The 8-Bit Ultimatum - A Mario Bros. Overview

[Grim Tuesday]

Fix'd for 10chars

What? Giving an admittedly competitive stage, that never had any solid reasoning behind it's banning... A CHANCE!?

INSANITY!

---

Red Ryu, does that mean you support having the Kamikaze Rule instated like it was previously? I mean, I'm sure well over a super majority wants it in.

 

[#HBC | Red Ryu]

Red Ryu, does that mean you support having the Kamikaze Rule instated like it was previously? I mean, I'm sure well over a super majority wants it in.

Not anymore.

BBR got rid of it, so I'm pretty sure 66% doesn't fly, also the rule only helps Bowser, which proper knowledge of him can help make it so Bowser wins a suicide, or Ganon, which is sudden death or a loss, the rest is arbitrary.

I will not debate that rule, I'll even state I'm against it.

However if 2/3rd and higher majority wanted it, ok go for it.

 

[Steam]

What? Giving an admittedly competitive stage, that never had any solid reasoning behind it's banning... A CHANCE!?

INSANITY!

---

Red Ryu, does that mean you support having the Kamikaze Rule instated like it was previously? I mean, I'm sure well over a super majority wants it in.

Mario bros is competitive... as mario bros. but not smash.

maybe you should check if the domain name Mariobrosboards.com is availible :0

 

[ぱみゅ]

There's no rason for hating.
Discussing legality is worthless, because we all know nobody would consider it for any serious tournament, with or without criteria.

I think the stage is competitive in its own way, learning it even helps you improving your game (reaction time and item play moreover), and it could be a great stage if people weren't that close-minded.

I'd try it because it is hella fun and, again, competitive in its own way.

 

[Grim Tuesday]

Mario bros is competitive... as mario bros. but not smash.

maybe you should check if the domain name Mariobrosboards.com is availible :0

Last I checked, Mario Bros. is a part of Smash.

 

[Browny]

I hate competitive Smash >_>

Let the hate flow through you my young apprentice.

 

[Rizen]

Link's attacks hit up, they'd easily be tecked and Link is slow. The stage heavily supports hit (or throw critter) and run tactics instead of SH spamming style. No one cares about Link, but (sorry if this has been said, I didn't read every post) any character who can be CGed off stage has only the middle platform to avoid this and CG's are fast enough to KO before critters stop them. DDD and several other characters would get 1 grab KOs almost guaranteed like ICs. Because the layout Falco's laser would be unavoidable, only shieldable, and he could have a critter in hand as he camps, he can CG a walk-off KO too- this is worse than Falco on FD. Some characters have good side launching attacks like Yoshi's Dtilt/Dsmash, Jiggly/Fox Dsmash ect but many others launch up enough for the hit character to ceiling teck, which can be done at any %.
I like this stage but it's not suited for competitive Brawl.

 

[Grim Tuesday]

Link's attacks hit up, they'd easily be tecked and Link is slow. The stage heavily supports hit (or throw critter) and run tactics instead of SH spamming style. No one cares about Link, but (sorry if this has been said, I didn't read every post) any character who can be CGed off stage has only the middle platform to avoid this and CG's are fast enough to KO before critters stop them. DDD and several other characters would get 1 grab KOs almost guaranteed like ICs. Because the layout Falco's laser wold be unavoidable, only shieldable, and he could have a critter in hand as he camps, he can CG a walk-off KO too- this is worse than Falco on FD. Some characters have good side launching attacks like Yoshi's Dtilt/Dsmash, Jiggly/Fox Dsmash ect but many others launch up enough for the hit character to ceiling teck, which can be done at any %.
I like this stage but it's not suited for competitive Brawl.

It helps to read through the thread before commenting, because pretty much all your points make no sense at all.

 

[Rizen]

It helps to read through the thread before commenting, because pretty much all your points make no sense at all.

I should have recognized a troll thread. Walk-off KOs, bad SH spamming, strong strait laser camping, bad for upwards launches/good for side launches, this don't make sense on Mario Bros?
Okay you got me the first time. Fool me once shame on you, fool me twice shame on me. lol

 

[Grim Tuesday]

I should have recognized a troll thread. Walk-off KOs, bad SH spamming, strong strait laser camping, bad for upwards launches/good for side launches, this don't make sense on Mario Bros?
Okay you got me the first time. Fool me once shame on you, fool me twice shame on me. lol

It's not a troll thread.

The effect of the walk-offs is made negligible by the powerful items.

I have never heard of 'SH' meaning anything apart from 'Short Hop', so I have no idea how you can "spam short hops" on this stage.

Why is laser camping over-powered here?

Being bad for upward KOs and good for side KOs is a VERY stupid reason to ban a stage.

