Legality Tentative: MBR Official Ruleset for 2012

[TheCrimsonBlur]

Salepate's tag was 0xFF in his recent vids. I thought that was cute.

 

[Kal]

Haha, Bones mentioning subjectivity. ****ing wonderful.

 

[Bones0]

There's nothing wrong with making subjective statements as long as you aren't acting like it is objective. If someone wants to argue their opinion that FD is the most neutral, that's fine, but game 1 shouldn't be forced onto BF because someone's subjective opinion is being treated as an objective declaration of what is neutral.

 

[Kal]

The point of striking to Battlefield is exactly that players do believe it is, for most relevant matchups, the most neutral. However, there is nothing emphasizing it being struck there the most often. I don't really understand what position you're taking here.

We have six stages. We need an odd number for striking, so we either add a seventh, or leave one off. We leave off Pokemon Stadium by convention. From there, players strike in a specific order, and the stage is selected.

There is nothing in effect which serves to (artificially) force Battlefield as the stage selected for the first match. In many cases, it would be "fairest" if players were forced on Battlefield. But having the strike system accounts exactly for the cases where it would not be fairest, and for the cases where players, for whatever reason, do no want to play there.

I agree with you, though, that the players who advocate for playing on Battlefield first in every matchup are being silly. In a misguided attempt to balance the game, they are eliminating the potential for depth both in game and with regards to outplaying your opponent.

 

[TheCrimsonBlur]

Lost in all the Battlefield nonsense is the fact that ICs are ****ing terrible on that stage and removing FD from neutral would make it even more unfair for them..

(though they are generally good on Stadium too)

 

[Kal]

I think removing Final Destination for Pokemon Stadium is a debatable position, but I think removing any of the stages (thus two or four stages) altogether is a bad idea. I've stated this before, but I think the distinction between starter and counterpick is outdated. It's a remnant of the way we used to select the first stage. Now that we have a methodology for preventing situations where a player gets a severe disadvantage on the first match, the distinction is no longer necessary.

 

[Bones0]

Just fyi, I was addressing Sveet's argument that we should be attempting to "lead" strikes to BF by altering the stage strike list. I obviously have no issue if 99% of matches strike to BF as long as there is still stage striking in place to allow for other stages for players that DON'T want to go to BF. It's not like I hate BF or anything either. I strike there all the time, but I also like striking to other stages when it suits me.

 

[Fortress | Sveet]

I'm all for players striking BF, thats the point in having a strike system and not just one neutral. My point, which was originally intended as casual banter between kal and myself, not a formal declaration, and has since been misunderstood and misreported by myself, is that FD causes more harm to the strike process than PS does (in a utilitarian sense).

 

[Kal]

False, everyone knows Pokémon Stadium shouldn't even be legal.

 

[FerrishTheFish]

But FD only causes more harm to the strike system because you define "not striking to BF" as harm to the strike system.

 

[-Sinister-]

umm. am i missing something? why on earth is jungle japes a cp for teams? can someone explain this to me? rainbow cruise and even brinstar aren't near as gay. besides, who honestly wants to play a serious tournament match on JJ?

unless on april 1st the mbr is gonna come out and say april fools. actually i'm really hoping that's the case.

 

[Geenareeno]

besides, who honestly wants to play a serious tournament match on JJ?

That is the worst reason in the history of this argument to ban JJ.

 

[FerrishTheFish]

That is the worst reason in the history of this argument to ban JJ.

It's even been made before in those exact words, I believe -.-

 

[Fortress | Sveet]

But FD only causes more harm to the strike system because you define "not striking to BF" as harm to the strike system.

Not necessarily.

 

[-Sinister-]

That is the worst reason in the history of this argument to ban JJ.

the point wasn't to give a reason to why it should be banned. the point was to get someone to tell me why it should be legal. i just don't get why anyone would want to play a serious match on it. doesn't make sense to me. so why don't you tell me why the klaptrap, water, and the numerous ledges will NEVER impact the match.

 

[Kal]

If it's not how obvious that you can apply that logic to just about anything, you should probably stay away from ruleset discussions.

 

[-Sinister-]

can SOMEONE please just tell me why jungle japes shouldn't be banned? instead of this typical smashboards ******ry?

 

[Strong Badam]

About Jungle Japes...

This was basically my post in the MBR:

The biggest issues with Jungle Japes are the claptrap, the ridiculously high ceiling, and the way it promotes camping. In teams, camping strategies are not nearly as effective as in singles. If a team goes to Jungle Japes playing Marth+Marth (or any duo of characters that has no answer for projectile induced camping weakness), they deserve to lose. Most team compositions will have ways to counter camping.

The claptrap is highly situational, but, in my opinion and experience, promotes play that is aggressive towards getting the opponent into the water for as much time as possible. It also reduces ledgestalling options by threatening with a stock loss.

The extremely high ceiling also encourages play towards killing the opponent off the bottom or sides.

Control of the right side of the stage is valued over control of the left due to water flow.

On stage, there are no random variables to account for.

Overall, I don't really see anything wrong the the stage for teams. Anyone care to counter/discuss?

