Stage Information Database and Q&A

[ぱみゅ]

I still need to test Fixed Camera diferences between 4:3 and 16:9 screens (if hoop damage acts different mostly).
But I find it amazing for many uses (like Pictochat).
You can't see which side Norfair's lavawalls are coming from, tho.

 

[Supreme Dirt]

Also, YI:B is as banworthy as Picto, no lie.

Yeah. I was serious about banning YI:B

Also I updated my personal ruleset's stagelist.

 

[sunshade]

People are calling it flossing!

How the hell did that catch on, I made one joke post about that ****

Also, YI:B is as banworthy as Picto, no lie.

You said that if people started calling it flossing you would support it so when I made a thread in tactical discussing stage procedure I called it flossing and it caught on. Now you need to jump the liberal bandwagon and start saying that we should floss the stage list first round.


In terms of randomness I don't consider it a ban worthy enough criteria unless the randomness causes larger disparities in results than the lowering of the skill cap by banning the stage.

So technically Yoshi's Island brawl is bannable but its on the line and it all depends if that means its in or out.

 

[Ghostbone]

YI:B is ******** >.>

The Ghost popped up on me while I was charging diddy's up-b causing me to shoot off unintentionally to the middle of the stage where i was promptly punished extremely hard by Snake................

 

[T-block]

My life's mission has been to expose the hypocrisy behind the double standard that surrounds YI:B and Pictochat.

I love you guys.

 

[san.]

Never had a problem with YI:B ghosts. You can't be serious.

You can't predict the exact moment, but you can get a general frequency of occurrence for how often the ghost appears. The ghost does the same exact thing every time it appears too, in the same exact locations.

Even when you can't predict the precise moment the ghosts come up, you can see if you can come up with a time span for when to expect ghosts. This assumes the player does doesn't affect the ghost rate. If it did, that's even better, actually.

 

[Raziek]

YI:B saved me from a 27% gimp in tourney the other night.

YAY RANDOMNESS.

 

[ぱみゅ]

Never had a problem with YI:B ghosts. You can't be serious.

Never had a problem with Pictochat unless people's unawareness fault.

You can't predict the exact moment, but you can get a general frequency of occurrence for how often the ghost appears. The ghost does the same exact thing every time it appears too, in the same exact locations.

Even when you can't predict the precise moment the ghosts come up, you can see if you can come up with a time span for when to expect ghosts. This assumes the player does doesn't affect the ghost rate. If it did, that's even better, actually.

*insert YI/Picto randomness comparison*

Spoiler: You will say "but YI is fine and Picto is not because X"

 

[Grim Tuesday]

As I have said before, randomness = too many variables to comprehend.

Pictochat just has more variables than Yoshi's Island, whether you think either should be banned just depends on how many variables you think players can deal with at the highest achievable level of play.

 

[ぱみゅ]

imo, more variable = More stuff to learn.
And every variable can be learned, and you can adapt to them.

 

[Grim Tuesday]

Obviously more variable = more stuff to learn, yes.

When I realized how much of Brawl is luck-based purely due to the random nature of PvP combat, I stopped caring about Picto's randomness.

 

[theunabletable]

When I realized how much of Brawl is luck-based purely due to the random nature of PvP combat, I stopped caring about Picto's randomness.

have you... played the game before lmao?

why does this board suck so much?

is it because everyone here is a pseudo intellectual with far too quixotic opinions that disregard the human aspect of the game, and don't actually play the game enough, or not at a high enough level to understand the fact that we're not all robots?

man stage discussion sucks lol

 

[Grim Tuesday]

I'm a power-ranked player, as BPC has pointed out before, we aren't ALL skill-less theory-crafters.

Explain to me how tech-chasing isn't random.

Ironic that you bring up how we ignore the human-factor when my ENTIRE POINT was about the influence human nature has on game play.

 

[ぱみゅ]

have you... played the game before lmao?

why does this board suck so much?

is it because everyone here is a pseudo intellectual with far too quixotic opinions that disregard the human aspect of the game, and don't actually play the game enough, or not at a high enough level to understand the fact that we're not all robots?

man stage discussion sucks lol

Did you really came here for no reason just to say that nonsense ****?

He meant that human action is the most random thing in the entire game (plus other extra-player elements, like tripping), and I couldn't agree more.

And I'm local best MetaKnight.


**SoCal -and Tijuana for the same matter- is filled with AiB kids that only play Smashville. /personalbiasthatIwonteversayagainunlessitsreallynecessary

 

[Ghostbone]

There's a big difference between players essentially playing a bunch of weighted rock paper scissors games and a stage's randomness imo >.>

When someone wins due to them succeeding in predicting the opponent and what not then you can clearly say they outplayed the opponent and deserved to win.

If you trip into Snake's f-smash there's no real outplaying occurring here...

That said there are a bunch of random things (MK's d-tilt for example) that can drastically affect a match.
e.g. MK gets the trip from his d-tilt against olimar, d-throws him off the stage and shuttle loops him as he tries to get back, gimping him.
:/

 

[Grim Tuesday]

That's just a matter of semantics Ghost. If I beat you in a game of Rock-Paper-Scissors, would you say that I "out-played" you in that game?

 

[T-block]

Never had a problem with YI:B ghosts. You can't be serious.

