We need to revisit why FLSS is no longer being pushed-

[Ansou]

Hello there ! (Newly subscribed but long lurker.)

Maybe this can help (I made it) : http://supervachebros.fr/striking.html
The point is to use it directly from a smartphone during a tourney. The code is quite simple and can be adapted for how many stages we want.

This might indeed be helpful! It's about as simple as it gets. One or both players have this up on their phone and taps out every stage that gets struck. Do you mean that it's okay to copy the code to another website but add in some more stages (Kongo Jungle 64, Dreamland 64, Wuhu Island and Skyloft)?

 

[Ajimi]

No problem to reuse or modify it ! If it can help FLSS I'm all for it
I just ask to keep the comment reference at the bottom of the HTML document.

 

[teluoborg]

The reason everyone has shut up about customs and 9 stages FLSS is because EVO has come and gone and proven that it didn't change anything.

If 2 solutions bring out the same results then the principle of least effort states that the less complicated alternative is the better one. That's why international competitive smash will be played on 5-7 stage lists and without customs.

Now it's up to you : you can spend time debating which of WHZ or Kongo Jungle 64 is more fit to be in a 13 stage FLSS, you can spend time perfecting every gimmick and jank known on Halberd, or you can spend time bettering yourself as a player by working on your fundamentals and matchups.

 

[KeithTheGeek]

You act like those things are mutually exclusive. They're not.

Stage knowledge is a PART of your fundamentals and match up knowledge...unless you're one of those players that seriously strikes to Smashville every time, no matter what you're employing at least a little bit of stage knowledge during the striking phase, and counter-picking phase. You could be a relatively strong player and still make a bad stage pick. Like, IDK, letting Sonic take you to FD.

Learning the stages does NOT take a significant amount of time. There are resources right here that explain things in more detail, and a few minutes in the lab can help you familiarize yourself with a stage's features. You can also try wackier stages out in friendlies too, if the other player is okay with it!

On FLSS: I don't really see how that it can be considered more complicated than the current system, which is already somewhat arbitrary and a holdover from the Melee days. And yeah it's unfamiliar and a lot of players are probably going to stick to what they're comfortable with, but they would do that regardless of the stage striking format. That doesn't mean we shouldn't experiment with the rules. (BTW, FLSS doesn't have to be for a large number of stages, it can be scaled back for smaller stage lists...)

 

[TheHypnotoad]

This is very subjective. I prefer visual feedback in terms of pictures and therefore like the randoms stage select screen more in Smash 4. But they pretty much works in the same way, so it still shouldn't be a problem using it for anyone.

I'd have to say that Melee's is a lot better than Smash 4's, simply because it has every stage on the screen at once. In Smash 4's random stage select screen, you have to scroll down to see every stage. So if you're doing FLSS, you might potentially forget to ban a stage which isn't on the screen at the time.

 

[Ansou]

I'd have to say that Melee's is a lot better than Smash 4's, simply because it has every stage on the screen at once. In Smash 4's random stage select screen, you have to scroll down to see every stage. So if you're doing FLSS, you might potentially forget to ban a stage which isn't on the screen at the time.

Yeah sure I can give it that. It's not really a big deal though.

 

[[Deuce]]

The reason everyone has shut up about customs and 9 stages FLSS is because EVO has come and gone and proven that it didn't change anything.

If 2 solutions bring out the same results

Really now? In the OP I have already put up an example which has disproven this via game1 castle siege.

I went to EVO myself, and struck smashville against every Shiek I played against, and the games didn't necessarily go to BF or FD.

Or unless you're one of those guys who believe only the opinions of those who placed top 8 matter.

 

[teluoborg]

You act like those things are mutually exclusive. They're not.

Stage knowledge is a PART of your fundamentals and match up knowledge...unless you're one of those players that seriously strikes to Smashville every time, no matter what you're employing at least a little bit of stage knowledge during the striking phase, and counter-picking phase. You could be a relatively strong player and still make a bad stage pick. Like, IDK, letting Sonic take you to FD.

Learning the stages does NOT take a significant amount of time. There are resources right here that explain things in more detail, and a few minutes in the lab can help you familiarize yourself with a stage's features. You can also try wackier stages out in friendlies too, if the other player is okay with it!