(As a side note: Seeing Taj or Forward play on Jungle Japes is a thing of beauty.)

If you disagree with this reasoning, then don't have it legal at your tournaments. The ones you never host.

 

[Seartu]

If you disagree with this reasoning, then don't have it legal at your tournaments. The ones you never host.

Your quote from Cactuar was awesome. Gave a noob some insight. I've always disliked that stage just because it's irregular. I'll try to stay away from that trap in the future.

 

[Kal]

Edit: nevermind, I'm a little slow.

Sinister, the main point is that asking for someone to explain why something shouldn't be banned is silly. You can't expect ruleset creators to justify every possible legality in their ruleset.

 

[Seartu]

Edit: nevermind, I'm a little slow.

Sinister, the main point is that asking for someone to explain why something shouldn't be banned is silly. You can't expect ruleset creators to justify every possible legality in their ruleset.

At the same time, there are very few legal stages it seems that he ran into an awful lot of resistance for asking why one of them was legal.

If the neutral/cp stages can't be justified what would separate them from the rest?

 

[Fortress | Sveet]

Burden of proof is in the direction of banning, which kal reminds me of quite a bit

 

[Kal]

It depends somewhat on your perspective; I would not question a TO's decision to not ban something, because then I would be requiring him to justify just about every decision he made. As far as I can tell, "why is Jungle Japes legal?" is not any different a question than "why is Falco legal?" In the case of the former, the convention is to scrubbily ban the stage, and this is the only reason people think it's somehow a more valid question than the latter. But, in reality, you can't ask someone why something isn't banned. What you can do (and something Sinister sort of tried to do, but not really) is explain why you think the thing should be banned, and ask for a response.

However, in this particular case, resistance arose because of the way he posed the question (and his laziness in not searching the tread for the word "Japes"). If he had simply asked "why is Jungle Japes legal in teams?" a response would have been provided. "Who honestly wants to play a serious tournament match on JJ?" treads into the territory of "we should ban **** we dislike."

 

[Seartu]

Burden of proof is in the direction of banning, which kal reminds me of quite a bit

Perhaps I misunderstood some motives. I didn't really see Sinister as imposing the burden of truth but simply looking for information.

Reading back I see some confrontational wording but I guess as an observer of the thread I was interested in the same topic. Essentially "what separates the variables and unorthodox nature of Jungle Japes from similar elements on other stages?"

I appreciate Strong Bad's response which answered that question, but Sinister seems to be taking a lot of heat for what looks to e like just some poor wording in his first post.

EDIT: Kal, I see you brought up many of these same points. Well done and thanks!

 

[Strong Badam]

Let's ban Falco

 

[King5280]

i think japes in doubles is fine. and itd be interesting to see how a lot of the other stages that were banned in singles due to over emphasis on camping would fare in teams. i feel like theres a lot more stages in teams that could work as legal stages because camping isnt nearly as dominant of a teams strategy.

 

[FerrishTheFish]

I am in favor of banning Falco. The amount of time a player can put into him vs. the reward the player will get out of him is ********.

I literally practiced Falco by myself for like 15 min, then turned around and beat Falco mains I consider better than me multiple times in Falco dittos. (Ok, I know he shouldn't really be banned ... But if he's not banned, I'll pick him up myself 8D)

 

[Kal]

Let's ban Falco

This. If I were banning characters the way the MBR is banning stages, I'd have banned Falco four years ago. As a little nublet, Hylian picks him against me and says "check out this laser."

Cue the Kill Bill-style red overlay of rage.

 

[Fortress | Sveet]

Falco is kinda broken... Somewhere between Icicle Mountain broken and Mushroom Kingdom II broken...

Either way, he deserves the banhammer!

 

[FerrishTheFish]

Exactly! Now if Cactuar will just sign next to the 'X' ...

 

[Kal]

It would just make me profoundly happy if, in a fit of karmic justice, the Smash community started banning Falco at tournaments.

 

[Dr Peepee]

thread sucks imo

 

[twizzlerj]

I am in favor of banning Falco. The amount of time a player can put into him vs. the reward the player will get out of him is ********.

I literally practiced Falco by myself for like 15 min, then turned around and beat Falco mains I consider better than me multiple times in Falco dittos. (Ok, I know he shouldn't really be banned ... But if he's not banned, I'll pick him up myself 8D)

this picture was amazing laughed so hard

 

[Mew2King]

LMFAO @ pp

 

[Mew2King]

LOL ITS SO FUNNY CUZ OF PPs personality

he could say "you guys ****ing suck, i put mad work into falco, andhe'sthe9thbestcharacter"

but

"thread sucks imo"
LOOOOOOOL

 

[The Star King]

IDK why but M2K's posts make me smile for no reason. Does anybody else see how adorable they are

BTW we should probably ban all the high tiers down to ICs - Melee would be pretty balanced

 

[Kal]

Or ban everyone but the high tiers? >_>

 

[Geenareeno]

Kal's right, the game would be so balanced, but I don't think The Star King was being serious.

 

[Kal]

False. Ban all the things!

 

[stelzig]

You have my full support on banning falco