You can't predict the exact moment, but you can get a general frequency of occurrence for how often the ghost appears. The ghost does the same exact thing every time it appears too, in the same exact locations.

Even when you can't predict the precise moment the ghosts come up, you can see if you can come up with a time span for when to expect ghosts. This assumes the player does doesn't affect the ghost rate. If it did, that's even better, actually.

That is the most bull**** justification, san.

Bringing up past posts. There will be some redundancy here, as things were copied from a couple different places buuuuut:

Sheik manages to take Marth's double jump with a f-air at low percents. His up-b won't make it back to the edge, so he aims for the platform. Call this point A. Scenario 1: the platform does not save him - he loses the stock. Scenario 2: the platform saves him - Sheik is obviously prepared for this, so she.... does what? Sheik can not guarantee taking Marth's stock anymore, no matter what she does. From point A, what is the difference between scenario 1 and scenario 2? Whether the platform decides to appear in that spot at that point in time, which is completely random.

Someone else brought up the scenario of two characters with poor recoveries trading blows and flying to opposite blast zones. Maybe they both use their double jump and clash aerials, so they're off-stage with only their up-b. Both characters can make it to where the platform rises, but no further. It saves one, but not the other.

Even in high percent situations, if the recoverer can only make it to the platform, and the platform saves him, all he has to do is hold shield. The platform rises faster than can be reacted to, so the edgeguarder must attack at the apex of the platform's path, as hoping to land a hit while it is rising cannot be done consistently. The recoverer holds shield and puts his shield up before the edgeguarder connects with an aerial, and suffers at worst an edge slip. At this point, the stock is no longer guaranteed by any means.

Sheik can assume that the platform will show up. She can do so and react perfectly if it does. What can she do? She can probably f-air/b-air again? Let's say she even gets the hit in before Marth is able to shield. It doesn't matter. Yes, Sheik gets another hit in and that's great. However, now Marth has his double jump and up-b back, and Sheik is not guaranteed to hit him out of his double jump again by any means. Marth went from a position where he was definitely going to die to a position where it was very likely he would recover. What determines whether he would be able to get into that position? Random chance.

Players assuming that the platform will rise does not mitigate the effects of randomness completely. Let's say this scenario plays out. Marth gets hit out of his double jump by Sheik's f-air and will be ledgehogged by Sheik if he goes for the ledge. He up-b's, and aims to fall where the platform will rise. I pause the replay here. Now let me ask you this: will Marth lose his stock? You won't be able to answer. This is, without a doubt, randomness affecting a match.

Being able to react doesn't change the fact that the outcome of a match was potentially swayed. Stocks can still be returned even if you react perfectly, as shown in the Sheik-Marth example.

 

[san.]

Edgeguarding is particularly nerfed in that regard on YI. Hitting foes against the wall allows for some nice options.

Sheik manages to take Marth's double jump with a f-air at low percents. His up-b won't make it back to the edge, so he aims for the platform. Call this point A. Scenario 1: the platform does not save him - he loses the stock. Scenario 2: the platform saves him - Sheik is obviously prepared for this, so she.... does what? Sheik can not guarantee taking Marth's stock anymore, no matter what she does. From point A, what is the difference between scenario 1 and scenario 2? Whether the platform decides to appear in that spot at that point in time, which is completely random.

Marth's upB goes pretty high, and he falls slow. with SideB stall, upB, and a slow fall, Marth can stall in the air long enough to have a very good chance of getting the ghost. You need to take into account marth getting sent offstage, the edgeguard, Marth attempting to recover, and all of this without the ghost appearing midway through, which is a lot of time.

Someone else brought up the scenario of two characters with poor recoveries trading blows and flying to opposite blast zones. Maybe they both use their double jump and clash aerials, so they're off-stage with only their up-b. Both characters can make it to where the platform rises, but no further. It saves one, but not the other.

The character that's able to stall in the air longer has the inherent advantage.
YI ghosts never spawn at the same time. Either they both die, or one will be saved.
After 1 ghost descends to the bottom of the screen, there is ~6 seconds +/- 2 seconds before the ghost appears on the left or right sides.

You can approximately tell if a ghost will appear on one side ~6 seconds after you see a ghost descend, and then ~+12 seconds each time (the ghost appeared on the other side, and it takes an extra 6 seconds for the ghost to rise and descend. Ghosts stay up for a variable amount of time, ~2-5 seconds).

It's pretty random which side a ghost will appear, but most of the time it switches between each ghost, so you can expect ~15-18 seconds for a ghost to appear. When a ghost appears multiple times, the other side may not see a ghost for an upwards of 20 something seconds or higher.

Even in high percent situations, if the recoverer can only make it to the platform, and the platform saves him, all he has to do is hold shield. The platform rises faster than can be reacted to, so the edgeguarder must attack at the apex of the platform's path, as hoping to land a hit while it is rising cannot be done consistently. The recoverer holds shield and puts his shield up before the edgeguarder connects with an aerial, and suffers at worst an edge slip. At this point, the stock is no longer guaranteed by any means.

2 scenarios
1. If you just saw the ghost on your side
2. If you didn't see anything for a while (6+ seconds)

for scenario 1: Expect the ghost in ~6 seconds, otherwise it's not coming up for a while
scenario 2: There is a good chance the ghost is going to come up soon. We are limited in information by the camera, so we may not see the ghost on the other side.