 

[-LzR-]

Are people this stupid? They don't realize what this thread is about? Grim isn't saying I WANT THIS LEGAL I LIEK. He is saying, PROVE ME WRONG.

Now do and don't say **** like lolitems. I have said my arguments many many many times and I think they are a valid reason to ban this stage. Anyways, it's a damn funny stage.

 

[Grim Tuesday]

Are people this stupid? They don't realize what this thread is about? Grim isn't saying I WANT THIS LEGAL I LIEK. He is saying, PROVE ME WRONG.

Now do and don't say **** like lolitems. I have said my arguments many many many times and I think they are a valid reason to ban this stage. Anyways, it's a damn funny stage.

I'm just really not sure if the items really DO marginalize and change the required skill-set at a high level. I mean, we've played some pretty decent matches on it here in my state, but other people are reporting stupid item abuse-fests.

 

[-LzR-]

Well I just think it's the fact that you HAVE to abuse the items to win. It's not like in YI, you don't have to abuse the support ghosts. You don't have to abuse the lack of hazards or anything in FD. You don't have to abuse the lava in norfair to win. You can still win by using your normal skillset. In Mario Bros. you don't really win without the usage of the shells.

Having this stage legal would just force everyone to main Diddy Kong as they have to be good with items to win.

 

[Rizen]

It's not a troll thread.

The effect of the walk-offs is made negligible by the powerful items.

I have never heard of 'SH' meaning anything apart from 'Short Hop', so I have no idea how you can "spam short hops" on this stage.

Why is laser camping over-powered here?

Being bad for upward KOs and good for side KOs is a VERY stupid reason to ban a stage.

Oh, you were serious.
Item's aren't always there, particularly at the start. Their feed rate is too slow.

Except on the top where you will be sharked, characters can't jump over CGers. The low platforms make shield grabbing extremely easy on most of the stage, which also has walk off KO potential. Many characters simply could not get past CGers like DDD if the aren't in the middle.

SH spamming: Common to almost every character with a range special attack. SH and fire energy or projectiles at angles or a faster rate.

Have you fought vs Falco on FD? He SH spams lasers> phantasm or reflector> repeat or grab CGs shields. Falco could spam characters in a similar way but where they can't jump. Range attacks also launch critters so that wouldn't stop him and he could easily phantasm to the other side. This also applies to other fast strait forwards spamming.
Characters who spam at angles and aren't affected by gravity (not ice bergs, fireballs, thunder jolts) are severely limited. Link, Snake, Toon Link, Olimar, Samus (worse Zair), Yoshi, G&W, maybe others- their spamming would be stopped by platforms above completely or limited to slow ground use.
And a CGer could shield grab and characters without fast escape moves (fox illusion etc).

"Being bad for upward KOs and good for side KOs is a VERY stupid reason to ban a stage."
MK can hit most characters off stage and gimp, then low ceilings are banned because strong upwards launchers are too powerful (Cornairia). Stuff like that happens. Are characters not suppose to star KO but get a walk off KO with 1 grab?

Tecking ceilings lets people survive ridiculous %s, I've seen over 600% on MBs. Critters are almost the only feasible way for many characters to KO and they don't emerge fast enough for character's who rely on them. Jiggly can Dsmash or roll KO at very low %s, same for some Dsmashes, CGers have many opportunities to force walkoffs, DDD/Kirby can inhale> spit for KOs at any%, Space animals have speed, reflectors, fast side launches, and greatly boosted spamming.

A few characters get huge advantages, a handful get good advantages, and everyone else has little to no chance on Mario Bros. It's banned for good reasons.

 

[-LzR-]

You don't really know much? Corneria is not banned because of it's ceiling, it's because of it's overpowerful fincamping. If you really get camped by Falco and can't beat it, learn the MU. At least in Mario Bros. you can leave a shell in the area behind you so if he used phantasm, he could fly into it.

And you don't really get walked off in this stage, no. You leave a stupid shell in the path and tada! You don't get walked off if you have the slightest brain to use the stage. DDD and Kirby will like instarelease you out of inhale if you just learn to mash. Space animals reflectors aren't really good for reasons Grim has already mentioned a lot of times. Jiggly's dsmash is like the worst in the game and this stage is no exception. Her rollout is just asking to get turtle'd.

 

[Grim Tuesday]

I'm not even going to respond to that, Arizen.

 

[Rizen]

You don't really know much? Corneria is not banned because of it's ceiling, it's because of it's overpowerful fincamping.

...and low ceiling because Snake's Utilt.

If you really get camped by Falco and can't beat it, learn the MU. At least in Mario Bros. you can leave a shell in the area behind you so if he used phantasm, he could fly into it.

The point was Falco's camping is better than on FD. And even MK is annoyed by Falco spamming on FD. There won't always be a shell behind you and it could get up and walk into you, even holding one isn't safe for long periods of time. Lasers can flip critters and stop thrown ones.

