~ Why Brawl isn't as competitive as it could be ~

[~ Gheb ~]

So most people either agree that Brawl isn't really competitive or at least not as competitive as Melee. While the former isn't true and the latter isn't necessarily bad I still want to explain why Brawl is not as competitive as it could actually be. Brawl actually still has potetial to become more competitive than it is right now. The problem doesn't lie within the game itself but rather in the ruleset. A few things in the recommended Brawl ruleset (or in current yet undecided issues) should be thought over again. I don't actually want to critisize the ruleset but rather give another point of view on how the game could be more competitive.
This does NOT mean that I'm dissatisfied with the current rules or the game itself. These are just additional thoughts: None of them are proven to make the game more competitive - they aren't "explored" enough. But exactly for that reason they should be tried out more.


Items

I know: there is an Item Standard Play Project but I still want to mention that this project needs more support from the TOs. Few people even know that such a project exists and many people fail to realize its potential.
A guy named Titanium Dragon mentioned in one of his posts that in Melee all items were banned because even if you only turned on items that don't break the game there would still be containers randomly popping up. This stupid feature was removed in Brawl. It is now entirely possible to play with almost complete freedom in regards to items (the only thing it lacks are spawnrates for individual items). As a result items do not break the game anymore and some of them do not need to be banned, so why are they banned still? The purpose of a competitive game is to ban as little as possible. Melee needed several stages, mechanics and all items banned in order to become a competitive game. Having items turned on that don't break the game is perfectly acceptable in a competitive fighting game and banning them just because it used to be like that in Melee is just plain scrubby.
In Melee you couldn't turn on the Bunny Hood because as a consequence other game breaking items were turned on as well (Game breaking means that there's unfairly more reward in using an item than there are risks). This is no longer the case in Brawl therefore the game can be played with several items:

Sandbag: The Sandbag doesn't have any properties that make battles unfair. However, as a shield to block attacks it has tactical applications.
Banana Peel: Diddy can use them - why ban it?
Franklin Badge: This item has obvious uses but still doesn't make a worse player win
Bunny Hood: Same as the Franklin Badge
In teams it may even be possible to use Smash Balls and other items as you can hit your teammate as well - risk and reward might be balanced in this case.

The Item Standard Play also approves of other items such as Warp Stars or the Beam Sword - I don't think they should be allowed as they tend to over-centralize the match (although this needs to be tested) but what's wrong with having the Franklin Badge turned on? It helps characters, who lack projectiles but doesn't prevent the better player from winning. It may even make games more enjoyable to some people considering how popular projectile camping is in Brawl.

What the removal of these items does not do:

- Make the game fairer or more balanced
- Make the game more entertaining (shallow reason but still a reason)
- Make the game more competitive!!!

What leaving these items on does do:

- Give the game a lot more tactical layers
- Possibly make the games more entertaining
- Balance out "unfair" mechanics (banana peels interrupting King Dedede's CG)

In conclusion: banning items because it used to be like this in Melee is just as scrubby as banning Meta Knight. Remove as little as possible from the game to keep it as competitive as it gets - this does not need to be the case but it's still scrubby to not even try.


Custom Stages

I'm sure somebody made a thread about that somewhere before but I haven't found it so I ask at the risk of repeating an old question: Why are there no regulations regarding custom stages? There could be a regulation that allows a certain number of preset (probably by the SBR) custom stages (legal ones of course) for tournament play. I know that there's no need to do this but for the sake of variety (which may have an impact on how competitive the game is) it's still a good idea. There are certain "shapes" of stages in Melee that are unused in Brawl (DL64, YS, FoD) but can be generated additionally. Why should these left out? Adding a number of playable stages to give the players more freedom to pick and maybe make the counter pick system more prominent may have a positive impact on the game - at any rate it won't hurt it so using additional custom stages might as well be tournament standard.

Yuna once wrote in one of his posts that a game that needs too many modifications/bans/hacks/etc to be played competitively should be forgotten and something else should be played. He does indeed have a point but adding stages doesn't alter the game that dramatically - custom stages are features that are meant to be used and if they can be used competitively, then why not? There's a difference whether you have to hack a game and ban 90% of it's features or if you just use one of those features to improve the game - the developers gave us that option, which we still haven't used, despite the fact that there's no reason not to do it.
The option of creating own stages should be used more actually, as it gives us the option to decide for ourselves, to what level we want to push this aspect (with limits of course but legal stages have to be limited anyways) but we haven't even tried it - for what reason? It's better to use custom stages than debate whether garbage stages like Port Town Aerodrive should be legal or not (no, this is not a joke - there are indeed people who think it should be legal).