You still can hit people, due to the lag of their landing. There is also edgeslip situations, and the fact that the opponent is already in a pretty disadvantageous situation.

Sheik can assume that the platform will show up. She can do so and react perfectly if it does. What can she do? She can probably f-air/b-air again? Let's say she even gets the hit in before Marth is able to shield. It doesn't matter. Yes, Sheik gets another hit in and that's great. However, now Marth has his double jump and up-b back, and Sheik is not guaranteed to hit him out of his double jump again by any means. Marth went from a position where he was definitely going to die to a position where it was very likely he would recover. What determines whether he would be able to get into that position? Random chance.

Poor sheik. She's almost low tier for a reason. Nice choice by the opponent to choose this stage.
You can make inferences to how often the ghost will appear. The marth knows that either way, Sheik has no options to kill him. Characters who can kill won't care.

Players assuming that the platform will rise does not mitigate the effects of randomness completely. Let's say this scenario plays out. Marth gets hit out of his double jump by Sheik's f-air and will be ledgehogged by Sheik if he goes for the ledge. He up-b's, and aims to fall where the platform will rise. I pause the replay here. Now let me ask you this: will Marth lose his stock? You won't be able to answer. This is, without a doubt, randomness affecting a match.

True, but you must be very silly if you think players assuming that the platform will rise doesn't noticeably mitigate the effects of the randomness.
If it was right after the ghost on one side left, 0% chance. If it is 4-6 seconds after, probably 60% chance, 6-8, 40% chance, afterwards, 0% chance (to surive).


Overall, this isn't much worse than Frigate (frigate sides come up very often, to the point where you're almost guaranteed survival), and isn't much better than a character lucking out on landing on the ground stalling for a stage transformation on Delfino (background gives you cues, and I think there's some structure to which transformation is chosen), and quite a bit better than brinstar acid/norfair lava which covers the entire bottom screen.

Obviously, you can't expect people to become this focused on the amount of time the ghosts appear. If the ghost doesn't reappear in 6 seconds, expect to see it come a while later (+12 seconds) and so on until you see it again.

EDIT: You can predict the ghosts even easier with fixed camera mode

At least make an attempt to understand/predict the stage before you decide to whine and moan about it.

 

[T-block]

Love the insinuation that I don't understand this stage. You obviously don't know me very well =P

Let us take the timing window to be ~15-18 seconds (which I think is a little too generously restrictive, but my points will still stand), and the side it decides to appear on to be completely random (I have not seen anything to suggest otherwise).

Edgeguarding is particularly nerfed in that regard on YI. Hitting foes against the wall allows for some nice options.

Then couldn't we say wall CGs are particularly buffed in that regard on Pictochat?

Marth's upB goes pretty high, and he falls slow. with SideB stall, upB, and a slow fall, Marth can stall in the air long enough to have a very good chance of getting the ghost. You need to take into account marth getting sent offstage, the edgeguard, Marth attempting to recover, and all of this without the ghost appearing midway through, which is a lot of time.

Are you really going to claim that Marth will be saved MOST of the time?

You said ~15-18 seconds between ghosts. If the ghost decides to appear on the other side, that's already ~30-36 seconds with no ghost on the side where the edgeguard is taking place. If it decides to appear twice on the other side (not unlikely at all), that's ~45-54 seconds with no ghost. Marth can't stall for THAT long -_-

Sure, characters like Peach, Yoshi, and Marth are more likely to be saved than Captain Falcon or Ganondorf, but they still cannot achieve 30+ seconds of stall time. I'm going to start questioning your understanding of the stage if you think Marth can stall long enough to get a "very good chance" of being saved.

The character that's able to stall in the air longer has the inherent advantage.
YI ghosts never spawn at the same time. Either they both die, or one will be saved.
After 1 ghost descends to the bottom of the screen, there is ~6 seconds +/- 2 seconds before the ghost appears on the left or right sides.

You can approximately tell if a ghost will appear on one side ~6 seconds after you see a ghost descend, and then ~+12 seconds each time (the ghost appeared on the other side, and it takes an extra 6 seconds for the ghost to rise and descend. Ghosts stay up for a variable amount of time, ~2-5 seconds).

It's pretty random which side a ghost will appear, but most of the time it switches between each ghost, so you can expect ~15-18 seconds for a ghost to appear. When a ghost appears multiple times, the other side may not see a ghost for an upwards of 20 something seconds or higher.

This is in response to my example of two characters being sent to opposite sides and the platform saving one of them.

How does this address my point at all? Why does it matter when or how often the ghost comes up in this scenario? What matters is that the ghost COULD save one player, but not the other, thus heavily influencing the outcome of a match.

Poor sheik. She's almost low tier for a reason. Nice choice by the opponent to choose this stage.
You can make inferences to how often the ghost will appear. The marth knows that either way, Sheik has no options to kill him. Characters who can kill won't care.

First of all, you are attacking the WRONG part of my example. Who cares what the characters are? What if Diddy manages to side-b gimp Snake so he's falling off the stage with no C4 and no Cypher? Why am I even bringing up another example? It doesn't matter. We have a matchup taking place on this stage. Forget about which player or character picked it. We have a stock that was supposed to be taken, and we see it given back because of the stage's randomness. And you're just going to dismiss it by saying CHARACTER FLAW?

