The Unity Ruleset: Discussion

[theunabletable]

It is important in rounds 2 and 3. I never said it wasn't.

I'm saying that first round should have the most emphasis out of all of them on pvp based combat. There shouldn't be really gimmicky stages first round.

Your question is so unnecessary lol. It's like saying "Why do we allow people to gain an advantage in rounds 2 and 3 via the counterpicking process when we can't in round 1?"

Round 1 is different from rounds 2, 3, 4, and 5. The stage selection process is different, and thus the things you take into account when deciding what stages are available is different.

And PS2 is super gimmicky. That doesn't mean it shouldn't be legal, but it shouldn't be a starter, unless there are few enough that you can guaranteed go somewhere that isn't super gimmicky.

What's your assumption, though? That subjective opinions matter? That's ridiculous; I have some friends here who I can use to prove that Temple is the best stage in the game.

hella strawman

I was saying that subjective opinions aren't inherently wrong, and tend to be based on more than you initially think, and aren't completely without merit. But alright, you can forget all of that. We can start with one subjective opinion, and from now on we'll be completely objective.

Except that, get this, it's not that simple. See above. Furthermore, "diversity" is one thing, it's just that the same characters that love FD usually love most of the rest of the starter list too.

lol "get this, it's not that simple" as if I didn't argue the same thing you're arguing now for 6 months, and I don't understand what you're saying.

Yeah, they perform well on those stages. THEY'RE GOOD CHARACTERS. Those stages provide a good pvp experience, and those characters happen to be REALLY good when there aren't stage gimmicks holding them down. If we didn't give a **** about what provides the best pvp experience, we could strike from the entire stagelist, and have a separate list for what's legal in the games after game 1.

Say that we have 41 stages legal, and each player gets 20 strikes. You'll end up on your 21ST BEST STAGE. So why don't we do that? We wouldn't need to have any stages banned in the first round, the two players would just come to the absolute, most even possible stage in the matchup, right?

What's objectively wrong with that?

 

[Orion*]

@orion: I didn't respond because first I got lazy, then Ghostbone dealt with it.

Who is Ghostbone...? >_>

A few things...

1. "Traditional CPs"? Shouldn't matter. At all. PS2 and CS are traditional CPs, but they are really well-balanced, competitive stages, and they make for really good starter stages.
2. ICs best stages in most matchups: FD, SV, BF. How many of those are in the current starter list? How many can you strike.
Falco's best stages in most matchups... Getting the point here? You cannot strike away all of the stages that are flat-out amazing for them in this ruleset. By offering more starters, you not only prevent characters from getting their best stages (with 7 starters, what is the very best stage you can get? The 4th-best for your character in the matchup. 9-starter? 5th-best. 5 starter? 3rd... And tbh I'd consider that a problem in some matchups), you also leave more up to player choice, as opposed to "forced strikes".

PS2 is not traditional... irregardless of if anyone thinks it should be legal or not. LOL

So ICs get their 3rd best stage in a MU game 1....? LOL I still don't know why people care about this it never effects anything drastically, as most of these characters arent winning anyway lol

@shmot: wut? Let's see your data... I find that highly questionable.

I still have yet to see any reasonable matchup data ever outside of frame data and options.

Everything else comes down to opinion

And PS2 is super gimmicky. That doesn't mean it shouldn't be legal, but it shouldn't be a starter, unless there are few enough that you can guaranteed go somewhere that isn't super gimmicky.

-waits for large *** essay about how the stage is like smashville-

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

It is important in rounds 2 and 3. I never said it wasn't.

I'm saying that first round should have the most emphasis out of all of them on pvp based combat. There shouldn't be really gimmicky stages first round.

Why? You keep on repeating this point but I have yet to see justification for it.

Your question is so unnecessary lol. It's like saying "Why do we allow people to gain an advantage in rounds 2 and 3 via the counterpicking process when we can't in round 1?"

Because the idea in round one is to find a balanced starting ground for the matchup, so that an uneven number of games is fair. This is perfectly explained by the purpose and intent of Striking+counterpicking.

Round 1 is different from rounds 2, 3, 4, and 5. The stage selection process is different, and thus the things you take into account when deciding what stages are available is different.

Bull****. It's different because it's supposed to be the "even ground". It's not right now! Falco, Diddy, ICs... They get two counterpicks per round. This runs directly contrary to, you know, the point of stage striking.

What you are describing is essentially a ban criteria. You are saying, "This stage is not okay for competition in round one." Not due to how balanced it is, but due to its innate qualities, regardless of character balance. There is no tenable line of logic leading to this. You cannot argue that a stage is not legitimate for round one based on something beyond its balance (because balance does in fact matter for the starter list due to how stage striking works), but still legitimate for rounds 2 or 3. That's like saying "Bridge of eldin is definitely not okay for round one–too flat, too campy. But round two? Oh, sure, no problem!" Seeing the parallels?

