• 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!

7.0.3 discussion

Blinds

Smash Cadet
Joined
Oct 27, 2008
Messages
53
Location
Illinois
I come with a compromise.

1. Keep Summit+ in with Ice. Regardless of legality, it's a fun stage without some of the bull**** of vSummit. We do include other extra stages disregarding legality, like WWR.

2. We decide legality AFTER some legit testing done by B+ BR members. I think snap judgments are the worst thing we should do. Once we come up real arguments with evidence, we can revisit this. Until then I don't think we know enough.
 

FrozenHobo

Smash Hero
Joined
Mar 26, 2007
Messages
5,272
Location
Nowhere Land
I think the non-slip .pac is fine. I thought I'd already made that clear.

It doesn't have an identical platform layout to any of the existing stages nor does it have identical boundaries to any existing stage (iirc). Non-slip Summit+ is fine imo... if people are not opposed to the inclusion of an additional near neutral stage. I am not, personally, but I know VaNz and Glick are. CP/Ban slipping Summit+ is... okay for the time being. It will probably end up banned if I put it to a vote with the slipperiness on.

Frozen, would you prefer a CP/Banned Summit+ that would likely be eventually banned or a likely CP non-slip Summit? This isn't a rhetorical question. I genuinely want to know.
i want a stage that will actually see play. people like both versions right now, so i have to go with this post for now:

I come with a compromise.

1. Keep Summit+ in with Ice. Regardless of legality, it's a fun stage without some of the bull**** of vSummit. We do include other extra stages disregarding legality, like WWR.

2. We decide legality AFTER some legit testing done by B+ BR members. I think snap judgments are the worst thing we should do. Once we come up real arguments with evidence, we can revisit this. Until then I don't think we know enough.


i am going to a smashfest tonight and will be bringing B+ with me. i will include the no slip for the first few hours and then switch to the slip version after that. i really feel that there is just not enough data right now to make a final decision, but i do want this stage to see use. if this catch 22 regarding the ice remains strong, however, i will more than likely lean towards the slip version.
 

Veril

Frame Savant
Joined
Jun 20, 2008
Messages
3,062
Location
Kent Lakes, New York
I didn't have time to test 75m... school, yo! And we don't need additional stages from any competitive standpoint. I intend to try it out tomorrow with whoever shows up for my birthday fest thang.

Either way I don't want to include additional stages officially until I know what we are doing with the ones we have now. Its sorta a more pressing concern since everything is set for the release...

The only question remains what to do with Summit+. Seriously. That is it. All I need to do with Lylat is have Corey put in a modified death boundary code to account for all the boundaries being redone via .pacs... which is literally just changing the first line of the code and removing all but Lylat ;p

We have the new character .pacs
We have the new stage .pacs (with Maestro's Delfino and your general edits sans your Lylat).
We have a new .gct except for an extremely minor fix.

I look forward to your response following the smashfest. Please include the specific players involved, who they played, and how many times the stage was used (vs. number of total full, standard matches played if possible...if you are like me and actually would keep track of that sorta thing).
 

MK26

Smash Master
Joined
Jun 29, 2008
Messages
4,450
Location
http://www.mediafire.com/?zj2oddmz0yy for ZSS fix!
Completely unnecessary wall of text

I didn't have time to test 75m... school, yo! And we don't need additional stages from any competitive standpoint. I intend to try it out tomorrow with whoever shows up for my birthday fest thang.

Either way I don't want to include additional stages officially until I know what we are doing with the ones we have now. Its sorta a more pressing concern since everything is set for the release...
This is just infuriating! I feel like tearing my hair out. This way of thinking is straight-up backward. Throw stuff at the community, and let them decide what to do with it. Forget discussing whether it's good enough. The fact of the matter is that it's leagues better than the original. You can't possibly argue against that. just release the **** stage, and let the community sort out what goes where. If they like it, they like it. If they don't, they don't, and we can release a fix in a DLC pack somewhere down the line. But don't just disregard our **** because your predetermined prejudices against anything remotely different from what you're used to means you actually have to take some time and learn a stage. I know, right! Outrageous!

Bull. F***ing. S***.

Also, you called Summit+ "extreme". I laughed out loud.