People are inclined to ban too much!

Seriously, what the hell is up with that crap? First MK, then D3s infinite and now planking? Next time you wanna ban projectile spam? People want more bans than the game needs - in fact it would hurt the game to ban so much. Keep on going on like that and you'll ban everything that makes (or is supposed to make) competitive...there are already unnecessay bans on things without even knowing whether they make the game uncompetitive or not (certain items, read above).
This is obvioulsy not directed towards the likes of M2K or DSF but to random SWF poster #3422, who can't beat random MKs in a random local tournament. Yes, the game could be more competitive but what really gives the game such an unvafourable reputation is its community. You guys wanna ban things until there's nothing left to ban.

...

I hope some of this ideas will be read by some well-known TOs and inspire some people to actually try these. People want to ban game mechanics and even a whole character (!) after already banning something that doesn't need to be banned in the first place. Something I'd like to mention is that I don't demand that these rules need to be added to the standard ruleset. However there should be an alternative ruleset that actually considers these things, since they possibly make the game more competitive.

tl;dr ban less, make more use of the game's features

 

[indianunit]

i guess the reason no one plays with items is because it just sounds very unprofessional. also people are so used to playing without items that turning them on completely changes certain playstyles (and in turn may change the game). i agree we can try out but i don't have high hopes for it.

also please get ready for a **** load of flames

 

[Deleted member]

it's not practical to add all of those elements to game play and still expect to finish tournaments.

1. it is not our job to decide what is fair or unfair, just to make tournaments as smooth and enjoyable as possible.
2. custom stages aren't universal.
3. half the stuff you have listed as banned was never banned.

your arguments have holes all over the place.

 

[KevinM]

Then point them out Mow, I don't like his thesis myself, merely because adding stuff to me is a crux to Brawl plus my inexperience with brawl metagame regardless, but you can't just list three facts and then tell him his entire argument is full of holes, if you want to say that at least try and address them.

 

[metaXzero]

Items
The community doesn't keep them banned for being gamebreaking. They're kept banned because the majority doesn't like Item-Smash and want to play Item-less Smash. They're 2 different games and most prefer playing the latter. It's to the point where if you try and make us come to an item tourny (a la EVO), most will ignore it. Item Smash can be done (and the ISP project may kick it off), but simply, the majority don't want to play that over item-less Smash.

Custom Stages
Their is no reason NOT to use them, but their is no reason TO DO either. Simply put, their has to be interest.

Banning

Yes, the community needs to get out of this ban at first notice thing. It's very scrubby. Heck, we already have an AT that may or may not be broken banned (don't say it's stalling nature, that's defeated). And a character, a limited infinite, and an undefinable strategy have been banned at tourneys despite it not being a problem there. It's disgusting.

My $.02

 

[Inui]

I strongly disagree with everything you said, lol.

 

[Stev]

The only thing i agree with is the custom stage. Other games (I'm thinking of Counterstrike and Halo in particular) add downloadable content (ie maps) to be included into competitive gaming. If a level that is simple to design and has balance to it (like Yoshi's Story did in Melee) then why not add it. I don't think it would be too much of people to ask to build it. You just have to include specific instructions. I can see 2 issues dealing with this: 1) who's gonna decide which levels should(n't) be included and 2) how do you enforce it

1) that's what the smash back room is for, is it not? People should submit screenshots and such and it can be discussed and whatever. and ultimately they decide.

2) enforcement should be based on trust, and if during a match, the level was created incorrectly or the person does not have the level, then the match is continued on a different wii. I would think most people who donate their wii's for tournament play would not do so with the intention of holding things up.

 

[~ Gheb ~]

i guess the reason no one plays with items is because it just sounds very unprofessional. also people are so used to playing without items that turning them on completely changes certain playstyles (and in turn may change the game). i agree we can try out but i don't have high hopes for it.

also please get ready for a **** load of flames

Isn't that what makes a scrub a scrub? Rejecting perfectly acceptable things for whatever reason? I know it's not what you personally think about this but if you ban things merely because they are "unprefessional" you're being a scrub.

it's not practical to add all of those elements to game play and still expect to finish tournaments.

What? This doesn't make any sense at all? The matches will still take the sime time, same numbers of stocks etc....how is it supposed to take longer.

1. it is not our job to decide what is fair or unfair, just to make tournaments as smooth and enjoyable as possible.