 

[T-block]

^I actually agree with everything in the above post, and can find nothing over the top like I usually do. I'm interested in hearing unabletable's answers.

irregardless

Seriously, this is not a proper word >=(

 

[Orion*]

Seriously, this is not a proper word >=(

My jobs not to impress you with my english lol, it doesnt come up red when i type it so it cant be to bad :D

anyway,

LOL WHO IS GHOSTBONE

seriously nothing has been answered

**** table, Im salty I actually bothered to type something out and nobody answered it
(table you know i love you but you wont win unless you write an essay so im trying to save you<3)

 

[T-block]

I'm not only unimpressed - I'm actually annoyed lol... I don't give a **** about your english otherwise, as long as you get your point across.

Next time you want to type "irregardless", try just using "regardless" =P

 

[rPSIvysaur]

Irregardless of what T-Block says, I say we continue to push the use of irregardless.

 

[Orion*]

On that real talk though, whenever I see your name I start thinking of bags instead

 

[fkacyan]

Orion why the **** are you awake

 

[MK26]

Because it's a neutral stage and there are muuuuch better counter-picks for many characters.

Like FD

this guy maybe?

 

[T-block]

On that real talk though, whenever I see your name I start thinking of bags instead

cool story bro... haven't heard that one before

irregardless is probably as bad as saying "don't never"

 

[theunabletable]

**** table, Im salty I actually bothered to type something out and nobody answered it
(table you know i love you but you wont win unless you write an essay so im trying to save you<3)

haha I have a little time, so I'm gonna see how concisely I can address what he's saying. it's like a personal challenge

Okay, BPC, then why don't we each get 20 strikes and get to both of our 21st best stage in the MU? What's objectively wrong with doing that? That's about as fair as it gets, right?

 

[Orion*]

Orion why the **** are you awake

I slept over at the girl im datings place last night and we essentially just stayed in bed the whole day. So my actions where

Wake up
She makes breakfast, eat, go back to sleep
Wake up
Listen to music with her in bed for a while, go back to sleep
Wake up
Watch family guy with her on the couch, go back to sleep
Wake up
She orders pizza, and we eat and watch more family guy
Go to store buy cookies on the way home
Walk in my room, feel tired and take nap.

Wake up.....

fuuuu

edit: didnt mean to double post sorry

 

[Orion*]

cool story bro... haven't heard that one before

irregardless is probably as bad as saying "don't never"

You obviously don't know enough black people

 

[T-block]

haha I have a little time, so I'm gonna see how concisely I can address what he's saying. it's like a personal challenge

Okay, BPC, then why don't we each get 20 strikes and get to both of our 21st best stage in the MU? What's objectively wrong with doing that? That's about as fair as it gets, right?

I can answer that for BPC.

Yeah, that is as fair as it gets, and would be the procedure in an ideal world. It isn't because of time constraints though.

Not sure whether you're emphasizing the fact that banned stages would be included, but full stage list striking is very fair.

You obviously don't know enough black people

clearly =P

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

haha I have a little time, so I'm gonna see how concisely I can address what he's saying. it's like a personal challenge

Okay, BPC, then why don't we each get 20 strikes and get to both of our 21st best stage in the MU? What's objectively wrong with doing that? That's about as fair as it gets, right?

First of all: what T-block said. Second of all: it's completely reasonable to exclude stages that are broken in every matchup from the procedure, as well as any banned stage. (That is, most of the stages banned in BBR 3.0 other than maybe Skyworld and Onett are broken in almost every matchup)
The reasoning behind cutting the banned stages... Well, we're looking for the median of bias from the legal stages, AFAIK. So to remove the strawman aspect... I would personally advocate 13 (or 15, or 17-depends on how large the existing stage list is) stage starter lists, if it wasn't for those pesky time constraints.

 

[Orion*]

clearly =P

Socialist....

 

[Elyssa Xey Hexen]

Alright, well that explains FD, but I simply have not been hearing much for the alternative. To lose FD means you reduce to a 3 stage starter since 4 would be unfair since it gives one person more strikes over the other. To add more stages means you add on more stages people do not want as CPs.

If FD is really the issue, then swap FD with PS2 or PS1. Each player is likely to have one forced strike in a match which is not the issue if you want balance for the first match.

 

[Orion*]

Alright, well that explains FD, but I simply have not been hearing much for the alternative. To lose FD means you reduce to a 3 stage starter since 4 would be unfair since it gives one person more strikes over the other. To add more stages means you add on more stages people do not want as CPs.

If FD is really the issue, then swap FD with PS2 or PS1. Each player is likely to have one forced strike in a match which is not the issue if you want balance for the first match.