======

@GOG: not quite. If neither of us have any idea what goes on on Hyrule, the results when the two of us play will be roughly equal (assuming equal skill, etc., of course). Say I know the stage and you don't. Even if I somehow let myself get cp'd there as ganon against fox, I'd probably win. Because I know the stage, and you don't. That's ok. On the flipside, if you know the stage, and I don't, you'd shellack me. Or time me out. Or both. whatever. That also works out. In a metagame where Hyrule is legal, it's a very powerful cp for Fox, just looking at the three scenarios above.

However, this is ignoring the part where we both know the stage. Even if I know it equally as well as you, even if i'm vastly more skilled than you, the stage gives you a near 100-0 matchup. Nothing I can do as a Ganon can even touch you. This goes beyond knowing characters, matchup, and stage. Even if i know all three to the best of my ability, and you only know bits and pieces of each, I still can't win.

Now, does this apply to Summit+? First off, it's probably too early to tell. Secondly, probably not. For argument's sake, I play a mean Olimar, you wreck with Ike, all else is equal, and Ike utterly wrecks Olimar on Summit+ for no good reason. If I don't ban it, and you counterpick me there, that's almost an assured win - it's that bad. But the fundamental difference there is that I can do something about this. If I play enough Ikes on Summit+, I'll see patterns in the way they play. More importantly, these patterns aren't "shoot one laser and run away for the rest of the match", so I can develop some kind of counter-tactics. Maybe I get in a habit of rolling toward you when I see you charging a moving fsmash. Maybe I abuse the sliding in a way you didn't see coming. Maybe I decide not to even go near you and I camp the upper platform, so the ice doesn't even come into play. And though you still have the advantage, and though you still win most of our games there, I can eke out a victory here or there. And when some random Ike guy cp's me there when he sees I don't ban it, I utterly destroy him. Because my knowledge of the stage can overcome that handicap that comes with getting cp'd here. I can't do that with Ganon on Temple. Even if I do shut up and learn the stage, nothing makes my chance of winning any better.

======

And saying "it'll turn off newcomers"...a whole slew of things are gonna turn off newcomers. That's a fact of this project. Why not try telling them beforehand, or having a post that you can direct them to, or whatever, that a bunch of stages have been changed? "by the way, we've done more than balance the characters. A bunch of previously banned stages are now legal. Summit+ looks like this and doesn't move: *pic*. PS2 looks like this and doesn't move: *pic*. Skyworld looks like this and doesn't move: *pic*. Rumble Falls looks like this and doesn't move: *pic*. (i sense a pattern :p) New Pork City looks like this and doesn't move, except for the ship. The jury's still out on whether it's good or not. Jungle Japes doesn't have water any more. Luigi's Mansion doesn't have any ceilings. PTAD has ledges, and the cars and the big wall are gone. That one ledge on Delfino that you were pissed about because you couldn't grab it...yeah, you can grab it now. PictoChat's hazards have been removed, and the really campy drawings are less campy because some of the platforms are fallthrough. Most stages have had their boundaries brought inward to make matches go a bit faster. The reason why you could never walljump when you wanted to? The game deliberately prevents you from walljumping on some walls. That's gone now."

Literally a minute to explain the changes, assuming you have a few pics lying around. Brawl+ is a new game, and vBrawl converts will have to get used to it if they want to get good. Thinking that someone should be able to use what they know from vBrawl is all fine and dandy, but thinking that it's a seamless transition back and forth is unreasonable. There's no reason whatsoever that that shouldn't extend to stages as well.

======

TL;DR: The worst that can happen to Summit+ is the same thing that happened to the failed Spear Pillar: out of sight and out of mind. Except we'll just try again. Holding up the set's release over whether or not you should include it is a non-issue. Include it. Just because it's an OFFICIAL BRAWL+ FILE doesn't mean everybody automatically is forced to fawn over it. What with the **** codesets that escape this place occasionally, I thought we'd have figured that out by now. But we'd never have known that RC1 was **** if we had decided to leave it hidden in here.
 

Veril

Frame Savant
Joined
Jun 20, 2008
Messages
3,062
Location
Kent Lakes, New York
I read the first paragraph and then stopped. Just cause a stage exists doesn't mean its getting put in. The goal isn't having as many stages as possible. As to the suggestion that I don't want to put something in cause I, or anyone in the broom, is unwilling to learn it is beyond stupid. "See Lucas's recovery for why what you said was moronic."

Keep your hair bro. I don't care if you are laughing out loud or putting holes in the walls.

I'm done reading these f***ing walls of text espousing the liberal stage philosophy (by attacking everything else). I know the ****ing logic behind it. You understand that the counterpicking system works because of a limited selection of stages right?
 