Knowing the stages in and out and how they particularily interact in all matchups DOES take a lot of time. Seeing people group Miiverse with BF and say that we don't need both shows how ignorant some people can be. It goes deeper than "don't let Sonic go on FD" or "SV is Sheik's best stage". And working the fundamentals takes even more time and practice, really.

PS : I do love playing on strange stages in friendlies but that's not what this thread is about.

On FLSS: I don't really see how that it can be considered more complicated than the current system, which is already somewhat arbitrary and a holdover from the Melee days. And yeah it's unfamiliar and a lot of players are probably going to stick to what they're comfortable with, but they would do that regardless of the stage striking format. That doesn't mean we shouldn't experiment with the rules. (BTW, FLSS doesn't have to be for a large number of stages, it can be scaled back for smaller stage lists...)

Well the majority of the FLSS advocates are for a stagelist that is 9 stages or higher so that's why I make the implication.
But of course if you want to FLSS on a smaller list (5 or 7) then everything is fine since it's virtually what's already happening with the S/CP system. People mainly pick their stage from the starter list and barely go on CPs, so statistically it's the same as doing a 5/7 stages FLSS.

Really now? In the OP I have already put up an example which has disproven this via game1 castle siege.

And how many sets in the whole tournament started on CS ? Out of something like 2 thousands of sets, how many went to something that wasn't considered a starter ? Is it worth it to complicate the ruleset of an international tournament just to get statistically insignifiant changes ?

I went to EVO myself, and struck smashville against every Shiek I played against, and the games didn't necessarily go to BF or FD.

Or unless you're one of those guys who believe only the opinions of those who placed top 8 matter.

First things first : It's not about the opinion of people (moreover top players often have a very biased view of the game so their opinion is rarely valuable), it's about statistical sampling. Sets that happen in the top 32 of EVO show more of how the game is supposed to be played compared to the rest of the bracket and thus are more reliable when it comes to discussions about the meta, be it in character choice and stage choice. You striked SV against all the Sheiks you encountered ? Good, how far did that bring you ? How many Sheiks did you beat ?
See, everyone was going on about how DK was broken with customs, but we didn't see any DK in the top 32, instead we got a GW that didn't use any customs and just relied on his very good basic skills.

I said it above and I'll say it above, I love all kind of stages and I have fun with them on friendlies, but what we're talking about here is their tournament viability and as much as I love DK64 I wouldn't want to see it tournament legal. You have to draw a line between what you like as a person and what is good for the competitive health of the game.

 

[Pazx]

I've decided to change my ruleset to FLSS with 9 stages because I think I can deal with the only downside being it supposedly taking longer as it's both more intuitive for newer players (I've seen this first hand) and likely makes for more balanced "game one"s. It undoubtedly promotes stage diversity too if people aren't lazy. Will report back after trialing it and seeing what people think.

Edit: FWIW I didn't really care for FLSS before this but I thought it was worth trying.

 

[KeithTheGeek]

Knowing the stages in and out and how they particularily interact in all matchups DOES take a lot of time. Seeing people group Miiverse with BF and say that we don't need both shows how ignorant some people can be. It goes deeper than "don't let Sonic go on FD" or "SV is Sheik's best stage". And working the fundamentals takes even more time and practice, really.

Well, yeah, learning the match-up specific stuff is going to take a while. I was just more so talking about the basics of the stage (platform layout, whether it has walls, size, blastzone size, what the hazards do in the stage, etc.) rather than how like, for example, the claw on Halberd may interact different with Little Mac versus Kirby. The answer there is that Kirby can float far enough off stage to cause the claw to switch targets (if Kirby is currently being targeted), but that's not what we're talking about.

And I do kinda think we should try to have enough stages to cover certain archetypes. One of the things transforming stages like Skyloft bring to the game is that stalling strategies become less viable on it. It also encourages good positioning and knowing how/when the stage moves so you can take advantage of certain features.

Of course that's the current debate the community is having, whether or not the transforming stages are viable, but the problem is people haven't really been providing much evidence that they aren't besides issues with the blastzones on Delfino and Halberd. Skyloft was banned at EVO not because it was worse than those stages (it's likely the other way around!) but because of music issues. Wuhu, as much as I dislike the stage, was never even given a chance because of a rare glitch that's since been patched out of the game.