Who said I can't beat Falcos on FD? It's hard but I've done it. Don't get personal, defend you case.

And you don't really get walked off in this stage, no. You leave a stupid shell in the path and tada! You don't get walked off if you have the slightest brain to use the stage. DDD and Kirby will like instarelease you out of inhale if you just learn to mash. Space animals reflectors aren't really good for reasons Grim has already mentioned a lot of times. Jiggly's dsmash is like the worst in the game and this stage is no exception. Her rollout is just asking to get turtle'd.

Leave a shell by every walk off? Won't happen. DDD and Kirby can inhale and immediately spit which is all they need. Or carry opponent with more damage. Play a good DDD sometime.
Dsmash distance isn't important it only needs to launch the short distance to a death zone. A Jiggly who's rollout gets turtled is not a good one.

I'm not even going to respond to that, Arizen.

No defense? Fooled me twice, shame on me; total troll thread. What a waste of time.


Someone lock this.

 

[-LzR-]

Seriously? If Dedede is sitting on a walkoff, just throw the stuff at him. You need to be a total noob to just dashattack his shield and die. Also the spit doesn't reliably kill at walkoffs as Dedede needs to be half outside the stage himself for it to work. And again, Corneria IS NOT BANNED because of it's low ceiling. Get over it.

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

Are people this stupid? They don't realize what this thread is about? Grim isn't saying I WANT THIS LEGAL I LIEK. He is saying, PROVE ME WRONG.

The problem: we have.

@Rizen: No, the small upper stage boundaries is not a problem at all. You die early on it. Just like you die early on Brinstar, Halberd, or Green Greens. It's not a problem. If it wasn't for fin camping, Corneria would be a legit stage.

 

[-LzR-]

Besides, everyone kills earlies upwards if the ceiling is low and vice versa.

 

[Grim Tuesday]

I guess I have to respond then, what a shame.

Oh, you were serious.
Item's aren't always there, particularly at the start. Their feed rate is too slow.

Don't get grabbed at the start? And the feed rate isn't slow, it takes 10 seconds to get 1 hazard on the stage, that's all you need.

Except on the top where you will be sharked, characters can't jump over CGers. The low platforms make shield grabbing extremely easy on most of the stage, which also has walk off KO potential. Many characters simply could not get past CGers like DDD if the aren't in the middle.

Alright, so, hypothetical situation:
You're opponent is camping a walk-off and has the lead. If you approach, he has an enormous advantage because one shield grab = death.

Now, on this stage you have 4 VERY powerful shield-poking hazards which can be carried, placed, thrown, walk on their own and stage wrap.

The solution to the camping problem should be obvious, but I'll explain it anyway:
Choose one of the following:
a) Place a hazard so it will walk into him (either from behind or in-front) and attack while the hazard distracts him.
b) Stand from afar and chuck hazards at him, chances are one will hit pretty quickly.
c) A combination of the above.

SH spamming: Common to almost every character with a range special attack. SH and fire energy or projectiles at angles or a faster rate.

Have you fought vs Falco on FD? He SH spams lasers> phantasm or reflector> repeat or grab CGs shields. Falco could spam characters in a similar way but where they can't jump. Range attacks also launch critters so that wouldn't stop him and he could easily phantasm to the other side. This also applies to other fast strait forwards spamming.
Characters who spam at angles and aren't affected by gravity (not ice bergs, fireballs, thunder jolts) are severely limited. Link, Snake, Toon Link, Olimar, Samus (worse Zair), Yoshi, G&W, maybe others- their spamming would be stopped by platforms above completely or limited to slow ground use.

I'd first like to mention that SH Spamming is terminology that you have created all by yourself and that no one else uses as far as I know.

A few tips:
1. Phantasm doesn't go through hazards, so it cannot be used as a reliable escape move.
2. You can power-shield lasers.
3. You can use some of the anti-camping solutions I mentioned above (such as making the hazard come from behind).
4. You can still jump with freedom in the middle section of the level, so you can just stay there to avoid most lasers while you set-up hazards to KO the opponent.

And a CGer could shield grab and characters without fast escape moves (fox illusion etc).

Again, CGing is not a problem.

MK can hit most characters off stage and gimp, then low ceilings are banned because strong upwards launchers are too powerful (Cornairia). Stuff like that happens. Are characters not suppose to star KO but get a walk off KO with 1 grab?

Tecking ceilings lets people survive ridiculous %s, I've seen over 600% on MBs. Critters are almost the only feasible way for many characters to KO and they don't emerge fast enough for character's who rely on them. Jiggly can Dsmash or roll KO at very low %s, same for some Dsmashes, CGers have many opportunities to force walkoffs, DDD/Kirby can inhale> spit for KOs at any%, Space animals have speed, reflectors, fast side launches, and greatly boosted spamming.

