Stage Information Database and Q&A

[Ghostbone]

You can throw a banana or two first, then if they try to grab them fair, or just jump and instant throw them if they don't try to grab them or something.

 

[Grim Tuesday]

Are you seriously arguing that walk-off camping isn't over-powered o_O

 

[Ghostbone]

Well it's not in every match-up.

But still extremely strong yes, so much so that it's basically always the best option.
And it heavily marginalizes skill.

 

[Grim Tuesday]

Then why on Earth are we arguing xD

 

[Ghostbone]

Because you asked what diddy could do against it.

 

[Grim Tuesday]

...

****.

 

[sunshade]

I think its worth taking note of what kill options a person walk off camping has because it shows just how risky it is for the camper. The walk off camper is making it more than just high risk/high reward, he is making it "do or die no matter what, you have one option to kill people, they have many, dont **** up".

Walk off camper's kill moves
-Back throw

Walk off campie's kill moves
-all moves used for pokes
-forward throw and down throw in most cases
-projectiles with decent knock back

In terms of non serious discussion,I am surprised I am so high on that tier list despite my infrequent posting.

Sunshade:
Name: Jacob Jochum
Location: Washington DC
Stance: Liberal
Tier: meh
Mains: Meta Knight
Secondaries: Falco, Pit
Favourite Stage: Smashville, Delfino plaza, Distant planet
Other: I cant think of anything note worthy to put here that would not just be bragging :/

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

It's a little like AA... You don't post often (enough), but when you do, it's pure genius.

 

[Life]

/bandwagon
(I'm expanding it slightly, because I can)

InferiorityComplex
Name: Incom
Location: western PA
Stance: Open-list (~=liberal) w/ 2-3 stage bans; hybrid CP system; dislike BRC
Tier: Lazy
Mains: Sonic/Marth
Secondaries: Diddy (surprised?... me too), TL, Olimar, MK, possibly others I can't think of
Favorite Stages: Norfair, DP for uncommonly used stages; Delfino, CS among more-common stages
Least Favorite Stages: Brinstar, Halberd. They're balanced enough for tournament play, I just dislike them.
Other: My tag is because I suck, not because I have a problem.
Debating Style: answer an opponent's entire argument at first, then pare the whole thing down to one major weakness. Unless I'm playing Mafia, in which case I go for information overload as a form of self-defense.

 

[WindMajor]

OP is updated with profiles and like 2 questions lol.

 

[-LzR-]

Do I fit in? Should I add those weird things too? :S

 

[WindMajor]

Um yes.

Do eet

 

[-LzR-]

All right will do tomorrow lol

 

[ぱみゅ]

lol@OP, not even a single self-called conservative has posted yet.

 

[WindMajor]

Only the liberals come here to try to prove a point.

And ADHD.

 

[sunshade]

I am liberal assuming that we are using a counterpick system other than that which is suggested by the Brawl Back Room. If we are using the BBR model, I personally will take advantage of the fact that the standard of "don't ban it unless its broken" does not specify how good is broken.

Moral of the story, use full legal stage list striking for the first round and make it so the counter pick list is the 7 stages which were banned last.

 

[Grim Tuesday]

Any particular reasoning for the number 7?

Would 9 screw any match-ups over?

 

[sunshade]

Probably not but 7 is a lucky number and it allows both players to move 3 stages along the spectrum away from the medium of bias.

It would probably be best as a choice made by TOs to tweek the amount of strength counterpicking has.

 

[WindMajor]

I prefer having the Full Stage Striking at the 3rd game of the set actually. That way, both players get their counterpick, and if the set is 1-1, we have a neutral tie-breaker.

 

[Grim Tuesday]

The problem with that Twinkie is momentum. Whoever randomly gets their counter-pick first is more likely to win the first game and thus get a psychological lead. Apart from that, I like the idea.

 

[WindMajor]

Doesn't that apply with our current system, and every other system that a player can get a first win in?

 

[sunshade]

Thats true but earning the psychological advantage from a neutral environment is much more fair than earning a psychological advantage from a bias environment.

 

[Grim Tuesday]

Yeah, what Sunshade said.

 

[#HBC | Red Ryu]

Well, if you really think about it conservatives, as people call them, are pretty content with the current stage lists set up, granted there are people who want Picto, Cruise, Brinstar, etc. gone.

The current unified list was A-OK for me, except it was missing one stage I thought should be legal. But I'm not in that group, nor do I support the tier 3 stages on the old rule set v3.1 either.

The problem with that Twinkie is momentum. Whoever randomly gets their counter-pick first is more likely to win the first game and thus get a psychological lead. Apart from that, I like the idea.

Or people could learn to handle pressure and not let it affect them.

Also they won game 1, therefore they earned it. That's how I see it really.