People are pushing for a smaller stage list without giving the meta time to breath. Yeah I get that we're playing a sequel to a series that's had a competitive tourney scene since the early 2000s, but Smash 4 is a different game from Brawl and Melee. Perhaps having Halberd and Delfino grandfather'd from Brawl in wasn't the best idea, but testing those stages is still important.

Ideally, if we cut down the list to 5 stages (I think that's a touch too small personally) it'll be because we'd have tournament results backing that decision, not because one tournament decided not to run a certain stage on a technicality and everyone else followed suit. The same should go for FLSS's usage in the tourney scene.

 

[teluoborg]

See this is the problem : stages like Halberd and Delfino have been around since Melee and the most people have to defend them is uncertainities like "maybe they add diversity" or wrong opinions like "One of the things transforming stages like Skyloft bring to the game is that stalling strategies become less viable on it."

Transforming stages do not prevent stalling, it's been seen in Melee, Brawl and Smash 4. In fact since some transformations provide blatant positional advantages you're more likely to stall during a transformation where approaching would put you at a stronger disadvantage than normal, because if you have the positional advantage you have to abandon it to approach and if you don't have it you have to fight against it.

People are pushing for a smaller stage list without giving the meta time to breath. Yeah I get that we're playing a sequel to a series that's had a competitive tourney scene since the early 2000s, but Smash 4 is a different game from Brawl and Melee. Perhaps having Halberd and Delfino grandfather'd from Brawl in wasn't the best idea, but testing those stages is still important.

Things have changed since Melee but not everything. One of the things that haven't changed is that Smash is still all about positional advantage, making stage layout having the same role in every game. People have given "the meta time to breath" in both Melee and Brawl, the results being a 6 stages list on Melee and a 7 stage list in Brawl. Maybe it's time to start learning from past experiences instead of repeating the same schema some people have already seen twice. Saying things like "people haven't really been providing much evidence that they aren't besides issues with the blastzones on Delfino and Halberd" willingly ignores more than 10 years of Smash history where people already had this debate.

 

[TheHypnotoad]

See this is the problem : stages like Halberd and Delfino have been around since Melee

Uhh...

 

[Ansou]

See this is the problem : stages like Halberd and Delfino have been around since Melee and the most people have to defend them is uncertainities like "maybe they add diversity" or wrong opinions like "One of the things transforming stages like Skyloft bring to the game is that stalling strategies become less viable on it."

Transforming stages do not prevent stalling, it's been seen in Melee, Brawl and Smash 4. In fact since some transformations provide blatant positional advantages you're more likely to stall during a transformation where approaching would put you at a stronger disadvantage than normal, because if you have the positional advantage you have to abandon it to approach and if you don't have it you have to fight against it.

Things have changed since Melee but not everything. One of the things that haven't changed is that Smash is still all about positional advantage, making stage layout having the same role in every game. People have given "the meta time to breath" in both Melee and Brawl, the results being a 6 stages list on Melee and a 7 stage list in Brawl. Maybe it's time to start learning from past experiences instead of repeating the same schema some people have already seen twice. Saying things like "people haven't really been providing much evidence that they aren't besides issues with the blastzones on Delfino and Halberd" willingly ignores more than 10 years of Smash history where people already had this debate.

I have yet to see an inherent problem with a stage being transforming. This is a new game. If the same arguments that could be used in Melee or Brawl applies to a specific stage in this game, then you are free to present those arguments to us. Having more stages will irrefutably add more depth and diversity to the game.

Also, this thread is about FLSS, not about stage legality. We should probably take this discussion here instead.

 

[teluoborg]

I have yet to see an inherent problem with a stage being transforming. This is a new game. If the same arguments that could be used in Melee or Brawl applies to a specific stage in this game, then you are free to present those arguments to us. Having more stages will irrefutably add more depth and diversity to the game.

Also, this thread is about FLSS, not about stage legality. We should probably take this discussion here instead.

Well for starter I already stated my opinion on FLSS and it hasn't been adressed so I guess everyone agrees with it. What you are quoting is just my answer to @ KeithTheGeek when he says that "the current debate the community is having, whether or not the transforming stages are viable", and the content of that answer is that no, it is not a current debate, it has been around for almost as long as stage lists have existed and that the answer has always been the same.
You're allowed to not be able to deal with it but since you're against the consensus it is you who should bring proof that transforming stages do not bring "inherent problems", not the contrary. With that said I'm off to the other thread.