This paragraph was what made me not respond to you before.

No stage is banned because of ceilings. Corneria is banned because of fin camping and Sonic's HA stall being over-powered.

Teching doesn't let people survive to ridiculous percents, because not everything can be teched. If you are on the ground in any place except for the middle platform, a hazard hitting you CANNOT be teched. Not to mention that in some cases, you can be blasted out of the air without a chance to tech and that people aren't perfect and will end up missing a tech eventually.

Hazards being the best KO method is your only semi-legitimate point so far.

Jigglypuff's down smash and roll-out are both terrible moves, roll-out ESPECIALLY on this stage.

Chain-grabbing isn't over-powered, as I've said.

Kirby and D3's inhale can be broken out of very quickly, and just like what I said above with walk-off/shield-grab camping, is not broken.

Yes, space animals are good on this stage. If I remember correctly, that's the point of a counter-pick!

A few characters get huge advantages, a handful get good advantages, and everyone else has little to no chance on Mario Bros.

Wrong. Too broad a statement, so I can't be more specific, you're just plain wrong.

...and low ceiling because Snake's Utilt.

No. It is not banned because of the low ceiling.

The point was Falco's camping is better than on FD. And even MK is annoyed by Falco spamming on FD. There won't always be a shell behind you and it could get up and walk into you, even holding one isn't safe for long periods of time. Lasers can flip critters and stop thrown ones.

Final Destination is one of MK's worst stages, so that's a pretty bad example.

There won't always be a shell behind you, but there will ALWAYS BE ONE ON THE STAGE, so you can just run-off and grab one. The hazards are so predictable, you'd have to be pretty bad to fail at picking one up. Why are they not safe to hold...?

Fox's lasers don't stop thrown hazards, only Falco, and he is slow enough to catch up with.

Every second a Fox spends flipping hazards is a second you can be spending attacking him directly. Think about it.

Who said I can't beat Falcos on FD? It's hard but I've done it. Don't get personal, defend you case.

FD isn't even Falco's best stage >_>. Learn to power-shield lasers, bro.

Leave a shell by every walk off? Won't happen. DDD and Kirby can inhale and immediately spit which is all they need. Or carry opponent with more damage. Play a good DDD sometime.

Erm... No... Leave a shell by the walk-off YOUR OPPONENT IS CAMPING.

Dsmash distance isn't important it only needs to launch the short distance to a death zone. A Jiggly who's rollout gets turtled is not a good one.

Down Smash is just simply a bad move, if it never hits on any other stage, why would it hit on this one?

A Jiggly who's roll-out gets turtled is one who is playing against any player who is smart enough to keep a hazard on them whenever they go into confrontation with the opponent.

No defense? Fooled me twice, shame on me; total troll thread. What a waste of time.

This was a very stupid reply and you know it.

Someone lock this.

...
Why?

If it wasn't for fin camping, Corneria would be a legit stage.

Not quite, there is the issue of Sonic being over-powered.

 

[-LzR-]

Seriously Arizen, out of all the crap on this thread, your arguments were the worst. None of it was true at all.

Yeah let's make a great argument. IC CAN CG YOU DO DEATH ON THIS STAGE OMG. Prove me wrong.

 

[Browny]

I like turtles

 

[Grim Tuesday]

I like turtles

Oh god, LMAO.

Timing for that was perfect Browny.

 

[-LzR-]

I prefer crabs thanks.

 

[Grim Tuesday]

I like anything cooked under a flame.

Spoiler

/badfireballreference

Okay, no more spam.

I'm going to address some previous posts I ignored in a moment.

 

[Grim Tuesday]

1. Mario Bros.' level of hazards combined with the teching prominence cause wild fluctuation in stock length, including the possibility of losing stocks super fast. You might make a mistake that causes you to die at 50% to a thrown item. The difference in play that causes that and that causes you to live to 200% is very small. This makes matches between similarly but not equally skilled players basically completely unpredictable in terms of result.

I believe this really needs to be tested before being so boldly stated. Of course, that will never happen because, well, it's ****ing Mario Bros.

Anyway, onto the actual legitimacy of the point: This same argument could be used for banning Ice Climbers. Say you have two near equally skilled players, one of which is an Ice Climbers main. In game 1, the first player could make no mistakes and win by an entire stock. In the second game however, just one mistake may cause an entire game loss due to the Ice Climbers in-escapable chain-grabs.

2. This is somewhat related to the previous point, but the ability to tech (which is continuous, not boolean) is tested more strongly here than on any other stage by a big margin (even stages like Luigi's Mansion focus on teching far less than this stage). This causes discrepencies in teching ability, an ability that is mostly tech skill, to be far more pronounced in match results. Game elements that cause tech skill to be significantly more pronounced in match results are really not good for the game, though the only reason people would agree with that is because I'm saying it about Mario Bros..