Itll still end up on bf/sv.... LOL

 

[fkacyan]

You obviously don't know enough black people

He's from Canada cut him some slack, all they have up there is booze, hockey, and free health insurance

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

Alright, well that explains FD, but I simply have not been hearing much for the alternative. To lose FD means you reduce to a 3 stage starter since 4 would be unfair since it gives one person more strikes over the other. To add more stages means you add on more stages people do not want as CPs.

If FD is really the issue, then swap FD with PS2 or PS1. Each player is likely to have one forced strike in a match which is not the issue if you want balance for the first match.

You haven't been paying much attention to this thread, have you? We're not even stumping for FD as CP any more. We're stumping for 7 starters (FD/BF/SV/YI/LC/PS1/(pick one: CS, DP, Halberd, PS2)). The reasoning: it's even more balanced than 5-starter without FD. But swapping FD with PS1 is a sensible solution. Dropping the list down to 3? Well, that's literally as bad as it gets.

 

[Orion*]

You haven't been paying much attention to this thread, have you? We're not even stumping for FD as CP any more. We're stumping for 7 starters (FD/BF/SV/YI/LC/PS1/(pick one: CS, DP, Halberd, PS2)). The reasoning: it's even more balanced than 5-starter without FD. But swapping FD with PS1 is a sensible solution. Dropping the list down to 3? Well, that's literally as bad as it gets.

Na chill. you act like its the end of the world, when literally ALL YOU HAVE TO DO on those stages is outskill your opponent...

it sounds pretty harsh when i put it that way but its true

 

[Elyssa Xey Hexen]

Itll still end up on bf/sv.... LOL

Like it does not happen already

 

[fkacyan]

My dude BPC is like all those kids on /v/ who spend all day complaining about SC2 balance when all they do is watch the GSL matches,

 

[T-block]

Obligatory being-better-at-stages-is-outskilling-your-opponent

He's from Canada cut him some slack, all they have up there is booze, hockey, and free health insurance

You forgot snow.

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

My dude BPC is like all those kids on /v/ who spend all day complaining about SC2 balance when all they do is watch the GSL matches,

Need I list off my tournaments again? You'll notice that it's pretty much every noteworthy german tournament I could reasonably get to since October.

@Orion: I still have to outskill them on every stage in the MLG 9-starter, except maybe Delfino. And with 9 strikes and only one, maybe two (halberd) stages like it, "just strike it" is a very viable answer to that dilemma.

 

[Orion*]

My dude BPC is like all those kids on /v/ who spend all day complaining about SC2 balance when all they do is watch the GSL matches,

Hes putting in a good bit of work since september to improve I will give him that

still mad free atm though

Obligatory being-better-at-stages-is-outskilling-your-opponent

Not really. Even if both players are really good on a CP there comes a point where the other character can just camp and abuse the other stage a lot more than the other.

Not to say that I'm against CPs and for a japanese ruleset, because I'm not at all. But I would rather do that than play on like the MLG rules, or infact these current rules here. Picto really ruins it for me lol

edit: at above post

while thats fine

youre acting like playing game 1 on SV/BF/FD will absolutely ruin everything and turn this into a uncompetitive mess which is well.... just not true

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

Hes putting in a good bit of work since september to improve I will give him that

still mad free atm though

You'd be surprised how good I am at most non-MK matchups offline... **** the ditto though. And maybe marth. I still suck, but hey-most of my country does. Come M2N I'll make it further in brackets.

 

[Orion*]

You'd be surprised how good I am at most non-MK matchups offline... **** the ditto though. And maybe marth. I still suck, but hey-most of my country does. Come M2N I'll make it further in brackets.

congrats on sucking in the only matchup your character doesnt win directly

i still want you to realize that its not just matchups you need to worry about, but actually getting better as a player. you can get better at a mu but when you play someone good if you just auto pilot it doesnt matter.

just playing the game, and really deeply being IN the game are two different things

but youll be fine at MSN2

speaking of when is that **** lol i need to sign up

 

[Tin Man]

The only top tiers without projectiles, Wario and Metaknight, both happen to have extremely strong air games.

Wario has a projectile.

Also, a powerful tool is going to their best stage first. If you can beat Diddy on FD, you just won game 1 and you scared the diddy. If you lose, he can't go back and you can ban his 2nd best stage, leaving the 3rd best stage which would be the neutral if you struck the opposite way.

Or... you can just strike it then ban it if they cp, and you only play on their 2nd and 3rd best stage instead of their 1st and 3rd...

He's from Canada cut him some slack, all they have up there is booze, hockey, and free health insurance

You forgot snow.

You also forgot Bagged Milk, and Poutine

 

[Xzax Kasrani]

The ledge-grab idea was amazing, props to you guys for that.