Uhh...

Preposition
like

1. Similar to, reminiscent of.
   These hamburgers taste like leather. Stages like Halberd and Delfino have been around since Melee.

Hope you understand my sentence now, tell me if you need more help with the english language.

 

[TheHypnotoad]

Hope you understand my sentence now, tell me if you need more help with the english language.

Christ, calm the hell down. Another meaning of like is "such as" or "for example." No need to be condescending when it's your poor wording that caused me to misunderstand you.

 

[KeithTheGeek]

See, my only problem with saying "learn from the past" is that even in those games we still have legal stages that aren't static. Pokemon Stadium (in Melee), Halberd, Delfino, Castle Siege for Brawl. Heck, I think some places still use Frigate Orpheon?

If you want to argue that we should ban the equivalent stages for Smash 4, that's a debate we should be (and are) having. But it should be done within the context of Smash 4. You can say look to the past examples of bans on dynamic stages happening in other games, I can say we have examples of these stages that are still legal to this day. Going back and forth on what we as a community did in the past isn't going to help moving forward.

I just don't think the moving/transforming aspect of these stages is the problem, unless they are like Rainbow Ride and Poke Floats from Melee and are constantly in motion.

I hope I've made my stance clear. I'm probably going to go ahead and bow out for now. This sort of got away from the original topic of FLSS, anyways.

 

[teluoborg]

Christ, calm the hell down. Another meaning of like is "such as" or "for example." No need to be condescending when it's your poor wording that caused me to misunderstand you.

No need to be condescending when your ad hominem backfires due to your own ignorance.
I'm not the one who made a 3 letters post to point what I thought was a mistake instead of addressing the content of the post.

Please stay on topic from now on, ok ?

 

[TheHypnotoad]

No need to be condescending when your ad hominem backfires due to your own ignorance.
I'm not the one who made a 3 letters post to point what I thought was a mistake instead of addressing the content of the post.

Please stay on topic from now on, ok ?

Damn, dude, seriously just chill. I didn't attack you, I didn't make an ad hominem (I don't know what part of my post even remotely resembles an ad hominem). I was simply pointing out a mistake, which ended up to just be a misunderstanding due to poor wording. And instead of saying "Oh, I actually meant to say x y and z," you decided to be condescending and passive-aggressive.

 

[Ajimi]

S/CP is not simpler than FLSS, people need to stop with that argument. Having a stagelist split in two, with some stages usable all the time but others "half-legal" that cannot be played on specifically in certains matches, is objectively more complex than just having a single list of legal stages and voila. The real problem is that people are reticent to change in general.

As others have said before me, if a stage is good enough to be played on in game 5 of grand finals, it is good enough to be played in game 1 of pools or any other match in the tournament, be it with 7, 9, 13 or 25 total stages.

 

[[Deuce]]

And how many sets in the whole tournament started on CS ? Out of something like 2 thousands of sets, how many went to something that wasn't considered a starter ? Is it worth it to complicate the ruleset of an international tournament just to get statistically insignifiant changes ?

How in the world do you know the effects were statistically insignificant? At what level? How do you know results were normally distributed and there weren't any Type II errors? Do you even have the entirety of the data? You literally just pulled that term out of nowhere, please

First things first : It's not about the opinion of people (moreover top players often have a very biased view of the game so their opinion is rarely valuable), it's about statistical sampling. Sets that happen in the top 32 of EVO show more of how the game is supposed to be played compared to the rest of the bracket and thus are more reliable when it comes to discussions about the meta, be it in character choice and stage choice. You striked SV against all the Sheiks you encountered ? Good, how far did that bring you ? How many Sheiks did you beat ?
See, everyone was going on about how DK was broken with customs, but we didn't see any DK in the top 32, instead we got a GW that didn't use any customs and just relied on his very good basic skills.

I said it above and I'll say it above, I love all kind of stages and I have fun with them on friendlies, but what we're talking about here is their tournament viability and as much as I love DK64 I wouldn't want to see it tournament legal. You have to draw a line between what you like as a person and what is good for the competitive health of the game.