GuruKid

Smash Ace
Joined
Sep 14, 2007
Messages
875
Location
Brooklyn, NY
I don't even know why we're debating the viability of a stage like summit+ when we have too many legit stages already.

I have not had the chance to play any version of Summit+, so I cannot comment on the stage itself. I do, however, want to bring back to light a statement made earlier:

well if i was running a tournament, summit+ would def not be on the cp list. It doesn't really test what we train to do, which is play on stages with normal traction. I shouldn't have to devote hours a week to practice on a stage with ice just because someone thinks the stage is 'fun' or interesting. We have enough interesting stages, and as is, imo, the stage list is getting to big. Just my thoughts
Simply put, most of the smash scene is conservative in its stage tastes for the very reason OBM and many others already stated; stages like Summit appear to be too game-changing and different. It wouldn't even matter if someone attempts to show that it isn't so; a player will see or play that stage in a friendly, (just from the initial reaction to seeing ice, which is not in any other stage) immediately deem that stage as stupid or silly, and then go pause-L-R-A-Start.

Example? Wifi Waiting Room. I'm personally indifferent to the stage, but whenever I played there, the reaction from other people would be something along the lines of "Sandbag... wtf"?

In every tournament/smashfest I've attended that attempted to introduce oddball stages (from Wes's weeklies to Hackfest to our local NY smashfests), the stages have always been met with either getting the first ban in a set or both players mutually agreeing on a neutral anyway to not waste time on striking excess stages.

You can design a stage to be Neutral or CP or whatever you guys would like, but realize that any stage's fate on the stage roster lies with the community, not its designers. And, for better or worse, the majority of the community is conservative; they want to play on a no-bs stage that will test the skills they've practiced for months/years, not gamble on a quirky stage that throws off their notion of a balanced, ideal match. They're more than happy with playing only on neutrals and the common counterpicks.

Again, I haven't played the stage at all, and hey, if Summit+ does become popular with tournament players, more power to it. Just... don't count on that happening anytime soon.
 

Yeroc

Theory Coder
BRoomer
Joined
Feb 28, 2004
Messages
3,273
Location
In a world of my own devising
I'm going to intentionally simplify your argument Guru for the sake of brevity, and if I unintentionally pigeonhole it, my apologies.

Summit+, with the sliding, should obviously be included in the set. It's fun, unique, it's a vast improvement over the original in terms of overall design and potential tournament viability. I say potential, because I don't think it should be solely up to us to decide this. The community can decide for itself if it wants to use the stage or not. I can put it in the CP/Banned section and let them all sort it out. If people are at all interested in playing on it, chances are it will eventually get used in a tourney at least once. And if that happens, the people that bother to take the time to work out the difference in the game mechanics there will have another weapon against their opponents, which in turn forces the others to adapt and learn, and the game deepens (this is my theory anyhow). If not, and the player base decides it's too far from the norm, no big deal. We made it, they didn't like it, but the important thing is they got the chance to evaluate and decide on their own.

tl;dr - The stage is a great inclusion, if for no other reason than as another showcase for what we can do. The potential for viability exists, imo, but I won't force it on you guys or anyone else. Let the people make up their own minds. They already do anyway, that's why there's a CP/Banned category in the first place.

PS - I'm not sure I have Maestro's Delphino, and I didn't see a link to it. Anybody have a copy they can point me to?
 

GHNeko

Sega Stockholm Syndrome.
Joined
Aug 13, 2007
Messages
20,009
Location
テキサス、アメリカ
NNID
GHNeko
Smash Smash Bros is making me want to Smash a Bro. Auugh. This is so annoying.

This is probably why I like the stage list of Texas and Midwest in Brawl. Waaay more liberal than EC who are probably the home of the most conservative stage lists ever.

EDIT: I love Yeroc. I think I might hire him to be my proofreader or something.
 

Veril

Frame Savant
Joined
Jun 20, 2008
Messages
3,062
Location
Kent Lakes, New York
tl;dr - The stage is a great inclusion, if for no other reason than as another showcase for what we can do. The potential for viability exists, imo, but I won't force it on you guys or anyone else. Let the people make up their own minds. They already do anyway, that's why there's a CP/Banned category in the first place.

PS - I'm not sure I have Maestro's Delphino, and I didn't see a link to it. Anybody have a copy they can point me to?
Here... I think. Mad stealthy ;p

I'm gonna have to get the KO% variance on the boundaries he put in, since as he says, no changelist so no way for me to estimate that. :mad:

No.