"Our"? Are you talking about your position as a TO or a SBR member?

3. half the stuff you have listed as banned was never banned.

It wasn't considered in a standard ruleset either.

your arguments have holes all over the place.

Point them out.

Items
The community doesn't keep them banned for being gamebreaking. They're kept banned because the majority doesn't like Item-Smash and want to play Item-less Smash.

So you agree that the community is full of scrubs? Many people dislike Meta Knight so they want him banned -scrub stuff. Many people dislike items so they want all of them banned - scrub stuff.

They're 2 different games and most prefer playing the latter. It's to the point where if you try and make us come to an item tourny (a la EVO), most will ignore it. Item Smash can be done (and the ISP project may kick it off), but simply, the majority don't want to play that over item-less Smash.

Have you even read what I say? I never said that the smash ruleset should include the nonsense that happened at evo. I was only talking about items that don't break the game. Obviously, it is ******** to include Smash Balls in 1vs1 Brawl. It's not supposed to be an "item" tourney but merely an alternate rule that doesn't ban things that don't need to be banned - what's broken about the Franklin Badge exactly that gives us the need to ban it?

Custom Stages
Their is no reason NOT to use them, but their is no reason TO DO either. Simply put, their has to be interest.

There are reasons to do it. I mentioned it in the OP - we have freedom to build our own stages, which gives us lots of options in regards to the CP system. A healthy CP system can improve the competitive aspect of a fighting game.

Banning

Yes, the community needs to get out of this ban at first notice thing. It's very scrubby. Heck, we already have an AT that may or may not be broken banned (don't say it's stalling nature, that's defeated). And a character, a limited infinite, and an undefinable strategy have been banned at tourneys despite it not being a problem there. It's disgusting.

My $.02

I appreciate your input. As you can see my rules aren't meant to please a scrubby commnity...I never said so. My only point was to make Brawl more competitive not to make random smasher #3847 happy.

Scrubs always tend to remove thing they don't like. They would've banned Meta Knight because they don't like him. On the other hand MK makes the game more competitive.
Items and custom stages on the other hand, were removed before we even tried their potential to make the game more competitive.

I strongly disagree with everything you said, lol.

How insightful.

The only thing i agree with is the custom stage. Other games (I'm thinking of Counterstrike and Halo in particular) add downloadable content (ie maps) to be included into competitive gaming. If a level that is simple to design and has balance to it (like Yoshi's Story did in Melee) then why not add it. I don't think it would be too much of people to ask to build it. You just have to include specific instructions. I can see 2 issues dealing with this: 1) who's gonna decide which levels should(n't) be included and 2) how do you enforce it

1) that's what the smash back room is for, is it not? People should submit screenshots and such and it can be discussed and whatever. and ultimately they decide.

2) enforcement should be based on trust, and if during a match, the level was created incorrectly or the person does not have the level, then the match is continued on a different wii. I would think most people who donate their wii's for tournament play would not do so with the intention of holding things up.

I also think it should be handled like that. The 2nd part will obviously be an issue although it's not very hard to create - let's say - 3 stages that are preset by the SBR.
You never mentioned why you disagree with the rest of my explanations though,

 

[teh_spamerer]

My argument against items is simple. Either turning them on is going to have an impact on the match or it won't. If it won't have an impact, why turn them on? If it does have an impact, then they shouldn't be allowed because they spawn randomly. Someone shouldn't be rewarded for just happening to be at the part of the stage where the item spawns.

That being said, I wouldn't really care if ISP became an alternative to Brawl singles as long as the most broken items are turned off since it'd probably be more fun.

 

[Viral-Enki]

Hmm, Custom stages could be alright, and there isn't really anything wrong with them, but the problem is availiablity. It would be near impossible to sumbit the 4 or 5 stages made for tournaments to every single Smash player.

I'm against banning too. Yes, MK is better than the other characters, but because his meta-game has been pretty much fully explored, everyone understands how he works, while other characters are still being worked on.
Look at Ollimar. He jumped 11 spots on the tiers because people have obviously been playign him and getting good results. And Diddy is rising up to be a formbidible MK opponent, so it's only a matter of time before the game balances out (well, a little bit...)

As for items, everyone is used ot them being off, and the fact that item spawn is completely random makes it hard to include it in competitive play. I'd be pretty upset if my opponent got 5 items in a row, even if they were only Franklin Badge's and Bunny Hood's.