I honestly don't agree with this. Teching is important in some situations, yes, but if you are too close to a blast-zone, hit while grounded or hit in any way (with the right variables), you won't get the chance to tech. All of those situations occur often on the stage.

VERY often.

3. The unique attributes of the charcters are somewhat understated on Mario Bros.. Yeah Brawl has those 27972 match-ups, but a lot of them are very similar. Fox/Bowser/Temple and Fox/Ganon/Temple are essentially the same match-up, and anyone with a basic understanding of the game could understand why. Mario Bros. pushes this even more by making wide numbers of the character attributes just not that significant. For instance, G&W's usmash on most stages is an attribute that helps define what it means to play as him and against him. It's essentially not a move on Mario Bros.. In fact, G&W's only ground moves he should ever use on Mario Bros. are dsmash (near walk-offs in certain ambiguous situations), dtilt, a few other walk-off pressure situations, to flip hazards), and jab (exclusively to flip hazards). Most characters get similarly boiled down so the 666 match-ups that exist on Mario Bros., playable though they may be, represent a far less diverse and interesting slice of gameplay than the 666 match-ups belonging to really any other of the non-loop stages.

We cannot ban a stage under this criteria without causing a double standard.

For example, Norfair provides shallower gameplay for the majority of the cast when compared to Delfino Plaza or Pokemon Stadium 2, should we ban this stage, too?

4. The nature of the gameplay on Mario Bros., partially because of the low lack of variety between match-ups, most likely makes the skill ceiling on the stage low enough to be realistically human achievable. That is, beyond a certain level of skill on Mario Bros., all players are likely essentially equal. That's not good for the game to have elements like that. BPC did bring up "mitigation of skill", but I don't think the Mario Bros. metagame is advanced enough for this to be a currently present factor so much as a very likely future factor so only partial credit for that one.

As you said, this really hasn't been proven and likely never will be, unfortunately.

------------------------

Are there any other important points I've missed?

 

[-LzR-]

I can't think of anything else. I would say there is a slight cave of life effect here thought. A good player should never die here. He can instathrow all the items back and he can DI up and tech the ceiling.

 

[Grim Tuesday]

I can't think of anything else. I would say there is a slight cave of life effect here thought. A good player should never die here. He can instathrow all the items back and he can DI up and tech the ceiling.

A good player ≠ a perfect player though.

Oh, your complaint with the stage was that you HAVE to abuse the items to win, right? I guess I'll try and refute that.

There is no "abusing" on any stage, you are simply using the geography to your advantage, this trait is present on every stage.

I could make a case for Final Destination being banned because you have to abuse the completely flat surface to win.

 

[Tesh]

You say you just want to be proven wrong, but you won't accept that the stage is over-centralized around the hazards. YET your arguement about walkoff camping and circle camping and easy CG kills is that the hazards are so broken that it dwarfs the other issues that we would already ban a stage for.

You seem to think you have a relevant point when you point out that the stage is part of the game. That doesn't matter at all. Its just using the game's engine to create very different minigame. The fact of the matter is that it DOES test skills as differently as switching game modes. It makes so many things irrelevant that its comparable to playing another game/mode.

Sonic is overpowered on Corneria? Really? Because all the characters that can't safely get to his homing attack stalling also can't get to him on FD. Not to mention the best characters in the game can still get to him and kill him.

You don't seem to understand what over centralized means. And yet you put it in the title.

 

[#HBC | Red Ryu]

A good player ≠ a perfect player though.

Oh, your complaint with the stage was that you HAVE to abuse the items to win, right? I guess I'll try and refute that.

There is no "abusing" on any stage, you are simply using the geography to your advantage, this trait is present on every stage.

I could make a case for Final Destination being banned because you have to abuse the completely flat surface to win.

You wouldn't succeed and I pointed out why this is a bad example like your battlefield one.

 

[Trent]

I said that I hated competitive Smash because arguing for anything is impossible when we can literally say "Hmm... Nah, I don't like that stage. Let's ban it".

1) Arguing on the internet is impossible. No one wins, ever.

2) After reading through this thread, while some people did say stuff similar to that, other people have given very good arguments, while your responses to them were"Hmm... Nah, I like that stage. Let's legalize it."

3) Why has no one addressed AA's post yet? I can't take this thread seriously until someone argues his points.

EDIT- AA's post:

Spoiler

The sad thing about this thread is that the only posts that are convincing are the ones saying this stage is a good stage...