No changelist.

The boundary adjustments have to be on Summit+ either way. I believe they were tweaked on the sides in the non-ice version. Correct me if I'm wrong on that.

The stagelist I posted is not especially conservative. Seriously, look at the current version. People who are conservative think there are already too many stages. (which includes me and NY+ on this issue, as well as OBM... but what would we know right?)
 

GHNeko

Sega Stockholm Syndrome.
Joined
Aug 13, 2007
Messages
20,009
Location
テキサス、アメリカ
NNID
GHNeko
Do we remove the non-capitalized characters? I assume yes, but I want to double check.

Also, Veril. That is a pro-status signature.

Right below mine in on the amazing scale.
 

Veril

Frame Savant
Joined
Jun 20, 2008
Messages
3,062
Location
Kent Lakes, New York
This is probably why I like the stage list of Texas and Midwest in Brawl. Waaay more liberal than EC who are probably the home of the most conservative stage lists ever.
Those lists suck and Overswarm is a tool. EC >>>>

Do we remove the non-capitalized characters? I assume yes, but I want to double check.
what?
Also, Veril. That is a pro-status signature.

Right below mine in on the amazing scale.
M2K is one of my favorite sources of comic relief in the smash community ;p
 

Veril

Frame Savant
Joined
Jun 20, 2008
Messages
3,062
Location
Kent Lakes, New York
Corey, another really important note: the blurbs on the select screen (like "pick final D..." when you select the multiplayer option) have got to go. Bio is on that iirc.

if only he was this funny in person
I have a soft spot for M2K. Sorta feel an affinity with him in the way he approaches the game... except he's infinitely better. idk I have mad respect for him and his corn-brownie combo.
 

Veril

Frame Savant
Joined
Jun 20, 2008
Messages
3,062
Location
Kent Lakes, New York
Where the hell does it say that. O_o
when you are going to select a mode, say training, and are highlighting that mode, the text box has alternate content. Some of it is objectionable, notably the tourney ***s reference. The only ones worth keeping are the tourney mode ("tournaments don't actually use this" lol) and training ("lift those weights" ;p)
 

Isatis

If specified, this will repl[0x00000000]ce the
Premium
BRoomer
Joined
Dec 18, 2008
Messages
10,253
Location
San Francisco, CA
NNID
reverite
I removed those a long time ago though (like, a day after 7.0 was released) and uploaded the titles from vBrawl...? I didn't even know the old file was still in circulation; I know there are song titles to be fixed though.

(It's also never been in the updater [throws errors] so if anyone got it it's from the pre-made pack)
 

FrozenHobo

Smash Hero
Joined
Mar 26, 2007
Messages
5,272
Location
Nowhere Land
results from smashfest:

approximately 5% of the matches tonight were played on Summit+ (No Slide), while less than 1% was on Summit+ (Slide). Of the matches played, here are the players/characters:

Summit+ (No Slip):
Lord Rayku (Sheik) vs AML!? (Ness)
Lord Rayku (Ike) vs AML!? (Jiggs)
Lord Rayku (Lucario) vs Dred (Falco)
---------------------------
Notes:
Good CP
Unique Layout
Would use this a CP if allowed at tourney


Summit+ (Slip):
Lord Rayku (lucario) vs Dred (Marth)
---------------------------
Notes:
Counter/Ban (more counter)
Ice is an interesting mechanic that certain characters can abuse
Shield game not an issue, but lack of character control is
Prefer no slip




based on these notes, i am willing (reluctantly) to allow the non-slip summit+ to make it into 7.0.3 under the condition that it be made a full CP and be considered legal for all B+ tourneys.

additionally, i would like to see the possibility of the inclusion of the sliding version on the second page/hold r command. note, however, that i am willing to wait till a later release to see this implemented. no decision will be made, however, until the first (and primary) condition is agreed upon by the wbr, and the B+ Backroom in total.
 

GuruKid

Smash Ace
Joined
Sep 14, 2007
Messages
875
Location
Brooklyn, NY
based on these notes, i am willing (reluctantly) to allow the non-slip summit+ to make it into 7.0.3 under the condition that it be made a full CP and be considered legal for all B+ tourneys.
What the...

Refer to this post, this post and this post, please.

What you're demanding is not only silly, it cannot be enforced at all. For reasons already stated several times.