Then, if you can say "oh well, poor Sheik can't guarantee a kill", why can I not say "oh well, poor x character can't abuse walls like Pikachu or Ike can"?

Why can't I say "nice choice for Ike to pick Pictochat" when you can say "nice choice for the player playing against Sheik to pick Yoshi's"?

Counterpicking to abuse randomness acceptable in one situation, but not in the other? Hypocrisy imo.

True, but you must be very silly if you think players assuming that the platform will rise doesn't noticeably mitigate the effects of the randomness.
If it was right after the ghost on one side left, 0% chance. If it is 4-6 seconds after, probably 60% chance, 6-8, 40% chance, afterwards, 0% chance (to surive).

It will mitigate it to some extent. Marth is at high percents and he manages to land on the platform. Ike kills him with a ledgedrop double jump b-air. Marth dies, and all is good.

There are situations where it doesn't make a difference. I acknowledge this. But there are situations where it DOES, and these situations are NOT that rare.

 

[san.]

Yes, I was just poking fun at you a bit =) I really think you don't, though.

Twice in a row: ~4-8 seconds after the ghost descends before it pops up again (usually like 6 seconds)

Ghost appears on the other side once: ~15-18 seconds (6 seconds after for the ghost to appear on the other side, stays for 4 seconds and descends, and another 6 seconds before it appears back on our side).

Twice brings it to ~30 seconds. It made me a little sad, but it's somewhat rare. I'm just going to assume 50% chance on each side.

Then couldn't we say wall CGs are particularly buffed in that regard on Pictochat?

Yes, extremely buffed.

Are you really going to claim that Marth will be saved MOST of the time?

You said ~15-18 seconds between ghosts. If the ghost decides to appear on the other side, that's already ~30-36 seconds with no ghost on the side where the edgeguard is taking place. If it decides to appear twice on the other side (not unlikely at all), that's ~45-54 seconds with no ghost. Marth can't stall for THAT long -_-

Yes, Marth should be saved above 50%, which is most. You can predict when a ghost will come, and you know the two places the ghost can appear.
Sorry if I confused you a bit. It takes more consecutive ghosts to take that long. Out of 30 minutes, I've only seen it above 40 seconds once or twice. Test it out for yourself if I'm starting to speak mumbo jumbo lol.

Sure, characters like Peach, Yoshi, and Marth are more likely to be saved than Captain Falcon or Ganondorf, but they still cannot achieve 30+ seconds of stall time. I'm going to start questioning your understanding of the stage if you think Marth can stall long enough to get a "very good chance" of being saved.

True, but that's if you factor in their recovery by itself. You need to consider them getting launched, and the whole recovery process. You also have to see if the camera let us see if a ghost appeared yet, or if a ghost helps during the recovery.

If we don't see a ghost on that side during the whole edgeguard process, you would think the player would have some hope it would appear sooner or later when things aren't looking so well.

This is in response to my example of two characters being sent to opposite sides and the platform saving one of them.

How does this address my point at all? Why does it matter when or how often the ghost comes up in this scenario? What matters is that the ghost COULD save one player, but not the other, thus heavily influencing the outcome of a match.

Just giving some info to the probabilities that a ghost will appear. There is actually a high chance of one character being saved and the other dying. Small percent chance both could survive if they can stall for a good 5+ seconds.

Because we know the frequency, we know that we could expect one player to survive. You need all the info you can get.

If the issue is that it COULD save one player, what's the point of arguing about randomness? If it wasn't random, it would be similar to SV saving one player or the other. Or Lylat, where it's tilted one way and not the other, and one guy dies, even though we know when it tilts based on which scene it is. On PS1, you get sent off to the left side when the stage is about to tell you what transformation it's about to enter. If you get mountains or windmill, that helps you recover easily, but you have trouble if it transforms to fire or forest.

We know approximately when a ghost will appear, just not which side, as far as we know. Many things could save players, but the magnitude of the event isn't really too drastic to affect gameplay enough to be bannable material. The best you can come up with are very situational events that are rare in high level play? That's the best I can come up with for SV/PS1/Lylat also.

First of all, you are attacking the WRONG part of my example. Who cares what the characters are? What if Diddy manages to side-b gimp Snake so he's falling off the stage with no C4 and no Cypher? Why am I even bringing up another example? It doesn't matter. We have a matchup taking place on this stage. Forget about which player or character picked it. We have a stock that was supposed to be taken, and we see it given back because of the stage's randomness. And you're just going to dismiss it by saying CHARACTER FLAW?

50% is not random enough to feel like it should be 100%. If it doesn't come on that side, you get your guaranteed kill. If it does, you get a guaranteed punish. Pretty simple.
Your examples are all pretty situational and bad.

You're missing my point. You chose sheik in your example, who would have problems gimping throughout the entire edgeguard process if the ghost comes up even once. The ghost comes often enough to make gimping for Sheik a less than optimal option. If you don't want me to think about character's options, then don't bring them up at all.

Then, if you can say "oh well, poor Sheik can't guarantee a kill", why can I not say "oh well, poor x character can't abuse walls like Pikachu or Ike can"?

You can. Is there something you're trying to get at?