Your foundation is already flawed because you propose to take a statistical sample and draw a conclusion from a subset of players who are primarily predisposed to selecting certain stages and/or using specific methodologies, because of what they're accustomed to from prior games.

Because of your over-reliance on the top end of the bracket your conclusions are far more subject to bias. Not only are you polling from a MUCH smaller sample, maybe 80 games out of several thousand which are being written off adding to variance and weakening any type of conclusion drawn, but also outliers tend to be more potent. This on top of multicollinearity. To justify everything with just the top 32 is not smart. Just sayin

 

[DavemanCozy]

Probably because people finally figured out trying to "push" something on people has the exact opposite reaction: They push back.

Reminds me of how customs ended up here in Ontario... being used for weeklies only.

 

[teluoborg]

How in the world do you know the effects were statistically insignificant? At what level? How do you know results were normally distributed and there weren't any Type II errors? Do you even have the entirety of the data? You literally just pulled that term out of nowhere, please


Your foundation is already flawed because you propose to take a statistical sample and draw a conclusion from a subset of players who are primarily predisposed to selecting certain stages and/or using specific methodologies, because of what they're accustomed to from prior games.

Because of your over-reliance on the top end of the bracket your conclusions are far more subject to bias. Not only are you polling from a MUCH smaller sample, maybe 80 games out of several thousand which are being written off adding to variance and weakening any type of conclusion drawn, but also outliers tend to be more potent. This on top of multicollinearity. To justify everything with just the top 32 is not smart. Just sayin

You're right : I don't have the data. And I don't think anyone has taken the time during the tournament to gather it. So we're back to my first post of this thread.

The stage list at EVO (and let's be honest here, it's not the FLSS system that people reject but the extensive stage list that comes with it, if FLSS was set up with 7 stages max no one would complain about it) hasn't shown any objectivable change in the stage choice meta. So why would people stick with the most complicated alternative ? Why would you push a system that require both the organisators and participants to provide more efforts when it has shown no practical results on the biggest tournament ?

Get a FLSS system with a simple stage list and people will follow. Keep on trying to add unpopular stages like Skyloft or Wuhu and it's bound to fail.

 

[[Deuce]]

You're right : I don't have the data. And I don't think anyone has taken the time during the tournament to gather it. So we're back to my first post of this thread.

That's exactly the thing. From your original post,

FLSS is because EVO has come and gone and proven that it didn't change anything

Is an arbitrary conclusion to be drawn from so little information subject to heavy bias. Inconclusive =/= insignificant

The stage list at EVO (and let's be honest here, it's not the FLSS system that people reject but the extensive stage list that comes with it, if FLSS was set up with 7 stages max no one would complain about it) hasn't shown any objectivable change in the stage choice meta. So why would people stick with the most complicated alternative ? Why would you push a system that require both the organisators and participants to provide more efforts when it has shown no practical results on the biggest tournament ?

Get a FLSS system with a simple stage list and people will follow. Keep on trying to add unpopular stages like Skyloft or Wuhu and it's bound to fail.

I can agree here, not with the position you've taken, but with the core point that stage legality must be ironed out before implementation can be solidified. I for one believe 9 stages is perfectly fine, if not 13. People have difficulty remembering because the list keeps on changing, and always forget that RSS screen can be used to help remember.

 

[Ansou]

You're right : I don't have the data. And I don't think anyone has taken the time during the tournament to gather it. So we're back to my first post of this thread.

The stage list at EVO (and let's be honest here, it's not the FLSS system that people reject but the extensive stage list that comes with it, if FLSS was set up with 7 stages max no one would complain about it) hasn't shown any objectivable change in the stage choice meta. So why would people stick with the most complicated alternative ? Why would you push a system that require both the organisators and participants to provide more efforts when it has shown no practical results on the biggest tournament ?

Get a FLSS system with a simple stage list and people will follow. Keep on trying to add unpopular stages like Skyloft or Wuhu and it's bound to fail.

FLSS does change stage selection. I've seen people strike to Skyloft and other non-starter stages multiple times on streams from Finland and Kansas in high-level matches.

 

[Nintenpro]

Actually, there are some data that shows FLSS didn't change anything in the top32 EVO bracket : http://smash4u.net/evo-2015-top-32-data/
Maybe FLSS change stage selection at locals because it's funnier, but at high level, top players don't want to deal with janks and risk loosing a match because of it.