 

[Stev]

You never mentioned why you disagree with the rest of my explanations though,

Actually, I only disagree about items (i was thinking there was another argument, but there wasn't) because the only way to make items fair is if each player is offered the same number of items. Like we saw with Ken at evo with the smashballs. Now i know that a smashball is a bit extreme because they are clearly unfair, it just proves the point that just happening to be in the right place at the right time is unfair. Also, items take away from each character. You can use a ****ty character who just happens to be fast (ie cpt falcon) and just get good items to **** people with over and over. Thus, the character's move sets become less significant. I guess in a sense this balances things out, but i think it takes away from the game.

 

[Stev]

It would be near impossible to sumbit the 4 or 5 stages made for tournaments to every single Smash player.

This isn't true. Just make it in standard rules published by smashboards, thus making it official. Those who are faithful/good/want to host/play significant tournaments would acknowledge and abide by the rules. The point I'm making is the levels shouldn't be difficult to make, and the instructions should be very detailed.

 

[Viral-Enki]

It still wouldn't reach everyone. A person who has never been a tourney could turn up to one he heard about from a friend and find out that 4 custom stages will be used, and he has no idea how to play on them.
I think custom stages would be good, but world-wide, it is a problem.

 

[Ghost42]

IMO the best way to find out if this will work is to put it in to practice in a (or several) mock tournament(s).
The best way to attract people may be to make a real tournament and have the mock tournament as a free side tournament which people can enter if they wish.

If this happens I suggest making custom stages that are guaranteed to be neutral (neutral mode of Pokemon Stadium for example).

These mock tournaments should not be based on or considered the same as the Evo tournament (granted I don't know much about the evo tournament), the items in these tournaments will be controlled, a neutral/ counter pick/ banned system could be implemented into the game (neutral items are on from the start, loser of last match picks a counter pick item to be on during the next match or the rest of the set).

At the moment item tournaments haven't seen many players in a controlled system (I assume) so most of these posts (if not all) will be highly biased until some experience and a lot more knowledge is attained.

 

[~ Gheb ~]

My argument against items is simple. Either turning them on is going to have an impact on the match or it won't. If it won't have an impact, why turn them on? If it does have an impact, then they shouldn't be allowed because they spawn randomly. Someone shouldn't be rewarded for just happening to be at the part of the stage where the item spawns.

I see. However, since none of the items make a worse player win, it is still acceptable. Just because somebody gets more Banana Peels doesn't mean the opponent can't pick them up afterwards or use it himself. Also a worse player won't beat the better one just for being lucky and picking up lots of Bunny Hoods or Franklin Badges

That being said, I wouldn't really care if ISP became an alternative to Brawl singles as long as the most broken items are turned off since it'd probably be more fun.

That's my whole point - except with stricter rules considering items and custom stages. What's your opinion on cutsom stages, spam?

Hmm, Custom stages could be alright, and there isn't really anything wrong with them, but the problem is availiablity. It would be near impossible to sumbit the 4 or 5 stages made for tournaments to every single Smash player.

Nah...players who bring setups could be told to create these stages before the tournament. Or if they arrive early at the venue t create them....that should easily do it.

As for items, everyone is used ot them being off, and the fact that item spawn is completely random makes it hard to include it in competitive play. I'd be pretty upset if my opponent got 5 items in a row, even if they were only Franklin Badge's and Bunny Hood's.

Why would you? If you really lose just because the opponent picks up more Bunny Hoods and Franklin Badges then your opponent might just be a better player. These items are "non-gamebreaking" for a reason: They don't make a worse player defeat a better player easier than without items.

Actually, I only disagree about items (i was thinking there was another argument, but there wasn't) because the only way to make items fair is if each player is offered the same number of items. Like we saw with Ken at evo with the smashballs. Now i know that a smashball is a bit extreme because they are clearly unfair, it just proves the point that just happening to be in the right place at the right time is unfair.

Not if the items isn't broken or if both players have the same random chance to get them.

Also, items take away from each character. You can use a ****ty character who just happens to be fast (ie cpt falcon) and just get good items to **** people with over and over.

Please show me how to **** people with a Franklind Badge!

Thus, the character's move sets become less significant. I guess in a sense this balances things out, but i think it takes away from the game.

How do these items affect the moveset? The only thing that could do that are the bananas but since both characters can pick them up and use them...there should be no problem.
Also, you say "it takes away from this game". Does it really? I can argue the same the other way round: Removing items takes away from this game. Except that I don't ban something that doesn't need to be banned.

...

Most people argue that the randomness of where these items spawn is the bigges issue. However, these items either won't affect the game dramatically enough to make it matter or they can be used by both characters equally.