Why can't I say "nice choice for Ike to pick Pictochat" when you can say "nice choice for the player playing against Sheik to pick Yoshi's"?

Pictochat is a good stage for Ike. Too bad it's not legal.

Counterpicking to abuse randomness acceptable in one situation, but not in the other? Hypocrisy imo.

Can you explain how this "randomness" is being abused? The timings of the ghosts aren't very random, but you just don't know if it appears on the left or right.

Every 6 seconds after one ghost descends, a ghost appears on the left or right side on YI. You can confine the timing to a few seconds. If the ghosts were player triggered or something, the sheik would hate that even more.

I'm going to have to watch YI matches a few more times, because it was surprisingly rare for ghosts to appear on one side more than twice in a row. It should be easier to assume that it's not going to appear on the same side as often.
EDIT: Yeah, seems to be random which side it is after looking at it more. Lots of times they were on the same side more than once, and sometimes they went back and forth (aka random)

Every 13 or so seconds on Picto, what happens? There is much more wrong with Picto anyways. You should expect walls all over that stage, but positioning, etc go right out the window. I want to focus on YI for now so I deleted a lot of Picto stuff.

There are situations where it doesn't make a difference. I acknowledge this. But there are situations where it DOES, and these situations are NOT that rare.

Those helpless situations are rare. If you have a 50/50 prediction of a ghost, that's not bad at all.

 

[T-block]

I suppose I owe it to you to watch YI for a while too. I'll do a couple runs when I get off work. Actually, I recall someone doing some research a while ago. I'll try to find it...

Here and here

~8-15 seconds between ghosts, completely random pattern. Often shows up on the same side more than once.

(sorry non-BBR members... when the original researcher gets here maybe he can repost his results)

It has shown up on the right side seven times in a row. That's at least a minute of it not appearing on one side. Streaks of three and four aren't uncommon either, which ends up being around thirty seconds on average.

How sure are you of your data? It seems to directly contradict what was shown here.

If the issue is that it COULD save one player, what's the point of arguing about randomness? If it wasn't random, it would be similar to SV saving one player or the other. Or Lylat, where it's tilted one way and not the other, and one guy dies, even though we know when it tilts based on which scene it is. On PS1, you get sent off to the left side when the stage is about to tell you what transformation it's about to enter. If you get mountains or windmill, that helps you recover easily, but you have trouble if it transforms to fire or forest.

We know approximately when a ghost will appear, just not which side, as far as we know. Many things could save players, but the magnitude of the event isn't really too drastic to affect gameplay enough to be bannable material. The best you can come up with are very situational events that are rare in high level play? That's the best I can come up with for SV/PS1/Lylat also.

I like the comparison to Lylat/PS1 actually. The difference is that on these stages, the timing window where the stage change has to occur in order for the stage's choice itself to affect the match is much smaller, and happens much less frequently.

These situations are NOT all that rare: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AYHj1diRlwU#t=1m25s. Watch as Diddy aims for the platform and it doesn't save him at 6:49 game time. We see the platform start to descend on the other side at 6:42 game time, so it probably showed up around 6:45 or so. What if it had decided to appear on the other side, just four seconds earlier (8-15 second window makes this plausible)? Last tournament I went to I was in a pools match where a very similar situation happened to me: I couldn't make it to the ledge, so I up-b'd and hoped to land on the platform. It chose my side, but I died FRAMES before it appeared.

You can. Is there something you're trying to get at?

Pictochat is a good stage for Ike. Too bad it's not legal.

Can you explain how this "randomness" is being abused? The timings of the ghosts aren't very random, but you just don't know if it appears on the left or right.

You imply that it's all right for a player to CP a Sheik to YI because there is a chance that the ghost could save them from a gimp. Moreover, you imply this line of thinking is to be encouraged. Why is it suddenly unfair for an Ike player to CP to Pictochat because there is a chance that a wall might appear and give him a wall CG?

But I guess a lot of your points rely on the interval being ~6 seconds. Would you like to revise any of your points with the knowledge that it's a huge 8-15 second window?

There is generally 6-9 seconds of blank time between drawings on Pictochat btw.

 

[san.]

After like an hour of gametime on YI, I haven't seen anything to suggest otherwise that the ghost appears ~ 6seconds on either side after it is gone from screen.

You misunderstand again. 8-15 seconds refers to the difference between when he sees the ghosts. 6 seconds takes out the time where the ghost ascends, stays there, and descends. The ghosts take up around 3-7 seconds themselves while onscreen. (ghosts stayed in one place from <1 second to ~4 seconds before descending. It takes a few seconds to ascend and descend)

I'll respond to the rest soon.

 

[T-block]

Kay I'm just gonna postpone this until I get a chance to get on my Wii when I get home lol

 

[san.]

Once you see it on fixed screen mode, you'll be surprised at how regular the interval is. The ghosts are gay and it's gay that the L/R sides are random (got similar results to the links you posted).

It's just that you're not completely hopeless with the ghosts, you can make a lot of leeway with what you can predict and when you know the ghost isn't going to help you.

 

[theunabletable]

I'm a power-ranked player, as BPC has pointed out before, we aren't ALL skill-less theory-crafters.

oh where are you power ranked?

Explain to me how tech-chasing isn't random.

mixups and reading people are random?