 

[Tobi_Whatever]

Actually, there are some data that shows FLSS didn't change anything in the top32 EVO bracket : http://smash4u.net/evo-2015-top-32-data/
Maybe FLSS change stage selection at locals because it's funnier, but at high level, top players don't want to deal with janks and risk loosing a match because of it.

Until they stop getting huge skill boosts every month, as soon as that happens people will turn to stages.
Stages right now are not nearly as big of a deal as stages are in Melee. As long as people continue to pick SV against Sheik your statement is void.

 

[Nintenpro]

Until they stop getting huge skill boosts every month, as soon as that happens people will turn to stages.
Stages right now are not nearly as big of a deal as stages are in Melee. As long as people continue to pick SV against Sheik your statement is void.

Sheik is godlike in every stage... you just have to pick the stage that is the best for your character or the stage you are comfortable with.
People should stop saying that SV is Sheik's best stage. I think players who reached top 32 at EVO know better than you which stage pick against Sheik or any other characters. They played to win.

 

[19_]

The stage list at EVO (and let's be honest here, it's not the FLSS system that people reject but the extensive stage list that comes with it, if FLSS was set up with 7 stages max no one would complain about it) hasn't shown any objectivable change in the stage choice meta. So why would people stick with the most complicated alternative ? Why would you push a system that require both the organisators and participants to provide more efforts when it has shown no practical results on the biggest tournament ?

Get a FLSS system with a simple stage list and people will follow. Keep on trying to add unpopular stages like Skyloft or Wuhu and it's bound to fail.

thisthisthisthis

Considering that more people might use socals stagelist (starters: FD, BF, SV, T&C,Dreamland Counerpicks: Lylat, Duck Hunt) I definitely believe it could work.

There are reigions that use lylat over dreamland over in five starter stages because of dreamland being similar to BF. Why can't we have both? I really believe the should only ever be one counterpick and that is only when you have an even number of stages leagal.

 

[Tobi_Whatever]

Sheik is godlike in every stage... you just have to pick the stage that is the best for your character or the stage you are comfortable with.
People should stop saying that SV is Sheik's best stage. I think players who reached top 32 at EVO know better than you which stage pick against Sheik or any other characters. They played to win.

I bet the whole Sheik board has absolutely no clue what they're talking about.
Have fun getting fAir'd off the blastzone.

 

[Nintenpro]

Have fun getting fAir'd off the blastzone.

Yes because we see this in every match with Sheik on SV ... oh wait. Maybe it's time to be less theoretical and rely more on fact.

 

[Tobi_Whatever]

Yes because we see this in every match with Sheik on SV ... oh wait. Maybe it's time to be less theoretical and rely more on fact.

You mean the thing that has happened multiple times at top level on stream?

 

[Nintenpro]

You mean the thing that has happened multiple times at top level on stream?

We haven't seen the same streams then

 

[DavemanCozy]

Sonic's best stage may be FD, but if I'm playing Fox, I'm not going to be afraid if he takes me to that stage.

Fox's best stage is Battlefield, but if I'm playing ZSS, I'm not going to be afraid if he takes me to that stage.

Sheik's best stage is Smashville, but if I'm playing... uh, Sheik... and maybe Meta Knight? Rosalina? Mario? uh.... damn, should've banned Smashville

 

[teluoborg]

That's exactly the thing. From your original post,

Is an arbitrary conclusion to be drawn from so little information subject to heavy bias. Inconclusive =/= insignificant

But this is the point of your OP and this whole thread right ? All of this is based on empirical observation and if my arbitrary conclusion wasn't right then this discussion wouldn't exist in the first place.

I can agree here, not with the position you've taken, but with the core point that stage legality must be ironed out before implementation can be solidified. I for one believe 9 stages is perfectly fine, if not 13. People have difficulty remembering because the list keeps on changing, and always forget that RSS screen can be used to help remember.

But those are your own beliefs. The competitive viability of a stage is dependant on the players' criterias for what an ideal competitive scenario is and thus many stages from a 9-13 stagelist are unpopular. A very large stagelist may find a niche of players that like diversity, but it will never appeal to the majority.