Example: Player 1 picks up a banana and throws it at the opponent. The opponent can pick it up himself and throw it back. sandbag wok the same way - the same sandbag can be used by both players. The randomness is limited and unimportant as both players still have the same access to them.
The other items I mentioned - Bunny Hood and the Franklin Badge - have too little impact on the overall gameplay - especially if items or set to low. You can pick up 10 Franklin Badges and you will still lose to Falco if he's the better player.

Edit @ ghost: Yes, the OP is mostly assuming things - they need to be tried out before we finally decide about this issue.

 

[Stev]

Not if the items isn't broken or if both players have the same random chance to get them.

Quote:
Also, items take away from each character. You can use a ****ty character who just happens to be fast (ie cpt falcon) and just get good items to **** people with over and over.
Please show me how to **** people with a Franklind Badge!

Quote:
Thus, the character's move sets become less significant. I guess in a sense this balances things out, but i think it takes away from the game.
How do these items affect the moveset? The only thing that could do that are the bananas but since both characters can pick them up and use them...there should be no problem.
Also, you say "it takes away from this game". Does it really? I can argue the same the other way round: Removing items takes away from this game. Except that I don't ban something that doesn't need to be banned.

Randomness (imo) = bad. I don't want things out of my control affecting the outcome of a match. Also, every match won't be fair. What if in your 3 game set, your opponent gets 70% of the items. This isn't farfetched considering the amount of games played. This could cost you the tournament. Every match is supposed to be as even as possible.

Also, the franklin badge affets projectiles and thus has a better use against projectile charcters such as samus. It also would not allow characters to use projectiles against you while recovering. One of the things I dislike about brawl is how difficult it is to edgeguard. This would make players able to recover even easier (which it already is in comparison to melee) and matches would take even longer (which is already pretty bad).

The reason it takes away from characters' move sets is because they can just throw items (or use it) at players instead of using the moves they were given. You're probably going to have to be more specific as to which items are legal because some are clearly more advantagous to the one possessing it.

 

[Mattsy]

How about this:

We enjoy playing without items, with our one tool (character) against an opponent. We don't want little aids spawning in randomly, because we have more fun playing itemless smash. Isn't that what the game's about, fun? If people want to play itemless smash, a competitive scene has to derive from that desire to play that way. Playing like this will, simply, not be more competitive, as practically no one wants to play that way.

EDIT - Also, we all know the amount of variables in smash with items is too great to predict what outcome a simple bunny hood spawning in would have. There are too many things to take into account. You'd have to take into account hitboxes, player mentality percentages at the time of spawn, etc, in regard to just one item.

 

[rathy Aro]

I had no idea you could take crates out. That considered TOs should hold item tournaments if the event is big enough for more than doubles and singles. From those results we'll see how good or bad items in a tourney are.

The rest I disagree with. MK and D3 infinites shouldn't be banned.... and they aren't. Planking sorta should, its just no one is quite gay enough to use it consistently at higher levels of play to win tournaments (right?) That's why it doesn't seem like a big deal, but in theory, it hurts the game way more than it helps it.

edit: Also Brawl is competitive as all smash games are, even sakurai couldn't take that out. But to think we were going to get a game better quality than melee was pretty optimistic. Melee happened to work amazingly well and there's no point in trying to get Brawl to that level of competitivenes though we can certainly try to make it better, but not that good.

 

[metaXzero]

As Mattsy said, it's just a preference thing. Saying items are banned for being gamebreaking for whatever reason (especially randomness) is indeed scrubby. However, turning off items to play a different game (non-Item Smash)isn't scrubby at all.

Even if EVO had done items right, many would still not go to it because it's an item tourney. It's like telling a Street Fighter community they will hold Art of Fighting instead.

 

[~ Gheb ~]

As Mattsy said, it's just a preference thing. Saying items are banned for being gamebreaking for whatever reason (especially randomness) is indeed scrubby. However, turning off items to play a different game (non-Item Smash)isn't scrubby at all.

But I already mentioned that in the OP: I'm fine with the current ruleset as it is. I don't want the ideas I mentioned in the OP to replace the standard ruleset. But since Brawl allows a moderate use of items and the use of custom stages there should be an alternative ruleset that takes these things into consideration.
You can't keep a TO from banning MK if the community wants him to do so, even if it's wrong. Most communities prefer to play without items. Thus (and for other reasons) TOs exclude items from their tournaments. But neither MK nor certain items break the game so you could leave both in the game. MK is in about 90% of the cases so why not items and custom stages?