As much as some people want to stick their heads in the sand and pretend it's not true, a major part of Brawl's design is that every stage is substantially different from the others. The fundamental way you approach gameplay has to be deeply informed by what stage you are on. Let's take the match-up Mr. Game & Watch vs Ice Climbers:

On Battlefield I'm going to focus on mobility between the three platforms when I have a lead as G&W. ICs basically have to run after me with uairs and Blizzards, but they have to be really careful since I can reverse direction and nail them with an aerial if they get sloppy. If ICs have a lead, they're going to just pick a side platform to sit under and uair if I get on it, making them very hard to approach.

On Smashville I'm going to be riding the moving platform around a lot. ICs are going to wait for me to pass over them and try to snipe with uair. I'm going to try to use Fire to punish sloppy uairs on shield to pop them up into position for a nair. If they get a lead, I more or less have to give up the platform play entirely which makes it extremely hard to fight them.

On Rainbow Cruise I'm going to focus on mobility and evasiveness on the ship and try to tag them with aerials if they try to chase. I may try to take a defensive position on the back of the boat and try to parry approaches. When the ship moves to the carpet section, I'm going to try to stay low and see if I can really get at them with nairs. If I can force them into real danger, I'll try to start chasing from the right to see if I can get an early fair kill which can really seal the deal for me. On the third section, I'm going to definitely focus on keeping to the right of ICs, staying on the platforms a lot, and seeing if I can snipe at them with fairs that will be hard to respond to. It's far in my interest to create trap situations when the stage is about to move downward since they have twice as many things that could go wrong as I do, and even if I don't gimp outright, I can land some good hits in the air as they come down under pressure. ICs, on the other hand, are going to try to corner me on the ship, try to just avoid combat completely on the carpets since that section is so wildly bad for them, and try to stay close to me during the third section since that's a pretty good time to cg me.

On Frigate Orpheon I'm going to stay to the right of the stage on the first form and try to "hold" the seam between the main stage and the part that moves. The vertical differences that frequently arise here make it much harder than usual for ICs to move in, and if I get in a situation that's too dangerous, I can use Fire and then drift to the left platform. On the second form, I'm going to hang in the center and try to counter approaches as best I can; it's a hard position to approach if played right. If ICs take the lead and start holding positions far from the good positions for G&W on this stage, I'm going to try to get on the ledges and fight back from those. If ICs move away from the effective attack range of ledge play, they move into areas where G&W has a lot of strong counter-play with geography on both forms.

Yeah, there are a lot of common elements, but it doesn't change that from the start to finish everything I do in the match is focused on the geography. I'm trying to create advantageous positions and avoid disadvantageous ones. I may very well be trying to run the clock and looking for ways to make hitting me hard either through stationary defense or by mobility based running. Geography dictates what positions are advantageous and disadvantageous, and it also dictates what the options are to hold defenses or approach a defense. The natural design of stages in Brawl only serves to make this more prevalent as only three of them are non-interactive (all three of which are geographically strongly different from each other) and many stages have completely unique elements to them relative to all the other stages (stuff like Distant Planet's rain effect that just has no analogue on any other stage). The amount of competitive depth this adds to Brawl is insane. Brawl already had 666 character-character match-ups. Using a different stage in many ways makes it a new match-up so if you were to include all 42 stages uniquely you would be looking at a game with 27972 match-ups. If more people looked at banning a stage as banning 666 match-ups, maybe things would be looked at differently... No one would argue stuff like how X stage changes the game too much; that's just not a reasonable position. Changes it from what exactly? You can't find me two stages that are the same or even really all that similar in the first place so a stage being an "outlier" should hardly bother us.

Likewise, the fact that that stage so deeply informs our game plans always makes the idea of "fighting the stage" or "not focusing on your opponent" so silly. You're focusing on defeating your opponent always on any stage. It's not even theoretically possible to make a stage in which you don't focus on that. You make use of the stage, on every stage, to create positions of strength for yourself. If the presence of a stage hazard is part of what makes your position strong, what difference is it?

This stage isn't really very random at all. This has been well established. It has randomness, but it's within tightly bound parameters that allow any player with the minimal skill needed to cover multiple possibilities with single actions to handle it easily. Anyone arguing anything based on randomness is being kinda silly here. It is hazardous. It has predictable hazards. The odd equation of hazards to randomness is perhaps tripping some people up, but there's no logical correlation between random factors in matches and stage hazards. The mobility argument is similar. How does being faster help you if both sides know where you need to be well in advance? The argument literally doesn't make sense.

There are a few real issues here, but I don't think a single person has brought them up (the only "real" issue brought up is the appeal to numbers of how no one likes the stage, which is definitely true but really speaks badly of the community more than wins any argument over what is competitively sound). I see four real issues:

1. Mario Bros.' level of hazards combined with the teching prominence cause wild fluctuation in stock length, including the possibility of losing stocks super fast. You might make a mistake that causes you to die at 50% to a thrown item. The difference in play that causes that and that causes you to live to 200% is very small. This makes matches between similarly but not equally skilled players basically completely unpredictable in terms of result.

