizes that stage, it will get around 5 serious entrants because people would just say, "Yeah, this TO has lost it". Making a thread saying "post your stagelists with no discussion" and then posting monstrosities with stages like Skyworld and Summit (refer to Mario Bros example). That's called "begging for ad hominem generalizations" and it throws an outright terrible light on sane people who will argue on stagelists like me, RR, and T-Block and makes us look like "just another one of those noobs with no idea what they're talking about" or worse, "just another one of those loonies".

Irrelevant. We are all entitled to our opinions, aka we all have our own image to worry about.

 

[Ghostbone]

Twinkie the main problem is that stage discussion has been put in the same section as 1-player and Wi-fi, where basically no competitive players venture, and some would probably even scoff at.

Putting stage discussion in that section implies that it's not important and has no relevance to the competitive player.

Oh and BPC the reason stages like Mario Bros. are brought up is because discussing other stages over and over again gets boring and nothing new is generally brought up, though I can see your point about ruining the image of stage debaters.
Though do you really think someone that will use that against you (when you were against it the whole time) is going to listen to your arguments anyway? People like that are close minded and won't pay any attention to you in the first place.

 

[ぱみゅ]

Though do you really think someone that will use that against you (when you were against it the whole time) is going to listen to your arguments anyway? People like that are close minded and won't pay any attention to you in the first place.

Are you asking that to the guy that a while ago was chased down and diminished for being 3-stocked by a Lucas.
Some people DO care who you come from.....

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

Twinkie the main problem is that stage discussion has been put in the same section as 1-player and Wi-fi, where basically no competitive players venture, and some would probably even scoff at.

Putting stage discussion in that section implies that it's not important and has no relevance to the competitive player.

DINGDINGDING!!! WE HAVE A WINNER!!!

Oh and BPC the reason stages like Mario Bros. are brought up is because discussing other stages over and over again gets boring and nothing new is generally brought up, though I can see your point about ruining the image of stage debaters.
Though do you really think someone that will use that against you (when you were against it the whole time) is going to listen to your arguments anyway? People like that are close minded and won't pay any attention to you in the first place.

Refer to Kyokoro's post. When it comes to discussing "opinions" on the stagelist, even if it's solid logic and not subjective, then most people here are vindictive douchebags when it comes to your past. Yes, I was mocked on the MK boards because I lost badly to Ravenlord's lucas. My posting habits in the MK ban debate have impacted how seriously people take me anywhere else, and it seems like it doesn't matter how right I am, how much I weaken the argument (I'm tentatively suggesting 7 starters or 2 stage bans and RC/Brinstar to german TOs–**** PTAD and Green Greens, I just want 7 starters or to be able to ban FD and BF against falco >.>) people are willing to ignore me and call my logic "subjective". This community is vindictive, and when a thread that seems to seriously discuss mario bros comes around, people point to it and laugh, saying "oh you crazy stage discussion nerds, you have no idea what you're even talking about".

 

[ぱみゅ]

Which is actually the most ******** commena anyone could ever say to stage debaters. Sad part is that most people thinks like that....
We all know our stuff when talking about stages, we all know how they works and why are they banned/allowed with reasoning behind them. But most people thinks that stagelists are about "Let's put this here and ban this because I don't like it. Problem? I'm the TO, deal with it" or "whatever you put in is fine, I'm picking SV anyways", and that's pretty much why Stage Boards are so low in Forum Priorities.

 

[WindMajor]

@Ghostbone I feel like I already covered that somewhere in my posts. It's there somewhere, although perhaps not directly worded out for everyone to see.

Either way, it has already been brought up to the staff, so it'll get addressed eventually.

 

[Ghostbone]

We all know our stuff when talking about stages, we all know how they works and why are they banned/allowed with reasoning behind them. But most people thinks that stagelists are about "Let's put this here and ban this because I don't like it. Problem? I'm the TO, deal with it" or "whatever you put in is fine, I'm picking SV anyways", and that's pretty much why Stage Boards are so low in Forum Priorities.

Pretty much this.

 

[Grim Tuesday]

People don't take you seriously anyway BPC, they don't take any of us seriously, that thread is not a viable scapegoat for our failure

 

[Life]

DINGDINGDING!!! WE HAVE A WINNER!!!



Refer to Kyokoro's post. When it comes to discussing "opinions" on the stagelist, even if it's solid logic and not subjective, then most people here are vindictive douchebags when it comes to your past. Yes, I was mocked on the MK boards because I lost badly to Ravenlord's lucas. My posting habits in the MK ban debate have impacted how seriously people take me anywhere else, and it seems like it doesn't matter how right I am, how much I weaken the argument (I'm tentatively suggesting 7 starters or 2 stage bans and RC/Brinstar to german TOs–**** PTAD and Green Greens, I just want 7 starters or to be able to ban FD and BF against falco >.>) people are willing to ignore me and call my logic "subjective". This community is vindictive, and when a thread that seems to seriously discuss mario bros comes around, people point to it and laugh, saying "oh you crazy stage discussion nerds, you have no idea what you're even talking about".