This is probably why I like the stage list of Texas and Midwest in Brawl. Waaay more liberal than EC who are probably the home of the most conservative stage lists ever.
Our apologies for wanting to play the player instead of falling back on stages like vbrawl Pictochat and Port Town, praying for that lucky out-of-nowhere kill.
 

MK26

Smash Master
Joined
Jun 29, 2008
Messages
4,450
Location
http://www.mediafire.com/?zj2oddmz0yy for ZSS fix!
for delfino:
side boundaries were changed according to the forumla (x-140)*.8+140 (which means that the floating platforms were changed from 220 to 204 and the transformations were everywhere from 230 > 212 to 180 > 172)
Top bounds had 15 units lopped off across the board, because the ceilings are equal everywhere
All walls are now walljumpable
The right side of the transformation in front of shine gate is now grabbable

theres your changelist. Delfino has some of the smallest side boundaries of our legal stages... 3 transformations were at 180 and 1 each were at 190 and 200, before the edits.
 

FrozenHobo

Smash Hero
Joined
Mar 26, 2007
Messages
5,272
Location
Nowhere Land
yes, i am in favor of the sliding variant, but i want to use the version that more people will play on. thus, i posted my ultimatum which states that if you do include the non-slip variant that it must be included as an official CP and be noted as such in all major B+ tourneys.

a side condition is that at a later date the sliding version also be added, either as a secondary spot in the SSS or to be accessible through the "hold r" method.
 

FrozenHobo

Smash Hero
Joined
Mar 26, 2007
Messages
5,272
Location
Nowhere Land
i want people to actually play on my stage. if every person who played on LM+, for instance, said they hated it after the first time playing there and never went back, you'd feel obligated to get it fixed so more people would use it, right? i want to see summit+ actually used more than once for half a match. while i do love the sliding it is important to note that there is a large number of people who don't. if that group is large enough to get it banned from tourneys then i am wiling to change it to be more globally accepted as a legal stage.


right now i am conflicted on the matter as i would love to get more feedback on the stage, but just about every person i've had play on it in person has been reluctant to go back there, even on my request. because of this i am willing to include the non-slip version in this release so long as this catch 22 bull **** is completely ignored and it is allowed to be a legal CP. if people still refuse to allow the non-slide summit+ as a CP, though, then i see no reason use it (if neither version is deemed legal, then at least keep the fun one).
 

GuruKid

Smash Ace
Joined
Sep 14, 2007
Messages
875
Location
Brooklyn, NY
looks liek like somebody needs to learn the difference between "slip" and "non slip"
You missed the point. You can have the stage slip, non-slip, upside-down-inside-out whatever, you won't get your demand to have it legal at all tournaments granted. Regardless of the stage variant you decide to install, the community decides what's legal, what isn't, and what they'll play on... not you.

I personally back MK26's suggestion: just let the slippery one in and see how it goes. As the metagame develops, attitudes toward certain aspects of the game change. An initial dislike toward the stage may turn to acceptance in the future as the characteristics of the stage are more thoroughly investigated.


Port Town cars are 100% on a timer bro. -___-
Competitive smash is about player vs player. With an overly-hazardous stage such as Port Town, the formula becomes player vs player vs stage, which throws the whole skill-based competitive aspect askew.
 

FrozenHobo

Smash Hero
Joined
Mar 26, 2007
Messages
5,272
Location
Nowhere Land
i'm asking this group to make a decision. without ice, summit+ is arguably a legal CP, however, if the general consensus remains that even if made non-sliding its still not usable, then i will simply delete any trace fo the pac and we will go with the sliding version for every other set from this point forward.

if they decide that the stage if left un-iced is, in fact, unique enough to warrant a CP place, then any argument on the matter should be dropped and the stage be allowed on to the list.

in short, i'm asking for a definite opinion on the matter so we can get past this bull **** and get to a release. if the majority feel that even made non-slip the stage does not warrant a CP spot then we will automatically go with the sliding version. there is no "i'm forcing you to make this legal", i'm just looking for a final consensus on the topic.
 

Veril

Frame Savant
Joined
Jun 20, 2008
Messages
3,062
Location
Kent Lakes, New York
The new stage .pacs do not have the correct boundaries. We REALLY can't move forward until that's addressed.

As to Summit+, I personally support a non-sliding variant as a CP, but I know that many people feel there are too many borderline neutral stages already. If you leave it as is it with sliding, it will end up CP/banned and EC tourney's will probably never use it. I also won't be supporting its inclusion to CP in that case, in fact, I will be actively working against ever seeing that stage at a large scale tournament.