 

[WindMajor]

Thats true but earning the psychological advantage from a neutral environment is much more fair than earning a psychological advantage from a bias environment.

At the risk of having a lop-sided tie breaker? There's going to be a psycological advantage either way, since in our normal counterpick, you have to win in TWO matches, and one of those matches has to be won in your opponent's counterpick. With the stage striking last, even though you lost your first game on their counterpick, you can at least depend on your own counterpick and a neutral tie breaker to win the set. For the other player, all he needs is one more win, and even if he can't get it on the opponent's counterpick, he at least still has the neutral stage.

Edit: Also, what Red Ryu said.

 

[Grim Tuesday]

Fair enough, I've changed my mind then. I support Twinkie's idea.

EDIT: Changed my mind again.

@Ryu
Why should we choose the option where players have to handle biased pressure rather than the one with-out?

And they didn't earn it by winning game 1 if it was on their counter-pick. They just got lucky.

@Twinkie
With a normal counter-pick, the psychological advantage is present but it is won on the neutral, which is much better than winning psychological advantage on a biased stage.

 

[sunshade]

If we choose to have counterpicking I have no preference one way or the other. They both are equally valid options. Personally I think we should play on the medium of bias for every match-up and characters should be counterpicked not stages. Counterpicking however does add depth and I see the legitimacy and reasons to have it.

Overall once you get to a point in which your opinion are logical I dont really care which opinion prevails.

 

[-LzR-]

Winning game 1 should be in theory enough to win the set, we just let the other player to try again with an advantage to allow for more consistent results.

Oh and we in Finland have some funny stuff like PS2 as a starter and we use a 9 starter system. We also have stages like Green Greens, Japes and Norfair legal.

So far, only Norfair has felt a little too much for me. As my method is test until you get negative results.

Anyways that's how it should be done instead of totally ignoring stages here.

 

[#HBC | Red Ryu]

Actually we don't let game 1 end a set because sometimes people can make mistakes so we do 2/3 to see the better player wins with consistency, we do 2/3 for time reasons.

 

[-LzR-]

Yeah but I think game 1 should decided the winner in practice, but still allow comebacks why counterpicking exists.

 

[Grim Tuesday]

What are people's opinions on character counter-picking? How should it be handled?

 

[#HBC | Red Ryu]

I say just leave it alone, if they play a character that has a 3:7 or can't handle character or stage combination's, sucks for them.

Only case I say do something about it is if it is a problem that is more universal for the cast to a larger extent.

 

[Grim Tuesday]

Leave it alone as in:
a) Have no character counter-picking
or
b) Have character counter-picking the same way we do now
?

 

[Tesh]

No character counterpicking could potential suck hard for people though. Aside from it being boring you have to consider what happens if there is a double blind pick and you wind up in a horrible matchup. Are you not allowed to switch then?

What if your opponent knows you main Ness and he starts the set with his pocket Marth?

 

[Grim Tuesday]

Yeah, the problem I see is in a hypothetical situation like this:

Player A mains DK and Fox.
Player B mains Ice Climbers and King Dedede.

A's DK > B's Ice Climbers
A's Fox > B's King Dedede

Now both of these players know each other very well, and with so few variables it might as well be random who they pick for the first game (equivalent to Bo1 RPS).

With our current system, one player would get punished for their choice (unavoidable, unfortunately ), but with no character counter-picking the set would be pretty much un-winnable.

 

[sunshade]

You could use double character double blind picks. Both players pick a main and a secondary character. You reveal the mains to each other and you continue to keep the secondary hidden. You then both double blind if you will be going with your main or your unrevealed character.

Basically you would need two pieces of paper. On the first you would write your main and secondary. You reveal the mains, you then write if you want to stay with your main or switch to a secondary on the other piece of paper. Both players then reveal if they will be using their main or secondary.

If this is stupid forgive my 2am ramblings.

 

[Grim Tuesday]

That's quite a lot of work that would have to be done for every match :/

And why would anyone ever reveal who they are using? Just say Ganondorf is your main and go with your "secondary" Meta Knight.

 

[sunshade]

Hmm, good point. I would say putting two legit characters would gives you an advantage because you have potential to better ensure a solid match-up but I have yet to test this system in anyway.

 

[#HBC | Red Ryu]

Leave it alone as in:
a) Have no character counter-picking
or
b) Have character counter-picking the same way we do now
?

The bolded.

I also want to point out blind picks can be pretty random by nature if you don't know the opponent.

You could get.

Player A: Wario
Player B: King DDD

or

Player A: Pikachu
Players B: Falco

We have no other choice so we do blind picks game 1, although people who solo main like myself kinda don't care and play match-ups out.

Cping games 2 and beyond is for depth of the game, which I'm fine and like having around.

 

[Grim Tuesday]

Sounds fine to me. Unless someone has a better option?