Ironic that you bring up how we ignore the human-factor when my ENTIRE POINT was about the influence human nature has on game play.

actually i'd written all that without replying to anyone, and then i saw your post, and decided to reply to it (with the like one sentence) after writing everything else

Did you really came here for no reason just to say that nonsense ****?

yeS.

He meant that human action is the most random thing in the entire game (plus other extra-player elements, like tripping), and I couldn't agree more.

how is that random at all?

**SoCal -and Tijuana for the same matter- is filled with AiB kids that only play Smashville. /personalbiasthatIwonteversayagainunlessitsreallyne cessary

we should only play on smashville lol. europe's got the right idea.

although socal doesn't only play on smashville, we tend to start the set on smashville (usually just ask the other person if they wanna play on smashville instead of strike, but sometimes people do want to strike), simply because it's the ****ing best stage in the game, and everyone likes it and doesn't wanna go somewhere stupid like lylat or something.

and we counterpick pretty gay
/just beat ranked 8 in socal by counterpicking him to rainbow cruise third round and playing gay as **** (shouldn't have won the set, honestly)

rainbow and brinstar shouldn't both be legal on the same ruleset, it's ********.

 

[Ussi]

Doesn't the ghost like to appear on the side where someone is off stage?

Or is it just we don't see the otherside kind of thing xD?


Anyways, here's my randomness argument between YI:B and pictochat

You can keep yourself ready for the ghost to appear

You have no way in knowing what comes next in pictochat

YI:B's randomness is not as extreme's as picto's, its random when it shows up, but its only 1 thing showing up. Picto has 1 of 27 things showing up which is impossible to always be ready for every single thing that could pop up.

2nd point is YI:B's randomness only affects offstage gameplay. Pictochat's randomneas effects general gameplay where the whole stage changes instead of 1 platform just showing up off the side.


Random isn't always bad, it just depends how much the player has to work around the randomness.

YI:B, never try to recover where the platform might pop up.. Pictochat, you are only able to fight in a small area of the stage.

Its all about practicality

 

[san.]

Picto gets less random as time goes on, a definite saving grace, but it doesn't get less random fast enough and some of the transformations can be pretty extreme.

 

[Ussi]

You also get get effected by transformations before you see them

 

[ぱみゅ]

Keyword:

Random isn't always bad, it just depends how much the player has to work around the randomness.

Is there a way to tell how much is too much? I don't think so.
You can't simply say Yoshi's is fine and Picto is not, that's just being arbitrary.

Personally, I've worked enough time on Pictochat to know its mechanics, which points to avoid and when to avoid it, and how to addapt to sudden changes. And that's my point: I have already worked on them, why others can not? Just because they do not want to I must drop the whole thing?

 

[WindMajor]

Once you see it on fixed screen mode, you'll be surprised at how regular the interval is. The ghosts are gay and it's gay that the L/R sides are random (got similar results to the links you posted).

Pretty much this. Even though the ghosts don't appear at a precise time, you can kind of get a frequency for when a ghost is gonna come up next. Note though that in the first link that you brought up, T-Block, that was only one run. It's possible that with more runs, we might get different results. If I had more time I would do more runs again, but I'm still doing that Green Greens stuff.

 

[theunabletable]

Is there a way to tell how much is too much? I don't think so.
You can't simply say Yoshi's is fine and Picto is not, that's just being arbitrary.

oh no, humans can't be arbitrary! even though we're gifted with the power of making subjective judgment calls based on more experiences and thought than you could define in a completely objective statement, it's automatically wrong to make a call that looks to be arbitrary!

we can simply say that. we can simply say "well yoshi's seems generally okay, and picto has waaaay too much randomness". it'd be better if we could find an objective line of reasoning, but that doesn't mean we should have ****ing picto legal just because we can't communicate why picto is so ****ing terrible.

i don't need an objective reason for why murdering someone is worse than punching someone, or stabbing someone. i don't need to objectively define what the line is between murdering someone and simply hurting someone. and i don't need to objectively define exactly why we should have more things in place to prevent murder than someone getting hit.

being objectively correct helps (it allows us to apply things we can be reasonably certain are correct to other things), however sometimes it's not necessary, and sometimes it leads to surface-level objectivity. objectivity that isn't really correct, but looks like it. objectivity that doesn't look at all of the available information, and makes a decision based on an insufficient amount of information. often surface-level objectivity is more damaging than semi-subjectivity.

i know how important objectivity is. i used to be hella liberal for stagelists, wanting to try out things like mario kart because "objectively" they didn't seem so bad because the burden of proof was on those who needed to show why it was bad, while saying the whole time that i wasn't biased, because i myself didn't like liberal stages, and preferred stages like smashville. and i was far more defensive and insecure of my opinions, and quicker to insult people for their "scrubbiness" or what have you.

funnily enough, i stopped being liberal stage-wise when i went to an actual tournament

 

[MK26]

despite table's trolling hes got a point...

 

[ぱみゅ]

*Oh God, I'm having lots of brainstorming writing this post, if something here makes no sense, blame the 4131278432 ideas crossing my mind at the same time and my lack of sleep time*

oh no, humans can't be arbitrary! even though we're gifted with the power of making subjective judgment calls based on more experiences and thought than you could define in a completely objective statement, it's automatically wrong to make a call that looks to be arbitrary!