 

[DippnDots]

I'm against banning too. Yes, MK is better than the other characters, but because his meta-game has been pretty much fully explored, everyone understands how he works, while other characters are still being worked on.
Look at Ollimar. He jumped 11 spots on the tiers because people have obviously been playign him and getting good results. And Diddy is rising up to be a formbidible MK opponent, so it's only a matter of time before the game balances out (well, a little bit...)

sweet, 4 characters instead of 2.

 

[Mattsy]

MK is in about 90% of the cases so why not items and custom stages?

Because we don't want to.

/thread

 

[Amazing Ampharos]

I don't understand how you can support items which actually do grant big random advantages (access to your glide toss is a big advantage) while thinking Port Town (which, when competent players are involved, does not grant big random advantages) is a joke. Port Town is just like melee Mute City except with stronger cars that don't matter that much because you really shouldn't get hit anyway (and no this is NOT a joke; I really think this). I agree with the last point about people wanting to ban too much, but I would extend that to include several "garbage" stages (that are actually decently fair and disliked more out of convention than real problems).

I think items are just obviously terrible (they're really random, and they tend to fall into two classes: ones that give big advantages and ones that just get in the way), and I strongly disagree with the language that they are "banned" with the current rules (they are a setting which happens to be set to "none"). Custom stages are more interesting, but the ultimately arbitrary factor in the making of custom stages is a pretty big concern (notably rule arguments about subtly altering stages to help some characters at the expense of others and what's the most fair, etc.). Brawl has loads of good stages if you are actually willing to play on diverse stages, and if you don't like diversity in stages, why do you need more stages? Having a bunch of stages that are very similar to each other (like those melee stages all are to Battlefield other than size) doesn't really help the game, especially since stage builder is pretty bad at making subtle differences in stages (like making a platform just a little big higher or lower or just a little longer or whatever).

 

[FB Dj_Iskascribble]

I agree with having custom stages pre approved by the SBR for tournies. There is so much potential in the simple stage creator. Also, if people want to play with items on, thats up to specific communities to decide, same as whether to ban mk or other things. It could also turn into a different type of tourney, so that ones could have single/no item, double/no item, single/item, double/item. It would get some new people into the scene and just add a little variety to things. If people want to play itemless, dont enter the item tourney. I can see it as just another option, that cant really hurt anything.

 

[LLDL]

any Mic_128s may now close the thread

 

[sMexy-Blu]

I liked the costume stage idea, I've always thinking of doing that, it seems pretty cool and it could be a great add to the CP system.

 

[teh_spamerer]

I see. However, since none of the items make a worse player win, it is still acceptable. Just because somebody gets more Banana Peels doesn't mean the opponent can't pick them up afterwards or use it himself. Also a worse player won't beat the better one just for being lucky and picking up lots of Bunny Hoods or Franklin Badges

They might with the Bunny Hood. Random smasher #1234 probably isn't going to beat M2K because of them but when two people are close in skill items could decide a match.

That's my whole point - except with stricter rules considering items and custom stages. What's your opinion on cutsom stages, spam?

As long as the stage is balanced, I don't really care. I have strict standards for that though; I personally don't think any of the neutrals in Brawl are as fair as they should be for R1 except BF.

 

[Dogysamich]

i did a text search for tripping and only found it in spammer's sig.

Cause i mean lets be real, i cant think of any other competitive game that gives people random knockdowns.

 

[ThatGuy]

Custom stages would add an interesting element to balancing the game and the cast. Half of the fun about Starcraft is the variety of maps they use, which force a change in playstyles and have been deciding factors in many tournaments. Considering Starcraft is the most competitive game out there, it's not exactly unprofessional to propose a couple custom stages (as long as they're proven to be playable and relatively balanced).

Granted, Brawl is a completely different game, and a stage can only do so much for a character.

 

[PraKirJaq]

How I see it though (with custom stages) is that its impractical in a full fledged tournament. iirc, there was something up with custom stages and the random function.

 

[SSJ5Goku8932]

Everyone needs to be Captain Falcon.That is all.

 

[Winston]

I'm pretty sure the "ban as little as possible" philosophy operates on very similar lines to "impose as few artificial restrictions as possible on gameplay".

Having items off does not fall under this at all. It's just a setting in the game and having it on shouldn't have inherent "rightness" just because it's the default.

