I want to siphon off discussion of the rules here so the other thread does not get overwhelmed. If you wish to participate in the conversation, please read the Melee rules listed here.
To kick things off, here's a WALL OF TEXT
Objectives of the Ruleset
1. A compromise between FC-era rules and Modern-day Rules in honor of the theme of reunion
2. An inclusion of as much of Melee as one can include without leading to game-breaking tactics, true to the spirit of the MELEE-FC franchise
3. A way for players to find neutral matchup ground amongst the diverse stages through a combination of stage-strike and bans
Primary CritiquesNo Input from Community
I solicited at least 3 players who were all heavily pro-MBR5, experienced, and of different ages. All suggested that it was outside the norm, but that it wasn’t so ridiculous that it would stop them from coming and enjoying the tournament. I talked to multiple players about it who were excited. In fact, upon posting of the rules in the thread, there have been an almost equal number of people excited about the addition of the old-guard stages as there have been complaining. Look, running a major tournament sucks. Everything you do pretty much makes someone angry. Trust me when I say that I take everything that gets posted seriously. Please be sure that I do want feedback, and I do respect people’s opinions.
Difference from the Norm
It is different! Really! In a totally customizable game! Ok, so this community has evolved a long way and has been narrowing down its preferences for 10 years. However, the MBR list does not speak for everyone in the community. When’s the last time a major ran with these 5 additional stages, just to add that particular aspect of depth and variety back in? It’s not like we’re adding items. It’s not like we’re adding game-breaking stages in. We’re talking about shifting 95% of matchups, mostly far less than 10% either way from an MBR5. That’s a neutral statement, neither an argument for or against. It just is. Even if you hate everything non-MBR5, you can even ban your 3 least-favorite stages PERMANENTLY for the entire tournament. If there is a compromise to be found between the two schools of thought, I’m not sure one can be found that is much closer than this list.
Stage Hazards
The stage hazards in these stages are actually some of the most-localized and least-random hazards in the game. They provide additional input that players must analyze while making decisions about zoning and stage control. Outside of a philosophical objection to the existence of these things (which honestly, isn’t an argument you are going to win here), I don’t think there is much room for debate.
Character (Im)Balance
First of all, there’s a distinct lack of evidence here and a TON of theorycrafting. Which I’m happy to see, actually, but it needs to stay in the realm of theorycraft unless you have some evidence or can present things formally, as PEEF did in the other thread. Otherwise, I’m not certain how there can be widespread agreement on how these stages will shift things within all of the 35-55 primary matchups in the game. I suspect that some characters will get better and other characters will get worse. The same thing happened when the stages were eliminated in the first place, which leads me to the point below.
Character Diversity
The common statement is that adding stages always favors the top tier. Really? Look at results from old tournaments. FCD had Fox, Falco, ICs, Sheik, Marth, Peach, Falcon, and Luigi represented in the Top 10. You cannot get more diverse than that, and the stage list was even wider then. Some have told me that the game has changed. Well, there’s two answers to that.
1. Where’s the evidence that character variety was getting stale? List some majors with abundant stages that had character variety issues that led to stages getting narrowed down
2. If the game has indeed changed, as people keep telling me, isn’t it possible that characters have not actually been fully tested on these stages?
Consistent/Random Results
This simply is not a problem, nor is it especially debatable. Again, the stage hazards in these stages are actually some of the most-localized and least-random hazards in the game. If players in 2007 understood how to deal with stage variety enough to provide consistent placings at a time when RANDOM first stages were also used, certainly the vastly more technical players of 2012 can do so with a stage strike (no sarcasm here, by the way). Yes, you could lose because the Brinstar lava interrupted your final combo. But is that really why you lost? What if the other player ceded the advantageous low ground to you in the first place because he was being more cautious of the lava? What about the 50 other decisions you made that round that caused you to get hit throughout the round? How was your recovery after the lava’s interruption? My suggestion on this point is that you own the match from beginning to end and try accounting for these hazards while you play, accepting the risk/reward tradeoff of certain positions.
Mushrooom Kingdom 2
There have been several criticisms levied against the stage, but I’m not sensing a coalescing argument against it. Forgive me if I’m missing something. Edge campers have to deal with three things:
1. They are placing themselves in danger of a low% kill, and actually limiting their own options by doing so
2. It is not a convenient position from which to use most projectiles, so practically they must earn a lead before they can take up residence there
3. They are ceding control of the eggs (and to those that argue against eggs as a matter of course, eggs certainly have no more influence on a match than a zombie turnip, and I would suggest they are actually more predictable/reliable, more dependent on match flow/stage control, more skill-based to acquire, and less affective of end result)
The middle plat is certainly strong, but the person with stage control IS supposed to have an advantage. It can be approached via the carpet and two different ledges, and the log, so there are options available.
The last argument is that of ledge stalling with Sheik or others. I’m not actually seeing how this is remarkably different from edge stalling on the outside edges of stages, and in fact can see several possible downsides to these ledges compared to those.
I welcome more debate on any of these points.
Jungle Japes
People suggest that they might die to a random Klaptrap. Well, they aren’t totally random, so you can plan on some safety after one comes, and you also have to actually be forced down there by your opponent before one can get you. This is a part of the risk/reward gameplay and stage control here.
Fun
These rules have nothing to do with fun and more about what we believe to be essential to the core of Melee. Believe it or not, some of us can take Mute City deadly serious in the midst of competition and play accordingly. Some of us actually do believe that the strategy of positioning, stage control, and zoning, are just as valuable as having flat space and platforms in which to do combos. This game is unbelievable, and there are about a million ways to play it.