Of course humans are arbitrary, but rulecrafters must not.
People are subjective, and they may or may not agree with a ruleset. Yet, with a solid criteria and objective stands, people has no right to complain.
That souds authoritarist? Maybe. But otherwise, people would just do whatever they want (which was the way it was done before the Unity Ruleset, that, being not based on solid criteria, lots of people complain about it).
I hope that's enough to get the idea.

we can simply say that. we can simply say "well yoshi's seems generally okay, and picto has waaaay too much randomness". it'd be better if we could find an objective line of reasoning, but that doesn't mean we should have ****ing picto legal just because we can't communicate why picto is so ****ing terrible.

First, a stage must not be banned until proven banworthy.
Second, For some people is bad, for others it is fine. That's the problem with subjectivity.

i don't need an objective reason for why murdering someone is worse than punching someone, or stabbing someone. i don't need to objectively define what the line is between murdering someone and simply hurting someone. and i don't need to objectively define exactly why we should have more things in place to prevent murder than someone getting hit.

That's a bit too much of an analogy, but I think it depends on why do you need to know which one it is worse.
For a penalty? It can be perfectly defined based on the caused damage. -and that's also subjective, with the court thing and stuff...-
For morals? Every example is bad and just shouldn't be done. -hence, ban both stages?-

being objectively correct helps (it allows us to apply things we can be reasonably certain are correct to other things), however sometimes it's not necessary, and sometimes it leads to surface-level objectivity. objectivity that isn't really correct, but looks like it. objectivity that doesn't look at all of the available information, and makes a decision based on an insufficient amount of information. often surface-level objectivity is more damaging than semi-subjectivity.

Wait.... What do you think "objective" means?

i know how important objectivity is. i used to be hella liberal for stagelists, wanting to try out things like mario kart because "objectively" they didn't seem so bad because the burden of proof was on those who needed to show why it was bad, while saying the whole time that i wasn't biased, because i myself didn't like liberal stages, and preferred stages like smashville. and i was far more defensive and insecure of my opinions, and quicker to insult people for their "scrubbiness" or what have you.

Well, despite I do not agree with your points of view, I'm not offending you, but pointing why your posts are wrong according with my criteria: you seem to have none and you're basing your decisions on merely personal preference...

funnily enough, i stopped being liberal stage-wise when i went to an actual tournament

Do you really think we have not attended tournaments?

 

[Grim Tuesday]

oh where are you power ranked?

South Australia.

mixups and reading people are random?

With two players of similar skill level, yes.

And it's not just tech-chasing, it's LOTS of decisions in the game. You never know what your opponent will do next, yo can *guess* (random) based on what you know, but you can't be 100% sure.

 

[theunabletable]

Yet, with a solid criteria and objective stands, people has no right to complain.

the problem is that i've never seen any criteria that is objective enough to warrant objectiveness being the best answer.

First, a stage must not be banned until proven banworthy.

that goes against my criteria.

and also, banworthy is nearly always subjective

Second, For some people is bad, for others it is fine. That's the problem with subjectivity.

yeah, subjectivity has issues. objectivity doesn't have issues, since subjectivity usually goes along with it to some extent anyways.

however pseudo-objectivity, surface-level-objectivity, or what have you has a large amount of issues. and i've never seen a good ruleset that wasn't based on surface-level objectivity.

That's a bit too much of an analogy, but I think it depends on why do you need to know which one it is worse.
For a penalty? It can be perfectly defined based on the caused damage. -and that's also subjective, with the court thing and stuff...-
For morals? Every example is bad and just shouldn't be done. -hence, ban both stages?-

for knowledge of severity.

morals-wise, killing someone and hurting someone are NOT on the same level, and the distinction is important

yoshi's island and pictochat are not on the same level of randomness, so it's not out of the question that we deal with them differently. it's not a double standard to ban one stage out of randomness and not another that is random, but not as much, because they aren't really the same thing. if there was a pictochat, and another pictochat that was the same, but mirror'd, and we banned one but not the other, that'd be a double standard.

Wait.... What do you think "objective" means?

without bias, and rational, i suppose if i were to give my own definition.

Well, despite I do not agree with your points of view, I'm not offending you, but pointing why your posts are wrong according with my criteria: you seem to have none and you're basing your decisions on merely personal preference...

oh my posts are wrong according to your personal criteria? that's very objective of you

i have a criteria, and it's subjective i suppose, but i'd say that the best criteria is one in which we base things on what is most beneficial for our metagame.

Do you really think we have not attended tournaments?

i think the majority of you are held back mentally because of the mindset brought on by debating stages like this, or by theorycrafting, and are, in effect, scrubs by sirlin's definition lol. i hate saying that, though, because calling anyone a name is so ****ing negative, and damaging to my own mindset, so be aware i'm mostly joking with the scrub thing. i do feel as though many of the players on these boards limit themselves with their mindset, though.

it's a mindset that quickly evolves from making statements like "mew2king has no idea what the **** he's talking about, he's an idiot", or "TKD is a scrub". this mindset has a tendency to turn you off from their advice in the actual game, that ALSO applies to rulesets once you fully understand it (the more connections you have in your brain, the better).

i don't think you guys don't go to tournaments, i think you guys disregard "subjective" things too quickly because of the mindset brought on from constantly thinking about burden of proof, and being objective.

i made my statement badly, i mostly meant "i stopped being liberal when i went to tournaments and started learning more about the game itself, and not about debating the game", but there's so many things that go into why i said that, that the only way i could really state what i actually mean would be to say a lot more than i can right at this moment.