As far as custom stages go, that seems like a contradictory position to adopt: why add custom stages if they aren't necessary? It seems like "doctoring" the game to me; adding user-created features in search for more depth or whatnot, when you're a person who argues against bans (even if they would add to balance).

 

[Browny]

Every time someone uses the slippery slope analogy i just stop reading right there.
Where in history has this ever been the case, its always talked about as some theoretical situation, which never seems to happen. might as well start discussing why we shouldnt allow custom characters to be imported into brawl. We all know its never going to happen

 

[Stev]

But how would this "custom stage" idea be viewed if somehow Nintendo offered a brawl update that downloads the map for you, like halo did with its map packs. I think if that happened, then everyone would say, "oh ya, the new levels are totally legit and can be in tournament play!" I really think that if the SBR released custom stages, people on smashboards would want to do it immediately. I dont get why other competitive games require participants to download **** (ie counterstrike), but smash cant. I'm not saying the tournament this will be done by the time the tournament this weekend. if the TO wants those stages, put it in the tournament info. make sure that if people want to dontate wii's, they have the stages on them. It's really a lot more simple than people think.

 

[~ Gheb ~]

I don't understand how you can support items which actually do grant big random advantages (access to your glide toss is a big advantage) while thinking Port Town (which, when competent players are involved, does not grant big random advantages) is a joke. Port Town is just like melee Mute City except with stronger cars that don't matter that much because you really shouldn't get hit anyway (and no this is NOT a joke; I really think this).

And if you get thrown into them and die at like 50%? This can happen and if people find ways to abuse the stage they will do so. Idk about Melee because I rarely play it but I know that the cars are survivable...on Port Town they're not, unless you're at really low %.

I agree with the last point about people wanting to ban too much, but I would extend that to include several "garbage" stages (that are actually decently fair and disliked more out of convention than real problems).

What stages, except PTAD would that include? I don't think any other stage is banned despite being perfectly acceptable in competitive Brawl.

I think items are just obviously terrible (they're really random, and they tend to fall into two classes: ones that give big advantages and ones that just get in the way), and I strongly disagree with the language that they are "banned" with the current rules (they are a setting which happens to be set to "none").

OK, for the sake of accuracy...I won't use the word "banned" in this context anymore, since it leads to unnecessary misunderstandings.

Custom stages are more interesting, but the ultimately arbitrary factor in the making of custom stages is a pretty big concern (notably rule arguments about subtly altering stages to help some characters at the expense of others and what's the most fair, etc.).

Of course this needs to be discussed...preferably by the SBR and/or the TOs.

Brawl has loads of good stages if you are actually willing to play on diverse stages, and if you don't like diversity in stages, why do you need more stages?

And when did I ever critisize a lack of good stages? I said it before: I have nothing against the current ruleset and I want it to stay the way it is. All I want is an alternate ruleset which allows the use of non game-breaking items and custom stages.

Why custom stages? Diversity - more freedom to choose. More potential CPs

Having a bunch of stages that are very similar to each other (like those melee stages all are to Battlefield other than size) doesn't really help the game, especially since stage builder is pretty bad at making subtle differences in stages (like making a platform just a little big higher or lower or just a little longer or whatever).

And when did I say that these stages had to be similar to each other?

I agree with having custom stages pre approved by the SBR for tournies. There is so much potential in the simple stage creator. Also, if people want to play with items on, thats up to specific communities to decide, same as whether to ban mk or other things. It could also turn into a different type of tourney, so that ones could have single/no item, double/no item, single/item, double/item. It would get some new people into the scene and just add a little variety to things. If people want to play itemless, dont enter the item tourney. I can see it as just another option, that cant really hurt anything.

Exactly. Using items and custom stages would probably fail as a standard ruleset though, but as a refreshing alternative it should be considered.

I liked the costume stage idea, I've always thinking of doing that, it seems pretty cool and it could be a great add to the CP system.

Isn't that what makes a game competitive? I mean, higher risk of getting CPd but higher risk of successfull CPing the opponent could add a lot of possibilities to some characters

They might with the Bunny Hood. Random smasher #1234 probably isn't going to beat M2K because of them but when two people are close in skill items could decide a match.

Personally I doubt it ...either way the idea doesn't seem too popular anyways.

As long as the stage is balanced, I don't really care. I have strict standards for that though; I personally don't think any of the neutrals in Brawl are as fair as they should be for R1 except BF.

Not even SV? I think it's a fair stage as well...although I agree that the other 3 aren't really fair...but isn't that one more reason to include custom stages? Having 5 neutrals with only one of them as really fair doesn't exactly make sense.

