what makes stage abuse any less acceptable of a tactic lol
it's not like these types of tactics have any less "depth" to them
let the game prove itself to be what it is. if it so happens that there's a cheap tactic, then you gotta outcheap them or deal with it. no johns
You know what else is in the game that is cheap? Items. But those got banned for obvious reasons. I'm not saying not to abuse RC if it IS legal, I am asking if it should be legal. You can abuse other stages like Japes, Norfair, Brinstar, but they are deemed "a cheap tactic" and therefore got banned. Planking was also determined to be a cheap tactic and was banned. Having the ability to choose RC against a character whose physics cannot handle the stage is just as "cheap" as any of the above. And considering my name is Jon, there are no "John"'s here
Surprise means nothing when you simply don't have the option for positioning.
Oh man, oh man. Someone willing to argue with me. The rest of you may want to come back to the thread in a week or so.
Man oh man this is what I like to hear.
Bull and ****. Smashville is every bit as polarizing as RCruise if not more. Falco, ICs, Snake, D3, Diddy, Tink, and MK can all turn that stage into for most other characters unless the MU is specifically terrible. Meanwhile characters such as MK, Wario, G&W, Kirby, and Jiggz do it on RCruise. Olimar and Ivysaur are basically the only characters who have a significant issue dealing with RCruise and Ivysaur is the only one who has any real issues on it when they aren't playing against one of the five above mentioned characters.
Wario vs. D3 is a stage based almost solely in stages and is why I picked it. It's no fault of the player that Smashville is a polarizing stage. What fault of the player is it that the stage is a large flat area where you are forced to play with limited variables in terms of stage layout.
You call bull**** on me for saying RC is a polarizing stage? Give me a break. Characters having plus matchups on smashville is not because the opponent cannot handle the stage, but because it provides a boost to the character choosing it. There is no character who cannot handle smashville the way in which Ivy/Oli/IC's/Peach/Falco/etc. cannot handle RC.
A stagelist will artificially buff certain characters, it's how the game works. A large stage list allows a larger cast of characters to be viable. The fact is, you don't like the current stagelist and you want it to buff other characters who thrive on more basic stages because you are plagued with a misconception that it takes more skill to win there
You're ****ing high if you think that a more "neutral" focused stagelist is balanced. ICs vs. half the cast on Smashville is worse than Falco/MK or (especially) Wario on RCruise.
You realize that you say it's probably because the character is better when how good a character is is heavily dependent on the stagelist. You act as if good and bad are things that aren't affected by the environment they're in. Cut that out.
By your logic of expanding stages to make more characters viable, why would stages be banned in the first place? A stage that used to be legal-ish like Jungle Japes would give characters like DK, Kirby, Lucario, and yes Falco a counterpick that invalidates certain characters, so why is it banned if it would balance matchups for some characters? Or even Norfair buffing people like Ike, Captain Falcon, and Gannondorf, should it be legal because it makes more of the cast viable? There is a limit to opening up the stagelist, and the fact is RC remains the only stage that is basically impossible for some characters.
I do not deny that just how good a character is is affected by the stagelist, although I do think you are overstating the difference, but there is a difference between a stage that helps on character and a stage that invalidates another.
What? Define "gimmicky." I mean, are ICs unhealthy to the game in the long run because they run a gimmicky strategy in every MU they play?
I never said IC's aren't unhealthy for the game in the long run. They are gimicky yes, but even then the difference is that IC's making other characters unplayable is based on character matchup, versus RC making other characters unplayable because of stage matchups. Should SSB or any other fighting game be decided more by character matchup or stage matchup?
You are ****ing ******** if you believe the crap you're spewing about why stage CPs were instituted. Smash has a variable that other fighters do not and that is differing stages. Stage counterpicks were instituted so that the artificial buff from stagelists did not benefit certain characters much more than others.
You're also ******** if you think RC is more polarizing that Brinstar, FD, or YI. Try playing D3/DK on FD. Try playing Snake vs. G&W on Smashville. Try playing against Sonic or DK on YI. Try playing MK vs. the entire cast on Brinstar.
I do not think RC is more polarizing than Brinstar. IMO they both should be banned, and at least one of them is (generally). Secondly, you are referring to specific characters taking advantage of stages. I agree that should be part of the game. I will say it now, I have absolutely no problem with Wario or Meta Knight having a stage like RC that benefits them as much as it does! By no means am I saying that there are stages that specific characters don't take advantage of more than others! What i am saying is that RC is the ONLY legal stage that not only benefits one character, but also completely destroys one character
at the same time, making it more unbalanced than any of the examples you provided. Wario does not face a large disadvantage on Smashville despite that being somewhere you might take him to. Olimar DOES face a large disadvantage on a stage like RC no matter WHO he plays. So you see the difference?
RCruise does not make any character unplayable. No character lacks the movement capabilities to satisfactorily navigate the stage. Everything past that is based on MUs.
This is obviously where we differ. Many characters (some you even mentioned) simply CANNOT maneuver the stage at the level it requires to win in high level play. What exactly is your definition of satisfactory? Simply being able to jump to every spot throughout the stage? Characters with either limited aerial mobility or a tether recovery simply cannot maneuver RC like other characters can. This is incomparable to a stage like smashville, because RC severely limits character options not simply because of character matchups, but because of character physics.
You claim that the stage invalidates characters. Give me examples that don't include extreme MUs. Talk to me about Falco vs. Diddy on RCruise. Snake and Marth. Toon Link and Wolf. Luigi and Sheik. There are bad MUs on every stage that should be a free CP 100% of the time, but RCruise is not a stage that invalidates characters as a whole, especially in an environment with a stage ban.
Hey, I agree there should be stages that take advantage of character matchups, and should be CP'd for obvious reasons - however I differ as to
why certain stages give a character an advantage over another. Should I be able to pick a stage that gives my character an advantage? Sure. Should I be able to pick a stage that makes his character unplayable? No.
Again, this is all IMO, but I will say this. Throughout Brawl's life the stagelists have consistently moved to a more neutral stage list. Even look at Apex this year where Rainbow Cruise was banned for (at least) one of the biggest smash events in history. There is a reason that more stages are allowed in local and sometimes regional play, because they are more fun and less of an indicator of player skill. The larger the tournament setting, typically the more conservative the stage list. And why? Because TO's realize that when you have more people, the only way to remove the "hax" and find the best
player is to remove stages like Pictochat, Brinstar (as constant as RC), and yes, Rainbow Cruise.