Really what you're asking for is a vote on the legality of non-sliding Summit+. Before I do that...

You might want to make a more detailed argument as to why non-sliding Summit+ deserves to be added to the CP roster as opposed to the "why it should not be banned". That's the real split between the conservative and liberal stage philosophy... but competitive players overwhelmingly lean conservative, especially in the east-coast where B+ is the strongest. If you can make the argument of "why it should be a CP" instead of "why it shouldn't be banned", than you might have some success persuading people here.
 

FrozenHobo

Smash Hero
Joined
Mar 26, 2007
Messages
5,272
Location
Nowhere Land
Alright then, lets look at how this stage can be classified as a CP:

~Uniqueness
The stages actual layout differs drastically from any other single stage present in the game. While it is true that it shares a similar number of platforms with BF, and additionally a similar structure, there are several notable differences that need to be taken into account:

1) Left Platform:
Whereas BF has 3 uniform platforms with the two lower ones at even distances above the ground as away from the center, Summit+ offers a different placement. The left platform is very noticeably higher than its right side counterpart, forcing players to perform aerial moves to assault players that land there. When compared to the standard BF layout, players on the platforms can be easily assaulted from the ground. In this way, the very presence of this platform means that characters with poor aerial prowess will be at a significant disadvantage.

Additionally, it can offer a retreat from certain characters combos; primarily those with poor ability to continue the combos in the air. (S)DIing to this platform can actually allow players to break combos that otherwise may prove devastating.

Finally, the platform overhangs the side, a feature definitely not present on BF. This proves to be a key feature in dealing with recoveries. Certain characters that decide to recover high due to poor vertical recoveries (see: DK, bowser) may attempt to recover high, in which case this platform can allow them either a safe landing from the grounded opponent, or offer an opening to a ledge guard-intent opponent. Through this simple feature, a variety of options becomes apparent with regards to recoveries (always a plus when caught in an intense match).​

2) Right Platform:
Similar to BF, Summit+ does offer a platform located close to the stage's base, as well as away from the ledge. What distinguishes this platform in the stage is how much of the match finds its focus around this platform. Changes from its BF counterpart include:

higher from the base (short/mid characters cannot simply usmash/tilt through the platform. see: IC's utilt).

and

farther in from the side (this can mean a lot of things, most notably of which is recovery and circling. recovering to this platform is not much harder due to how far in it is, meaning fox/falco may need to be closer to the stage if they need to land on it. similarly, it is easier to avoid the platform should you wish to land on the main stage. Additionally, as the majority of the fight tends to occur around this platform, it is now easier to slip down to the main stage/space your opponent)​

3) Top Platform:
Unique unto itself, this platform forms a long stretch for combat the very peak of the stage. With part of the platform overlapping both other platforms (more so the left, offering a good punish position), it is both a strong recovery platform as well as a combat zone. However, it is close/connected enough to the other platforms that both using it to camp and/or retreat become undesirable options (as opposed to its BF counterpart). Its "blanket" of the majority of the middle of the stage works well to stop certain strategies (see: pika's thunder/IC's ice blocks).​

4) Main Stage:
Only 2 other legal stages share a similar main body layout to Summit+, Yoshi's Island (Brawl) and Wario Ware, and both have entirely different platform layouts that make each unique. This part of the stage is a primary point to separate it from BF: you can't go underneath the stage. Similarly, wall clingers/jumpers can abuse this aspect for added recovery options. Similarly, it can mess with other character's recoveries, such as the mother boys. All of the aspects that make the main stage unique for WW/YI:B can be applied here.​


~Past Lessons:
In melee, there were a variety of stages that offered similar layouts, but were considered unique unto themselves for a variety of reasons (BF/Yoshi's Story/FoD/Dream Land). While each was unique in its own right, they're differences, though slight, were enough to make each unique stages with their own strategies. These strategies were developed based on:

1) Stage Boundaries:
In its current form, Summit+ has a medium/close distance ceiling with medium side boundaries. Through the magic of hacking, however, these can be edited into any unique form we could want. This ability by itself is enough to make the stage different enough to warrant consideration for CP status. If made legal, Summit+ can be given any death boundaries that the community feels would make it unique from other possibly similar stages.​