**** PTAD and Green Greens

Says the noob that got threestocked by a Lucas.



So, uh..... Compromise and have Stage discussion neither under In-Depth or Competitive?

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

Where then?

 

[Grim Tuesday]

It should have it's own site.

www.ssbbstagediscussion.com/

 

[sunshade]

BPC you shouldn't say anything about posts or threads discrediting stage debaters. I remember when you first started posting on these boards; your posts consisted of the words "your a scrub" and salt. I felt that you were giving stage debaters a bad name but asking you to stop posting wouldn't have solved anything. So what if we have 30 pages of mario bros, nobody reads this board anyways and adding stage discussion to the competitive tab wouldn't change that.

Grim, I clicked that link in hopes of it actually taking me to a site. I was disappointed.

 

[Grim Tuesday]

To tell you the truth sunshade, so did I.

Oh, and the more I play on Mario Bros., the more I'm convinced that it's a legit stage. I think it's because I'm getting good at placing the hazards, spacing around them and re-acting to the opponent's use of them, so I can focus more on actual combat rather than just "lolrunawaythrowhazard".

 

[sunshade]

You saying that makes me wish I still owned a wii so I could play on the stage a bit. I wrote off mario bros at first due to the circle in the center that I saw, and I did the same with 75m. If mario bros is potentially legit then I want try testing out 75m (which I wrote off for essentially the same reason) to see if it is legit as well.

 

[Grim Tuesday]

75m is not legit. It doesn't have a circle, it just gives the faster player too many options to run-away. Just like Rumble Falls and Big Blue.

The circle is DEFINITELY not a viable option on Mario Bros. Basically, if you can circle around the platform while avoiding 4 Pink side-steppers and your opponent (who, depending on the character, can shark through the platforms), you deserve to time your opponent out. I don't even think it is humanly possible.

 

[Ghostbone]

75m Has walk-off camping.

And like super broken walk-off camping too

 

[Grim Tuesday]

Oh yeah, that too. xD

 

[Ghostbone]

Remember Grim that on Mario Bros. z-dropping an item right below a platform will hit the opponent if they're standing on that platform also

 

[Grim Tuesday]

Yeah, that's true.

What would I do without you, Toasty?

 

[Ghostbone]

lol Toast

I should enter tournaments under that.
Or Luigiplayer69 or something

 

[sunshade]

I am not even convinced walk-off camping is broken and I figured it would be super powerful run away damning the stage.

Toast?

 

[Grim Tuesday]

Toast rhymes with Ghost, don't question my logic.

And I think I could convince you that walk-off camping is broken, Sunshade

 

[Ghostbone]

Toast rhymes with Ghost
lolololol

/live topic ninja'd

Edit: Even if Walk-off camping isn't broken on other stages having a platform directly above you preventing anyone from attacking you except in a very linear fashion makes it very broken

 

[Grim Tuesday]

I don't think walk-off camping is broken personally.

I think that King Dedede standing next to a walk-off, power-shielding projectiles, spot-dodging anything that he predicts and Shield SDI'ing > Shield Grab is, however.

 

[sunshade]

Ehh, I will have to mess around with it a bit more myself. Perfectly spaced retreating aerials has in my experience check mated walk off camping the majority of the time. MvC3 however has been eating most of my game time lately so me actually trying out things in brawl seems improbable.

 

[Grim Tuesday]

Perfectly spacing aerials against a camper's shield doesn't do anything to stop the camper, it just resets positions. Sure it prevents you from losing a stock at 0%, but the camper still has the lead, so who cares?

Not to mention that the chance of you messing up is much greater than that of the camper messing up.

 

[sunshade]

Funny you say that, because I always felt like it was easier for the walk of camper to mess up than the campie.

 

[Grim Tuesday]

Like I said, that is probably the case for every character except, like, King Dedede and Olimar.

 

[sunshade]

I don't see King Dedede or Olimars landing grabs after shielding a perfectly spaced aerial on regular stages, so I don't see why the walk off being there would change that. Walk-off camping at its most fundamental level is an execution test that player in the lead can choose to force on his opponent but this test does not feel unpassable even at its worst. Agree to disagree I suppose. If only walk-off camping got actual testing prior to its ban.

 

[Grim Tuesday]

Watch a match of an Olimar or King Dedede player and compare the number of times they landed a grab with the number of times they got punished for attempting a grab, you should find your answer.