South Australia.

so did you get a medal with that, or what?

With two players of similar skill level, yes.

ugh

And it's not just tech-chasing, it's LOTS of decisions in the game. You never know what your opponent will do next, yo can *guess* (random) based on what you know, but you can't be 100% sure.

the world isn't black and white
it's not random, or you're 100% sure. a large amount of reading people is picking things that you think has a reasonably better chance of working than your other options. that's not random.

 

[Grim Tuesday]

so did you get a medal with that, or what?

I'm not here to try and win support by being a good player, I do that by being logical, but if you'd like to play that card, where is your record of tournament success?

the world isn't black and white
it's not random, or you're 100% sure. a large amount of reading people is picking things that you think has a reasonably better chance of working than your other options. that's not random.

Semannnnnnnnntics. You can call it whatever you want, I choose to call it random.

The point is that in an average Brawl match both players have to make hundreds of decisions that they aren't completely sure will work in their favour (due to not being able to read the future).

Hypothetical situation: You're using Snake, we've never played before, at the very start of the match you down throw me in the very centre of the stage. How do you decide what action to take? How do I decide what action to take?

It's random, and if you can't see that by now, you are obviously too stupid to be worth continuing this discussion with, or too stubbornly obsessed with being right that you would chase a point you don't even agree with.

 

[theunabletable]

I'm not here to try and win support by being a good player, I do that by being logical, but if you'd like to play that card, where is your record of tournament success?

meh i beat ranked 8 in socal the other day. and the ranked players here are considerably better than the ranked players elsewhere (raziek is ranked 3rd in nova scotia, and he's not very good. or atleast he's bad enough to have lost to the me who only had a few months of experience with the game competitively).

i'm not saying i'm a good player yet, i'm saying that most of you are bad and shouldn't have any part in how good players have to play the game lol

Semannnnnnnnntics. You can call it whatever you want, I choose to call it random.

oh i must interpret the word random differently than you do

The point is that in an average Brawl match both players have to make hundreds of decisions that they aren't completely sure will work in their favour (due to not being able to read the future).

oh, so your definition of random is "choosing something without knowing if it'll work"?

well then by that definition you're correct, however that's far more of a broad meaning for random than i would choose myself.

Hypothetical situation: You're using Snake, we've never played before, at the very start of the match you down throw me in the very centre of the stage. How do you decide what action to take? How do I decide what action to take?

i choose my option based on what i know about you, what options you tend to like to choose, how i landed that grab, what kind of person you are, etc

lots of things go into that decision, and i'd probably just choose shield, since it usually covers most options anyway.

and, yes, that instance is probably not TOO far off from random, however to say that that exact scenario, where you know nothing of your opponent, and are working purely off guessing, instead of just covering as many options as possible, is pretty ****in' rare. far too rare to even compare it to the level of purerandomness that picto has

that's like saying rock paper scissors is random, or that choosing rock against teenage females is random. actually i almost do just what you mentioned. often throughout my day, i walk up to girls i've never met before, and ask them to play rock paper scissors, and pick rock, because they almost ALWAYS pick scissors. probably near 90% of the time.

we are NOT robots, we can make reads, or decisions based on a lot of things, and they aren't always discernible or easy to communicate. that doesn't mean random, not NEARLY comparable to pictochat

It's random, and if you can't see that by now, you are obviously too stupid to be worth continuing this discussion with, or too stubbornly obsessed with being right that you would chase a point you don't even agree with.

i can use a completely different meaning for a word than is the standard, then tell people that it's semantics when they call me on that, and then say that according to the meaning i'm using, i'm right, and that if they don't agree they're dumb, too, you know.

semantics aren't inherently bad when someone is dishonestly misusing a word in a debate. some semantics are bad, some are necessary, because if people use whatever ****ing word they want to represent anything they want it to represent, and then tell someone they're being bad for semantics when they get called on it, and then continue to use the word incorrectly.

yes, if that's how you use the word random, then you're correct. however there's no way i could have ever guessed that that's what you meant, when you were comparing human actions to ****ing pictochat lol

 

[Grim Tuesday]

My definition of random is pretty standard. If something isn't 100% certain, it has a degree of randomness, that's... well, universally accepted.

My example was intentionally extreme so there was no way you could say "No, this isn't random". However, in your Rock-Paper-Scissors games, you lost 10% of the time, right? That's because it was RANDOM. You simply increased your odds by being intelligent, you can do that with any kind of random-ness.

The way you are putting it, NOTHING is random. I mean, flipping a coin isn't random, as long as you can calculate what face it will land on by looking at the angle it was flipped at, how heavy each side is due to dust, how high it was flipped, etc...

 

[Ussi]

If you want to say YI:B is as random as Picto fine.

YI:B has less effect on the match overall because it deals with offstage gameplay. Picto's randomness is everywhere. On stage, off stage, and even considerable above the stage as well.

 

[Fuujin]

Table u troll
y?