ItoI6
Smash Journeyman
Why isn't lylat a starter?
Welcome to Smashboards, the world's largest Super Smash Brothers community! Over 250,000 Smash Bros. fans from around the world have come to discuss these great games in over 19 million posts!
You are currently viewing our boards as a visitor. Click here to sign up right now and start on your path in the Smash community!
It is at any reasonable tournament...Why isn't lylat a starter?
Short answer: people are stupid.Why isn't lylat a starter?
The problem is that the stage is a burden. It's constantly something you have to worry about. Not take advantage of, not utilize in a skillful way to outplay the opponent, but straight up worry about it. It's one thing to use the layout and pacing of, say RC, to your advantage, but RF is a whole nother monster.Rumble Falls is a weird case.
-Some people complain about the spike (silly, really silly, it is easily avoided).
-Others about Walkoff (your opponent is forced to jump eventually. Wait, bait and punish).
-Others says that Circle camping is possible. I don't think so, there's many tight spots that force people to approach....
-IMO, the only event that breaks matches is the Speed Up... There's some characters with weak vertical mobility can't do anything during it but trying and climb.... That's a really ******** behavior... :/
But even with no solid criteria, it's been universally agreed to be banned (see also: Corneria).
Predictable =/= acceptable. Look at 75M, Corneria, Bridge, etc.Is there a reason why Rumble Falls is banned? The hazards and stage structure are pretty predictable if you know the stage well. While the stage might provide a disadvantage for low mobility characters, isn't the point of a counterpick to be a stage that focuses on your character's strengths/opponent's weaknesses?
It's not that bad.Quick question - is Port Town Aero Dive currently considered a strong counterpick? is it banned? My friends and I 'adopted' it for a while and we personally believe there's nothing really worth banning about it. After a couple of matches avoiding the cars becomes second nature, while still being a good reward if you try to use them to kill your opponent. The lack of ledges is, in my opinion, not that bad, and take in mind I play as Ivysaur a lot.
I'm not trying to imply I'm right and people who oppose it are wrong, I genuinely want to know the general consensus on PTAD.
PTAD is generally opposed by most of the smash community due to the power of the cars and the lack of ledges.Quick question - is Port Town Aero Dive currently considered a strong counterpick? is it banned? My friends and I 'adopted' it for a while and we personally believe there's nothing really worth banning about it. After a couple of matches avoiding the cars becomes second nature, while still being a good reward if you try to use them to kill your opponent. The lack of ledges is, in my opinion, not that bad, and take in mind I play as Ivysaur a lot.
I'm not trying to imply I'm right and people who oppose it are wrong, I genuinely want to know the general consensus on PTAD.
To the extent that we should worry about it?BPC: PTAD is also one of the strongest CPs in the game for Pit, outside of things like 75m.
It was never given a chance. Melee tradition says it must be banned.I've always wonder why people ban Yoshi's Melee. Is it just one of those stages that people just hate?
PTAD isn't a problem because of Pit, or anyone of that nature. PTAD walks a very fine line between banned and CP imo. It's not clear cut broken in some aspects, but the stage changes allow very strong possibilities of running away, which is never a good thing.BPC: PTAD is also one of the strongest CPs in the game for Pit, outside of things like 75m.
I've always wonder why people ban Yoshi's Melee. Is it just one of those stages that people just hate?
The main issue with the stage is planking. That should have been obvious to most people. CG off the slopes is very mild compared to planking on the stage. The middle section of the stage is quite strong for some of the better plankers in the game, and the way it is set up shores up the weaknesses and holes in their planking quite well. If you have a LGL on everyone in the cast, you could think about legalizing it. Whether you need one on the entire cast... another subject for another time.I always felt like YI:M was a lot of fun. And with LGLs becoming a real standard for tournaments, I can't see a problem with the stage being at least a counterpick.
It was given a chance in Texas. Hell, just about everything was. I think our region had Corneria legal longer than anyone else, and look at how garbage that stage was!To the extent that we should worry about it?
It was never given a chance. Melee tradition says it must be banned.