How I see it though (with custom stages) is that its impractical in a full fledged tournament. iirc, there was something up with custom stages and the random function.

You can't choose custom stages with the random function, yes. But if you can create stages yourself people would prefer the stage striking system anyways, where you need do random function.

I'm pretty sure the "ban as little as possible" philosophy operates on very similar lines to "impose as few artificial restrictions as possible on gameplay".

Having items off does not fall under this at all. It's just a setting in the game and having it on shouldn't have inherent "rightness" just because it's the default.

Yeah, you're right. Items "off" is just as acceptable as items "on" (in general, not in smash only - as long as the items don't break the game). But this is exactly why an alternative ruleset should be created.

As far as custom stages go, that seems like a contradictory position to adopt: why add custom stages if they aren't necessary?

Because the developers gave us that option within the game mechanics. It's not necessary to add stages...it's not necessary to allow MK (or any character) either. But we do it still. Because MK is a part of this game and so are custom stages. You add nothing the game doesn't offer

It seems like "doctoring" the game to me; adding user-created features in search for more depth or whatnot, when you're a person who argues against bans (even if they would add to balance).

Yeah because banning and adding stuff is completely the same thing

Every time someone uses the slippery slope analogy i just stop reading right there.
Where in history has this ever been the case, its always talked about as some theoretical situation, which never seems to happen. might as well start discussing why we shouldnt allow custom characters to be imported into brawl. We all know its never going to happen

What kind of argument is this? Creating custom stages is a game mechanic, just like any character. Creating characters is not a game mechanic. One thing is a legitime function that was added to the game for exactly that reason: creating won stages. Why don't we make more use of it?

But how would this "custom stage" idea be viewed if somehow Nintendo offered a brawl update that downloads the map for you, like halo did with its map packs. I think if that happened, then everyone would say, "oh ya, the new levels are totally legit and can be in tournament play!" I really think that if the SBR released custom stages, people on smashboards would want to do it immediately. I dont get why other competitive games require participants to download **** (ie counterstrike), but smash cant. I'm not saying the tournament this will be done by the time the tournament this weekend. if the TO wants those stages, put it in the tournament info. make sure that if people want to dontate wii's, they have the stages on them. It's really a lot more simple than people think.

I agree. It's well within the possibility of people to create 3, 4 or more stages before a tournament if they announce to bring a Wii + Brawl setup. If they mention in a post to bring such a setup the TO can just tell them to add these stages (with a pic and an instruction on how to build the stage correctly).

Because we don't want to.

/thread

any Mic_128s may now close the thread

More like gtfo. This is a serious discussion. Go away if you've got nothing to say.

 

[Mattsy]

More like gtfo. This is a serious discussion. Go away if you've got nothing to say.

My point is completely valid. From this thread you can see that little to no one wants to. The game is predominately for fun, is it not?

 

[teh_spamerer]

Personally I doubt it ...either way the idea doesn't seem too popular anyways.

Bunny hood completely changes the way you space and it makes edgeguarding impossible...I'm pretty sure that has a large impact on a match and it does more than that.

Not even SV? I think it's a fair stage as well...although I agree that the other 3 aren't really fair...but isn't that one more reason to include custom stages? Having 5 neutrals with only one of them as really fair doesn't exactly make sense.

My problem with Smashville is that the moving platform comes around and will let people recover on to it when they would have died on any other stage. It's also REALLY dumb when Snake puts a C4 on it because now he has a strong kill move that seems completely unpunishable moving around which you have to keep track of. Getting hit by a C4 that times out is also one of the gayest things in Brawl and the fact that it is moving on the platform is going to make it gayer.

 

[indianunit]

using up a c4 on smashvilles moving stage means one less c4 to recover with imo. ya i suppose your right about the recovering on the platform but that rarely happens and you should be able hit the opponents when he lands anyway. as a snake main i tend to avoid smashville since the moving ledge more or less hinders my recovery anyway.

 

[Lethon]

It's probably just the characters overall that makes the game less competitive.

Anyways, I don't really think adding in banana peels would be a good idea.
Characters with good glide tosses can abuse it and approach differently. Or if a banana peel spawns in the middle of D3's chain grabs and saving the guy getting grabbed from potential damage.

Custom stages seem fine though

 

[Oracle]

Brawl is at its competitive peak.

The lack of advanced techs, toning down of the game, slowness, lack of hitstun, etc. severely limit its potential as a competitive fighter.

Spoiler

inb4GTFO MELEE TROLL etc.