BUT, on the other hand making all infinites legal, is not such a good idea. IC's infinites should be legal since you need both to CG, and separating the Climbers is very do-able, they don't have a great shield, and without the CG, they would be a lot worse. Having infinites such as DDD's infinite shuts down the characters such as DK, Mario, Samus, Luigi and Bowser(all Mid/Low-Tier characters, we are only hurting the not-so viable characters.) And DDD beats all 4 of those characters without infinites. Plus, the infinite makes DDD Dittos even dumber .

 

[fUddO]

You also forgot Bagged Milk, and Poutine

and beavers, polar bears, and the illustrious canada geese (yes, that's the correct plural).

 

[Grim Tuesday]

The ledge-grab idea was amazing, props to you guys for that.

No, it was terrible.

BUT, on the other hand making all infinites legal, is not such a good idea. IC's infinites should be legal since you need both to CG, and separating the Climbers is very do-able, they don't have a great shield, and without the CG, they would be a lot worse. Having infinites such as DDD's infinite shuts down the characters such as DK, Mario, Samus, Luigi and Bowser(all Mid/Low-Tier characters, we are only hurting the not-so viable characters.) And DDD beats all 4 of those characters without infinites. Plus, the infinite makes DDD Dittos even dumber .

Double standards, you are wrong, deal with it. I can't be bothered explaining it again.

Not really. Even if both players are really good on a CP there comes a point where the other character can just camp and abuse the other stage a lot more than the other.

That isn't a problem with CPs, that's a problem with the ruleset. Namely, lack of stage bans.

 

[True Blue]

I have a simple question, sorry for completely getting you guys off of whatever string of talk is going on and sorry if this was already asked, but I wanted a better understanding about the LGL rule.
I wanted to know if the rule ONLY applied if the match times out? Or if when someone beat the other player but went over their LGL would they still lose even if they didnt time out?
Just wanted to know cause two of the rulings about it on the front and kinda confused me. And sorry if this was already asked.

 

[Grim Tuesday]

It only applies for a time out.

 

[Attila_]

Double standards, you are wrong, deal with it. I can't be bothered explaining it again.

there's nothing wrong with double standards in an unfair game. unless you propose mk abide by the same lgl as everyone else?

 

[Grim Tuesday]

I don't believe that MK should have a LGL at all, I'm pro-ban.

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

OVERALL GAME DEPTH PEOPLE. IT'S WHAT WE SHOULD CARE ABOUT.

Jesus ****ing christ, I think I'm going to lose my mind the next time someone says that a "double standard" is a bad idea. There is nothing wrong with a double standard if it leads to a deeper, more competitive game. Which is, essentially, what banning MK's planking, DDD's infinites, and the like does. Yes, it seems unfair on paper that DDD can't infinite DK. But when you think about it for a moment, what's the upside? DK is potentially viable. Sure, he still has a few critical matchups (MK comes to mind), but with DDD's infinites legal, he pretty much loses to the first remotely competent DDD.

 

[Orion*]

Wario has a projectile.

everyone forgets marth ROFL

That isn't a problem with CPs, that's a problem with the ruleset. Namely, lack of stage bans.

The problem I was talking about in no way was related to the ruleset, JUST all stages so I don't really see how that makes sense.

No matter what ruleset you apply, what I said would still be true lmao.

I don't believe that MK should have a LGL at all, I'm pro-ban.

Its really hard to believe you sometimes don't have alt motives sometimes I'm sorry lol

edit: the ***** that wants game depth also wants japes legal ROFLMAO

I agree with you though

@ BPC

double edit:

Im not letting this drop LOL who is ghostbone and where is any response to my post LOL

 

[Grim Tuesday]

OVERALL GAME DEPTH PEOPLE. IT'S WHAT WE SHOULD CARE ABOUT.

Jesus ****ing christ, I think I'm going to lose my mind the next time someone says that a "double standard" is a bad idea. There is nothing wrong with a double standard if it leads to a deeper, more competitive game. Which is, essentially, what banning MK's planking, DDD's infinites, and the like does. Yes, it seems unfair on paper that DDD can't infinite DK. But when you think about it for a moment, what's the upside? DK is potentially viable. Sure, he still has a few critical matchups (MK comes to mind), but with DDD's infinites legal, he pretty much loses to the first remotely competent DDD.

I'd like to know why Snake is still allowed to use Up Tilt against my Jigglypuff please.

I actually seem to remember proving you wrong on this point, BPC, in that "Should infinites be legal?" thread.

No matter what ruleset you apply, what I said would still be true lmao.

Err... no, not every counter-pick is littered with abusable, skill-less gimmicks.

Its really hard to believe you sometimes don't have alt motives sometimes I'm sorry lol

What do you mean?