Example? I can't really think of a transformation where this is possible... How would it work on, well, any transformaion?PTAD isn't a problem because of Pit, or anyone of that nature. PTAD walks a very fine line between banned and CP imo. It's not clear cut broken in some aspects, but the stage changes allow very strong possibilities of running away, which is never a good thing.
Some parts of the stage are clearly not broken. A little under half of the transformations, on their own, are completely acceptable. The other transformations however dumb down fighting into 1 of 2 things:
1. Run away from the person because they can't catch you
Potential issue... But remember to compare it to, say, PS1 or Delfino; stages that have similar issues.2. Both players staying away from each other due to hazard coming into play
O.o? I don't understand what you're saying at all, mostly because "convincing argument for the stage" isn't what we need; what we need is a convincing argument against it. And it plays pretty differently from most other stages.Those two scenarios occur frequently on the stage. Besides already lobsided matchups, you don't see many people trying to use the cars or layout specific exploits (aside from the general strats like running away) because the risk reward ratio for attempting it isn't convincing enough unless you're already in a dominating MU or lead. In those cases, using the stage to your advantage wouldn't change anything besides probably dying to an aspect or facet of a stage instead of a character. Which doesn't feel like a convincing argument for a stage if the only strong point is "Well instead of dying to a MK dair gimp, you can get Daired into the cars and then die that way" or something along those lines.
I can confidently say the opposite from a ****load of friendlies.Either way, the stage design is terrible and having it legal honestly would not deepen competitive Brawl by any measurable means. I can confidently say that, with Xyro having PTAD legal for god knows how long in Texas and playing on it in everything from friendlies, MM, bracket, low tiers, and teams.
Stage-specific LGL. Seriously. A lesser evil to banning a stage that is, again, really unique in brawl.The main issue with the stage is planking. That should have been obvious to most people. CG off the slopes is very mild compared to planking on the stage. The middle section of the stage is quite strong for some of the better plankers in the game, and the way it is set up shores up the weaknesses and holes in their planking quite well. If you have a LGL on everyone in the cast, you could think about legalizing it. Whether you need one on the entire cast... another subject for another time.
Well... Make a fair rule to deal with circle camping. Enforceable, more or less discreet, and something you can check without, say, an infinite replay hack. Make a fair rule to deal with walkoff camping. Some places (IIRC even Pound 5 at one point) had rules against sharking; many have rules against scrooging. This is a case (like a ban on Rudder Camping) where a simple, discreet rule solves virtually the only serious issue the stage has.If you make stage specific rules to address its faults, why not do that across the board and just solve stage problems with gameplay rules? No circle camping, no walkoff camping, no planking, no sharking, no infinite abuse, etc? I mean surely you could make Hyrule or Big Blue legal if you made a rule against abusing the stage. What would be the point of restricting stage useage if you make sure rules cover any gameplay issues you would encounter?
But why not always go for the lesser evil, especially when the lesser evil is almost nonexistent and the greater evil is considerable?I'd rather not have a stage legal, than make it legal under the pretenses that you are covering the flaws through rules. Especially when it's not a question of "Well we ARE stuck with playing on this stage, let's go with a lesser evil over a greater evil".
It's not reasonably predictable for some parts that have small hole you can't even plan for. You can accidentally fall through a hole that lasts less than a second between transformations 1-2.RR, the holes in PTAD are totally predictable, you aren't risking anything special by hitting off the floor.
Also, think of it this way: if you hit the "floor" on any other stage, you immediately lose your stock.
lolmariocircuitAny other stage has ledges.
Mario Bros.Really the only things I could see him breaking is circles like Temple.
LMAO If my sig wasn't taken, I'd sig this.Well for those of you that just joined the conversation, we are talking about stage legality. We all have different roles here.
BPC will cite some deep competitive idealist logic.
ADHD and other folks will come in and talk about which stages are lame.
And I just cite precedence. If "A" is legal then why isn't "B" legal?
And no other legal stage offers such an easy ticket back. Seriously, you may get punished, but it beats dying. Don't get me wrong, this is lovely theorycraft, but in all the playtesting I've done, and most of the playtesting various others have done, it's simply not as awful as you make it out to be.No other LEGAL stage is so effortlessly harsh on recoveries.