@ Tobi_Whatever & @ DavemanCozy : don't worry we just have to ban sheik, smashville and diddy kong, easy. Problem solved :^)

 

[Tobi_Whatever]

But this is the point of your OP and this whole thread right ? All of this is based on empirical observation and if my arbitrary conclusion wasn't right then this discussion wouldn't exist in the first place.
But those are your own beliefs. The competitive viability of a stage is dependant on the players' criterias for what an ideal competitive scenario is and thus many stages from a 9-13 stagelist are unpopular. A very large stagelist may find a niche of players that like diversity, but it will never appeal to the majority.

@ Tobi_Whatever & @ DavemanCozy : don't worry we just have to ban sheik, smashville and diddy kong, easy. Problem solved :^)

How about FLSS with a big stage list? I could just strike smashville without being screwed afterwards, problem solved.

 

[teluoborg]

I'm not sure if you're trolling or just lack insight so I'm going to leave you the benefit of the doubt and explain it.

You want a "big stage list" so that you can "just strike smashville without being screwed afterwards" supposedly because Sheik is OP on Smashville because of the Fair chains that kill super early.
In a big stagelist you have transforming stages such as Delfino and Castle Siege. Those stages have what we call "walk offs" that allow you to walk off the stage directly into the blastzone. Now guess what Sheik can do with those walk offs ? Fair chains, and even more easily than on Smashville because she can literally start her combo while being in the magnifier. Hence with a big stage list you strike Smashville and Sheik can take you to 4 other stages that are even worse. GG.

Conclusion : a bigger stagelist won't help you, the only thing that can fix your specific problem is understanding how Sheik can set up those Fair chains and learning how to avoid those set ups. In short get good.

 

[Tobi_Whatever]

I'm not sure if you're trolling or just lack insight so I'm going to leave you the benefit of the doubt and explain it.

You want a "big stage list" so that you can "just strike smashville without being screwed afterwards" supposedly because Sheik is OP on Smashville because of the Fair chains that kill super early.
In a big stagelist you have transforming stages such as Delfino and Castle Siege. Those stages have what we call "walk offs" that allow you to walk off the stage directly into the blastzone. Now guess what Sheik can do with those walk offs ? Fair chains, and even more easily than on Smashville because she can literally start her combo while being in the magnifier. Hence with a big stage list you strike Smashville and Sheik can take you to 4 other stages that are even worse. GG.

Conclusion : a bigger stagelist won't help you, the only thing that can fix your specific problem is understanding how Sheik can set up those Fair chains and learning how to avoid those set ups. In short get good.

So you're saying a random 10 to 14 second walkoff on Wuhu or Skyloft that might appear every other minute is worse than a periodic easily predictable and observable walkoff on smashville?

Git Gud

Seriously?

 

[teluoborg]

So you're saying a random 10 to 14 second walkoff on Wuhu or Skyloft that might appear every other minute is worse than a periodic easily predictable and observable walkoff on smashville?

So you're saying that you have a harder time dealing with something predictable than with something "random" ? You know you don't have to get Fair'd to death every time the SV platform allows it, right ?

"git gud"
Seriously?

I'll be completely honest here : if you spend time whining about Sheik having early kill setups while playing ZSS chances are you are not very good.
So yeah "get good" or if you want me to paraphrase "work on your self improvement".

 

[Tobi_Whatever]

So you're saying that you have a harder time dealing with something predictable than with something "random" ? You know you don't have to get Fair'd to death every time the SV platform allows it, right ?

I'll be completely honest here : if you spend time whining about Sheik having early kill setups while playing ZSS chances are you are not very good.
So yeah "get good" or if you want me to paraphrase "work on your self improvement".

The chance of fAir to bastzone strings happening is much more likely on SV than it is on stages like Wuhu or Skyloft. Getting hit by Sheiks fAir also isn't exactly a rare thing for anyone.
If you would have paid attention you would have noticed that I wasn't complaining about Sheik having kill setups.

 

[Illuminose]

The chance of fAir to bastzone strings happening is much more likely on SV than it is on stages like Wuhu or Skyloft. Getting hit by Sheiks fAir also isn't exactly a rare thing for anyone.
If you would have paid attention you would have noticed that I wasn't complaining about Sheik having kill setups.

No, walkoffs make it so easy.