2) Stage Size:
Compared to other stages, summit is a rather vertically oriented stage. Even shrunk, it is still taller than BF/WW. Similarly, it is a very narrow stage, with only the left platform offering any form of space to escape the combat. These scalings make it a very unique stage with a very vertically focused combat strategy (notably different form BF's "ground control" strategy).​


With sliding removed, there are no real negative aspects to prevent it form being considered a CP aside from the assumption that it is a bland and overall repetitive stage to add to the list. in reality, though, it offers a variety of tactics both offensively and defensively with a layout completely unique unto itself. Proving in testing situations time and time again to be a fine singles/double stage with no clear aspects that can be replicated better on other stages, i see no reason for this to not be added to a legal CP list.

if there is any confusion or if i missed a topic, i'll be grad to explain/correct myself/go more in depth in the matter.
 

Veril

Frame Savant
Joined
Jun 20, 2008
Messages
3,062
Location
Kent Lakes, New York
I must say, I am extremely pleased to see such a well thought out and detailed post. Kudos. I supported non-slip Summit+ before and still do.

Also, I'm going to add Temple+ to the CP/Banned list on the recommendation of Yeroc. In the next release both the normal temple and temple+ will be playable. Yay!


So, the stage boundary mods are still going to be done with the .gct death-boundary mod. For whatever reason, it works right and the .pac stage boundaries do not. Also I've gotten really good at this. So what I need to know is: what are the stage subsection ids for Delfino Plaza, PTAD, and Halberd? I'm also going to be (re)doing the boundaries for Rumble Falls+ and PSI+. Using the death boundary mod-code will let us cut down on the file size somewhat by removing any unnecessary stage .pacs.
 

VietGeek

Smash Hero
Joined
Mar 19, 2008
Messages
8,133
edit: subsections would have to be edited inside the .pacs themselves; death boundary code goes by stage ids and there are no subsection ids; and even if there were the code probably couldn't read it

stage position datas (and death boundaries) start at ModelData[100] and go on in BrawlBox; names correlate obv; 'standard' stage data for the three is "on the platform"

Camlimit0N is left and up; 1N is right and down of overall camera boundaries and the same applies for the Dead0N and Dead1N (for the boundaries).
 

MK26

Smash Master
Joined
Jun 29, 2008
Messages
4,450
Location
http://www.mediafire.com/?zj2oddmz0yy for ZSS fix!
So, the stage boundary mods are still going to be done with the .gct death-boundary mod. For whatever reason, it works right and the .pac stage boundaries do not. Also I've gotten really good at this. So what I need to know is: what are the stage subsection ids for Delfino Plaza, PTAD, and Halberd? I'm also going to be (re)doing the boundaries for Rumble Falls+ and PSI+. Using the death boundary mod-code will let us cut down on the file size somewhat by removing any unnecessary stage .pacs.
??

Code:
[MiscData] - Stage description - (leftmost significant point WO=walkoff)(rightmost significant point WO = walkoff)
[ModelData]	Top death bound
		Top camera bound
Left death/camera bound		Right camera/death bound
		Bottom camera bound
		Bottom death bound
[collapse="vDelfino"]
Code:
Default

[3] - Floating stage - (-71)(71)
[100/121/122/123]
		180
		130
-220	-160		160	220
		-40
		-115

[50] - Island 1 - (-97)(100)
[112]		130
		80
-220	-160		160	220
		-90
		-165

[51] - Flat Plaza - (-98)(98)
[113]		160
		110
-200	-140		140	200
		-60
		-135

[52] - Shallow Centre Deep Left - (-147)(WO379)
[114]		150
		100
-180	-125		125	180
		-50
		-125

[53] - Three Rocks - (-105)(88)
[115]		110
		60
-220	-160		160	220
		-110
		-170

[54] - Island 2 - (-104)(-106)
[116]		140
		90
-220	-160		160	220
		-80
		-155

[55] - In front of Shine Gate (WO-252)(136)
[117]		150
		100
-190	-140		140	190
		-70
		-145

[56] - Umbrellas - (-178)(WO260)
[118]		160
		110
-180	-130		130	180
		-60
		-135

[57] - Shine Gate - (-128)(-128)
[119]		130
		80
-230	-170		170	230
		-90
		-170

[58] - Centre Depression - (WO-253)(WO260)
[120]		160
		110
-180	-130		130	180
		-60
		-135
[/collapse]

[collapse="Delfino+"]
Code:
[3] - Floating stage - (-71)(71)
[100/121/122/123]
		165
		130
-204	-160		160	204
		-40
		-115