I ask you to keep an open mind during the discussion.
To kick things off, here's a WALL OF TEXT
Objectives of the Ruleset
1. A compromise between FC-era rules and Modern-day Rules in honor of the theme of reunion
2. An inclusion of as much of Melee as one can include without leading to game-breaking tactics, true to the spirit of the MELEE-FC franchise
3. A way for players to find neutral matchup ground amongst the diverse stages through a combination of stage-strike and bans
Primary CritiquesNo Input from Community
I solicited at least 3 players who were all heavily pro-MBR5, experienced, and of different ages. All suggested that it was outside the norm, but that it wasn’t so ridiculous that it would stop them from coming and enjoying the tournament. I talked to multiple players about it who were excited. In fact, upon posting of the rules in the thread, there have been an almost equal number of people excited about the addition of the old-guard stages as there have been complaining. Look, running a major tournament sucks. Everything you do pretty much makes someone angry. Trust me when I say that I take everything that gets posted seriously. Please be sure that I do want feedback, and I do respect people’s opinions.
Difference from the Norm
It is different! Really! In a totally customizable game! Ok, so this community has evolved a long way and has been narrowing down its preferences for 10 years. However, the MBR list does not speak for everyone in the community. When’s the last time a major ran with these 5 additional stages, just to add that particular aspect of depth and variety back in? It’s not like we’re adding items. It’s not like we’re adding game-breaking stages in. We’re talking about shifting 95% of matchups, mostly far less than 10% either way from an MBR5. That’s a neutral statement, neither an argument for or against. It just is. Even if you hate everything non-MBR5, you can even ban your 3 least-favorite stages PERMANENTLY for the entire tournament. If there is a compromise to be found between the two schools of thought, I’m not sure one can be found that is much closer than this list.
Stage Hazards
The stage hazards in these stages are actually some of the most-localized and least-random hazards in the game. They provide additional input that players must analyze while making decisions about zoning and stage control. Outside of a philosophical objection to the existence of these things (which honestly, isn’t an argument you are going to win here), I don’t think there is much room for debate.
Character (Im)Balance
First of all, there’s a distinct lack of evidence here and a TON of theorycrafting. Which I’m happy to see, actually, but it needs to stay in the realm of theorycraft unless you have some evidence or can present things formally, as PEEF did in the other thread. Otherwise, I’m not certain how there can be widespread agreement on how these stages will shift things within all of the 35-55 primary matchups in the game. I suspect that some characters will get better and other characters will get worse. The same thing happened when the stages were eliminated in the first place, which leads me to the point below.
Character Diversity
The common statement is that adding stages always favors the top tier. Really? Look at results from old tournaments. FCD had Fox, Falco, ICs, Sheik, Marth, Peach, Falcon, and Luigi represented in the Top 10. You cannot get more diverse than that, and the stage list was even wider then. Some have told me that the game has changed. Well, there’s two answers to that.
1. Where’s the evidence that character variety was getting stale? List some majors with abundant stages that had character variety issues that led to stages getting narrowed down
2. If the game has indeed changed, as people keep telling me, isn’t it possible that characters have not actually been fully tested on these stages?
Consistent/Random Results
This simply is not a problem, nor is it especially debatable. Again, the stage hazards in these stages are actually some of the most-localized and least-random hazards in the game. If players in 2007 understood how to deal with stage variety enough to provide consistent placings at a time when RANDOM first stages were also used, certainly the vastly more technical players of 2012 can do so with a stage strike (no sarcasm here, by the way). Yes, you could lose because the Brinstar lava interrupted your final combo. But is that really why you lost? What if the other player ceded the advantageous low ground to you in the first place because he was being more cautious of the lava? What about the 50 other decisions you made that round that caused you to get hit throughout the round? How was your recovery after the lava’s interruption? My suggestion on this point is that you own the match from beginning to end and try accounting for these hazards while you play, accepting the risk/reward tradeoff of certain positions.
Mushrooom Kingdom 2
There have been several criticisms levied against the stage, but I’m not sensing a coalescing argument against it. Forgive me if I’m missing something. Edge campers have to deal with three things:
1. They are placing themselves in danger of a low% kill, and actually limiting their own options by doing so
2. It is not a convenient position from which to use most projectiles, so practically they must earn a lead before they can take up residence there
3. They are ceding control of the eggs (and to those that argue against eggs as a matter of course, eggs certainly have no more influence on a match than a zombie turnip, and I would suggest they are actually more predictable/reliable, more dependent on match flow/stage control, more skill-based to acquire, and less affective of end result)
The middle plat is certainly strong, but the person with stage control IS supposed to have an advantage. It can be approached via the carpet and two different ledges, and the log, so there are options available.
The last argument is that of ledge stalling with Sheik or others. I’m not actually seeing how this is remarkably different from edge stalling on the outside edges of stages, and in fact can see several possible downsides to these ledges compared to those.
I welcome more debate on any of these points.
Jungle Japes
People suggest that they might die to a random Klaptrap. Well, they aren’t totally random, so you can plan on some safety after one comes, and you also have to actually be forced down there by your opponent before one can get you. This is a part of the risk/reward gameplay and stage control here.
Fun
These rules have nothing to do with fun and more about what we believe to be essential to the core of Melee. Believe it or not, some of us can take Mute City deadly serious in the midst of competition and play accordingly. Some of us actually do believe that the strategy of positioning, stage control, and zoning, are just as valuable as having flat space and platforms in which to do combos. This game is unbelievable, and there are about a million ways to play it.
I ask you to keep an open mind during the discussion.