2. This is somewhat related to the previous point, but the ability to tech (which is continuous, not boolean) is tested more strongly here than on any other stage by a big margin (even stages like Luigi's Mansion focus on teching far less than this stage). This causes discrepencies in teching ability, an ability that is mostly tech skill, to be far more pronounced in match results. Game elements that cause tech skill to be significantly more pronounced in match results are really not good for the game, though the only reason people would agree with that is because I'm saying it about Mario Bros..

3. The unique attributes of the charcters are somewhat understated on Mario Bros.. Yeah Brawl has those 27972 match-ups, but a lot of them are very similar. Fox/Bowser/Temple and Fox/Ganon/Temple are essentially the same match-up, and anyone with a basic understanding of the game could understand why. Mario Bros. pushes this even more by making wide numbers of the character attributes just not that significant. For instance, G&W's usmash on most stages is an attribute that helps define what it means to play as him and against him. It's essentially not a move on Mario Bros.. In fact, G&W's only ground moves he should ever use on Mario Bros. are dsmash (near walk-offs in certain ambiguous situations), dtilt, a few other walk-off pressure situations, to flip hazards), and jab (exclusively to flip hazards). Most characters get similarly boiled down so the 666 match-ups that exist on Mario Bros., playable though they may be, represent a far less diverse and interesting slice of gameplay than the 666 match-ups belonging to really any other of the non-loop stages.

4. The nature of the gameplay on Mario Bros., partially because of the low lack of variety between match-ups, most likely makes the skill ceiling on the stage low enough to be realistically human achievable. That is, beyond a certain level of skill on Mario Bros., all players are likely essentially equal. That's not good for the game to have elements like that. BPC did bring up "mitigation of skill", but I don't think the Mario Bros. metagame is advanced enough for this to be a currently present factor so much as a very likely future factor so only partial credit for that one.

Of course, the stage hasn't been carefully tested, and it may have surprises in store. There's definitely a lot of reason to be suspicious, and when most people are ready to throw away proven quality stages like Norfair, I'm disinclined to be pushing for such a massive experiment with many ways to prove itelf a problem like Mario Bros.. It's just unfortunate that the arguments within this topic failed to be compelling, but then again, I think most people base their stage preferences more on, well preference and gut feelings than on analysis.

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

It's been addressed but not well or adequately.

 

[WindMajor]

You say you just want to be proven wrong, but you won't accept that the stage is over-centralized around the hazards. YET your arguement about walkoff camping and circle camping and easy CG kills is that the hazards are so broken that it dwarfs the other issues that we would already ban a stage for.

The hazards do take a huge effect on the game, but people are insinuating that because the match "over-centralizes" on the hazards, that it must be banned. Nobody has come up with a good reason as to why the inclusion of hazards are bad when considering the numerous ways around them.

I mentioned a couple of pages ago why the hazards shouldn't be a reason to ban, but it went ignored. To make it short, my points were:

1. Don't get hit. If you think that not getting hit is not a legitimate argument, you're causing a double standard that goes against the very fabrics of Smash and other fighters. Everything will always boil down to not getting hit.

2. There are numerous ways to not get hit by the hazards, which supports my first argument.

3. Even though the hazards can potentially remove a stock, they can be abused by anyone, which makes them better than character specific infinites.

4. The hazards can stop CGs, which means that the walk-offs are less abusable by CGs.

You seem to think you have a relevant point when you point out that the stage is part of the game. That doesn't matter at all. Its just using the game's engine to create very different minigame. The fact of the matter is that it DOES test skills as differently as switching game modes. It makes so many things irrelevant that its comparable to playing another game/mode.

This is quite the claim!

It uses the game's engine to create a very different minigame? Really now? It's a stage with items in it; How are we playing Mario Party, sir? Is it because "it DOES test skills as differently as switching game modes"?

For one, we're playing a game of stocks, and the stock amount is 3. The skills we're testing are pretty much every skill that can ever hope to be tested to fulfill the win criteria of "remove the opponent's three stocks before he removes yours" or "win by a time out". Like you guys said before, the stage focuses a huge deal on the hazards (aka items aka item control). What skill are we testing in Mario Bros. that we are not testing in a stage like Distant Planet or Green Greens? As far as I'm concerned, in order to play effectively in any of those two stages, you need to learn how to implement external items to your game, and how to evade those external items if you're in the receiving end. The same could be said about Mario Bros..

By saying that the skills being tested is so alien to Brawl that it's a minigame inside a game, or that it doesn't test the skills that we want to test in competitive Brawl is a huge double standard. The only thing that changes are the stakes of getting hit, but the skills required to use and avoid them remain the same.