[50] - Island 1 - (-97)(100)
[112]		115
		80
-204	-160		160	204
		-90
		-165

[51] - Flat Plaza - (-98)(98)
[113]		145
		110
-188	-140		140	188
		-60
		-135

[52] - Shallow Centre Deep Left - (-147)(WO379)
[114]		135
		100
-172	-125		125	172
		-50
		-125

[53] - Three Rocks - (-105)(88)
[115]		95
		60
-204	-160		160	204
		-110
		-170

[54] - Island 2 - (-104)(-106)
[116]		125
		90
-204	-160		160	204
		-80
		-155

[55] - In front of Shine Gate (WO-252)(136)
[117]		135
		100
-180	-140		140	180
		-70
		-145

[56] - Umbrellas - (-178)(WO260)
[118]		145
		110
-172	-130		130	172
		-60
		-135

[57] - Shine Gate - (-128)(-128)
[119]		115
		80
-212	-170		170	212
		-90
		-170

[58] - Centre Depression - (WO-253)(WO260)
[120]		145
		110
-172	-130		130	172
		-60
		-135
[/collapse]If that's what you want to know...

EDIT: also, what viet said.
 

FrozenHobo

Smash Hero
Joined
Mar 26, 2007
Messages
5,272
Location
Nowhere Land
if the pacs don't appear to be taking any effect then you may need to make sure you don't have the boundary code in your GCT. remember: the code over rules the pacs.
 

Veril

Frame Savant
Joined
Jun 20, 2008
Messages
3,062
Location
Kent Lakes, New York
7.03 didn't have my boundary code active. Blind has also noticed the boundary mod issues. It isn't just me. Obviously I would know if my own boundaries were in place and functioning. If the death boundary mod were overwriting the .pac stage bounds, I would have the same FD/SV/BF bounds. Which is not the case... They aren't the same. Why that is doesn't matter as I already have the working death boundary mod, I just need to add in new boundaries for several stages.

As such I will be using the .gct death boundary mod. Its a good deal way less stuff to download which cuts down on file size and thus is awesome. + I can actually do the boundaries myself for stages like PSI without needing to code by proxy. I like being able to research, analyze and modify without needing to wait on anyone else to get me a new stage .pac. Not that you guys aren't amazing, but seriously I think its better if I use the death boundary mod.


btw
The death boundary code goes by stage and sub-id. Thus the F (F=all) following each stage ID in my death boundary code. I'm not doing this in BrawlBox.
 

VietGeek

Smash Hero
Joined
Mar 19, 2008
Messages
8,133
So I was being bored when Zeus hit in the head with his judgment:

"You will open up Falcon's .PAC in PSA."

I yielded to his decree.

And found something peculiar:



So yeah, the injections for "Airdodge in Tumble" aren't present in the EscapeAir Subaction. I thought this was on purpose a good while back since Falcon had a clear hitstun problem, but upon further observation it was just injected into the wrong place (in this case backwards tech).

Unless the Falcon .PAC was changed since the last time Yeroc provided download links for the WIP 7.0.3, I've provided a fix:

http://www.mediafire.com/?qjnvjzmyj2g
 

FrozenHobo

Smash Hero
Joined
Mar 26, 2007
Messages
5,272
Location
Nowhere Land
so... a couple questions:

1) Why did the icy summit+ get in and not the non-slip version?

2) a lot of the stage pacs are missing their wall-jump fixes..

3) Castle Siege is still frozen in this version (i know we didn't really discuss this, but a good majority of the community wanted it to stay as it was)

4) Distant Planet+'s pac is still in... which makes no sense.

5) Blue title screen? Really? (jk, i don't care...)

thats really all i can see as a problem with this build... though i thought we had fixed some of this stuff a while ago (see 4).
 

goodoldganon

Smash Champion
Joined
Mar 17, 2008
Messages
2,946
Location
Cleveland, Ohio
1) I would assume because we have enough counterpicks so they left a unique stage in that has a cult following.

2) Which ones in particular would probably help the WBR you know...

3) I agree. Why don't we make a .rel or whatever like we have for Temple and Temple+? Some us still like the unfrozen Castle Siege and would enjoy to still play it. Why not remove electroplankton? No one likes that stage anyway. That way we can put unfrozen CS on the 'banned' side or whatever.

4) Good question

5) I like this one more
 
Top Bottom