What do you define as competitive?

[CaptainPressTheXButton]

I know when most people think of "competitive smash" they think of no items on final destination. But what do you think is acceptable for competitive play. Personally, I stick with no items on Final Destination, but sometimes my friends say "Final Destination is boring" and make me choose a different stage.

 

[Smog Frog]

competitive is a stage with no/minimal interference from outside forces(examples include:battlefield, fd, dream land ssb->ssbb, smashville)

some stages like big battlefield are banned because of the %s you can live to, thus making the game brawl 2.0

 

[ATH_]

If you're talking stages then it's based on common balance and fairness. This is given by symmetry, non-campability, layout, and hazards. A stage such as Smashville that has perfect symmetry, is not campable, has a simple and good layout, and absolutely no hazards, would be considered competitive without a doubt. Something like Skyloft however, is more controversial, because while it has some attributes like decent floating layouts and isn't campable due to transforming, it lacks some symmetry is parts of it's stages and has a couple of hazards that come from the background. This is argued upon because some people think that a hazard like Skyloft's cliffs should NOT be allowed, while others think it is not a prevalent feature.

some stages like big battlefield are banned because of the %s you can live to, thus making the game brawl 2.0

I know this is a joke, but this person is asking a legitimate question. Claiming it's Brawl 2.0 because you can live long is honestly immature. So is Brawl supposed to be Melee 2.0 because you can use Smash attacks and Mario's in the damn game? No.

 

[Raijinken]

Final Destination IS boring, in my opinion. At least Omega stages help that issue.

But really. My ideas of "competitive" used to be NoItemsFoxOnlyFinalDestination, and I hated it and wanted nothing to do with it. Now, I more accurately recognize the relative variety that goes into character and stage picking, but I still see it as too limited (thanks in no part to some good posts by AmazingAmpharos and others). Right now, I'm a big proponent of revising stage selection, embracing balance patches, experimenting with different (and more liberal, I guess) definitions of "legal stages" to include things beyond flat+plat, etc.

For stages, I call it fair if the stage is reasonably sized, and if hazards exist at all (which I support), they must be impartial and not overly-centralizing (as well as somewhat reasonable in lethality). I'm kinda neutral toward walkoffs, I understand the camping potential, but I also see that camping as coming with a degree of risk. Scrolling stages are pretty biased towards camping (and fast characters),

For instance, Ridley is not an impartial hazard, as he can take a player's side. Yellow Devil isn't either, as his attacks are always targeted at a player (and his explosion becomes player/team-aligned on death). On the other hand, the acid in Brinstar is impartial and completely fair. Norfair's lava would be, but the race for the safety capsule during the background lava wave is overly-centralizing is totally fine, thanks to ParanoidDrone reminding me it's shieldable. And so on. Basically, if you have to halt the fight to keep up with a hazard, or if a mistake can get you heavily penalized (i.e. Port Town's car damage), it's unreasonable, but most other things are fine.

I also believe in enacting rules against infinite combos and anything legitimately unfair. In the current absence of planned balance patches, I feel it's fair to act on things Nintendo has shown themselves to be unintended in gameplay.

 

[ParanoidDrone]

For instance, Ridley is not an impartial hazard, as he can take a player's side. Yellow Devil isn't either, as his attacks are always targeted at a player (and his explosion becomes player/team-aligned on death). On the other hand, the acid in Brinstar is impartial and completely fair. Norfair's lava would be, but the race for the safety capsule during the background lava wave is overly-centralizing. And so on. Basically, if you have to halt the fight to keep up with a hazard, or if a mistake can get you heavily penalized (i.e. Port Town's car damage), it's unreasonable, but most other things are fine.

Funny you mention Norfair. The lava wave can be shielded, and if one person seeks the capsule and the other person shields, the one in the capsule is at a disadvantage since it takes a while to unseal. In the meantime, the other player can throw hitboxes at it and try to poke through the walls. The whole thing isn't as cut and dry as one might expect.

 

[Raijinken]

Funny you mention Norfair. The lava wave can be shielded, and if one person seeks the capsule and the other person shields, the one in the capsule is at a disadvantage since it takes a while to unseal. In the meantime, the other player can throw hitboxes at it and try to poke through the walls. The whole thing isn't as cut and dry as one might expect.

I must admit, I had completely forgotten that the lava wave could be shielded (though I remembered it's dodgeable). That's still a harder sell to my friends than most smaller hazards.

 

[Tumultus]

There should be a way to turn off hazards from each stage. The Metroid stages would be extra cool if the hazards were to be disabled, IMO.

 

[hey_there]

Competitive is a term applied to an activity wherein people ... well, compete! Time, items on, random stages can be competitive if the competitors are vying for victory. Though, my preferred smash competitive play includes items off; stock; generally hazardless stages, though certain unobtrusive hazards aren't a big deal imo (halberd for example). So pretty much the same things as everyone else around here =P.

Anything can be competitive though. Chess has essentially no tech skill, can be extremely slow, and is possibly unfathomably deep. Competitive eating has tech skill, is based on speed, and includes only the single thought of 'eat.' Both are technically competitive.

 

[shapular]

Honestly, competitive Smash is just two or three or four or even eight people playing to win. It doesn't matter if the ruleset is Master Balls on high on Flat Zone X in Curry Stamina mode; if everybody's playing to win then it's competitive. The standard competitive ruleset adds a lot of rules to make the games more fair and based on skill, but that doesn't mean it's the only way to play competitively.

 

[Radirgy]

Competitive is playing to win. Tournament competitive is mastering perfect pivots so you can get a slight edge over people.

 

[T0MMY]

Competition is defined in standard communication regarding some kind of feat between competitors which results in a winner/loser situation where winning side claims a reward/prize/right/etc.
The theory of competition regarding Smash Bros. is much deeper involving a dichotomy of "playing to win" mindset that seeks to exploit the game to it's fullest potential to determine a clear winner based on skill - compare this to the contrary way to play as a more "casual" environment of out-of-game rules which are imposed on players meant to even up the skill-gap with luck.

There's not a right/wrong way to play, but there is something to be said about recognizing which area one "Plays" in - Competitive Arena vs Casual Scene.

Pretty much every kind of conflict regarding rules comes from players thinking they can be in both simultaneously.
See how smoothly it goes demanding Items set to High frequency and banning Final Destination while pushing for more "random" (read: lucky) Stages.
Or see what happens if you destroy your friends by exploiting wavedashing, chaingrabbing, edgehogging, L-canceling, and many other techniques within a more "competitive" environment (static stage like FD with no items).

When one recognizes where they are playing and respects the given parameters things work out much easier for all involved.

See the Competitive Philosophy Guide for a full explanation regarding competitive principles, values, and standards.

 

[NegaMawile]

I actually have a write up on what it means for a stage to be competitive & neutral check it out maybe? http://smashboards.com/threads/a-discussion-on-competitive-stage-criteria-for-the-3ds.382152/

As far as the rest of it, no items, I'd love character striking to make a more diverse competitive field, and stage striking as well, and just ways to fing out who's the best at a platform fighter, not just a fighter.