 

[Grim Tuesday]

You say you just want to be proven wrong, but you won't accept that the stage is over-centralized around the hazards. YET your arguement about walkoff camping and circle camping and easy CG kills is that the hazards are so broken that it dwarfs the other issues that we would already ban a stage for.

The hazards are not over-powered, but they are powerful enough to stop someone who is spending his time trying to abuse the stage (staying in one place/moving around in a set pattern).

I entirely accept the game is centralized around the hazards, but over-centralization is a bit of a misnomer in this case. I mean, how can it be OVER-centralized around the hazards when the hazards aren't even bad for the game?

You seem to think you have a relevant point when you point out that the stage is part of the game. That doesn't matter at all. Its just using the game's engine to create very different minigame.

Taken quite out of context. I have been saying that it is part of the game to all the people who are saying it ISN'T part of the game.

The fact of the matter is that it DOES test skills as differently as switching game modes. It makes so many things irrelevant that its comparable to playing another game/mode.

I recall listing what I thought some of the vital skills are, and it got shot-down pretty hard. Yet no one else has really been saying what these "skills" are that Mario Bros. mitigates. It'd be great if you could list what you think the core skills are and how Mario Bros. makes them un-important.

Sonic is overpowered on Corneria? Really? Because all the characters that can't safely get to his homing attack stalling also can't get to him on FD. Not to mention the best characters in the game can still get to him and kill him.

Eh, I guess. I wasn't really thinking when I said that it seems.

You don't seem to understand what over centralized means. And yet you put it in the title.

I understand perfectly well what over-centralizing means, and I did not, in fact, put it in the title.

1) Arguing on the internet is impossible. No one wins, ever.

This is wrong, but whatever, seemed to be for humor.

2) After reading through this thread, while some people did say stuff similar to that, other people have given very good arguments, while your responses to them were"Hmm... Nah, I like that stage. Let's legalize it."

Elaborate please. Who has given a good argument that I haven't addressed properly?

And I'll say it again: I don't like this stage and I have never said that I seriously like it.

3) Why has no one addressed AA's post yet? I can't take this thread seriously until someone argues his points.

I did >_>

and so did Ghostbone >_>

It's been addressed but not well or adequately.

Easy enough for you to say that without explaining why I didn't address it well or adequately.

 

[napZzz]

saying that you can get around hazards being the reason they dont matter is ********. Its like saying you can get around attacks to win games, sure, its true but its definitely not going to happen at all...let alone consistantly

you're gonna get hit...and you wont be able to avoid it

hazards shouldn't be allowed period, but thats a whole different discussion

when people say they dont like it as the basis of wanting it banned...did you ever stop to think that they dont like it FOR A REASON?

 

[Grim Tuesday]

saying that you can get around hazards being the reason they dont matter is ********. Its like saying you can get around attacks to win games, sure, its true but its definitely not going to happen at all...let alone consistantly

hazards shouldn't be allowed period, but thats a whole different discussion

when people say they dont like it as the basis of wanting it banned...did you ever stop to think that they dont like it FOR A REASON?

Except hazards are a lot more reasonable to avoid than attacks.

You can catch them, attack them, spot dodge them, air dodge them and just plain old avoid them.

lol at hazards shouldn't be allowed.

Erm... Derp, of course they don't like it for a reason... Why would you dislike something for no reason?

 

[napZzz]

Except hazards are a lot more reasonable to avoid than attacks.

You can catch them, attack them, spot dodge them, air dodge them and just plain old avoid them.

last time I checked this is the same format for describing anything thats a normal attack..comparisons cant fix the fact that hazards will be difficult to avoid and have over powering aspects...

 

[Grim Tuesday]

last time I checked this is the same format for describing anything thats a normal attack..comparisons cant fix the fact that hazards will be difficult to avoid and have over powering aspects...

Huh, I've never caught a normal attack before.

In all seriousness though, it is different because a hazard is just one attack.

Like, if you throw a hazard at me and I avoid it using one of the method's I mentioned, that's it, nothing else happens.

But if you come up and attack me, you can respond depending on what I do. If I shield, you can grab or apply shield pressure, if I spot dodge you can use a multi-hit or a delayed attack, etc...

And even assuming that hazards ARE impossibly difficult to avoid (which has been proven not true by actually, you know, playing on the stage rather than theory-crafting), why does that make the stage any more ban-worthy than Ice Climbers?

 

[Ghostbone]

Oh just to clarify sonic's homing attack stall on Corneria...
He does it just above the gun, if someone tries to approach they risk instant death.
So yea it is over-powered.
But anyway this isn't a discussion about Corneria.

As for people saying that walk-off chaingrabs are too abusable on this stage, I get more kills from walk-off chaingrabs on Delfino than here.....Are you going to ban Delfino?