MELEE-FC Tournament Ruleset Discussion

[Fregadero]

Alright this isn't ****ing debate club. I appreciate that you put so much effort into your posting, but expecting people to do the same is silly.

 

[Kal]

Boat Mode, that attitude won't allow for any sort of compromise. You can't possibly reach a compromise if your response is just "this isn't ****ing debate club, and I won't put this much effort into explaining my position. I want what I want." I would suggest just trying to explain your position to the best of your ability. This ruleset is already an attempt at compromise, so I think it's a little unreasonable to act like the Kishes are being stubborn.

 

[Bl@ckChris]

well, i am interested in your motivation towards being right in a discussion towards a stagelist in which i'm pretty sure most everyone else most certainly has an intention of going to, but you...may or may not. In fact, for most of the people in the discussion, the stagelist is a significant factor regarding their personal decision of attendance.

but you just seem to like arguing about stages, trying to get people out of the scrub mentality, and make sure that everyone knows that the kishes are right, and the new school is wrong, and the game is best when a stagelist that includes all nonbroken things is used. i don't think this is an invalid reason to argue and discuss the matter, but i was still curious.

To add to the actual discussion at hand: best ruleset in my mind is still that the first stage is struck from the mbr5, and you get 3 bans from the current 11 for cp stages. gentlemans rule applies where if both players want to use mbr5, they can for the set. I think if one person wants to use their full range of CP's, they should be allowed to in the FC ruleset. Otherwise, it'd be like getting 6 (or so) bans instead of 3 or something, and i think 3 out of these 11 is enough.

 

[Fregadero]

I'm referencing what you said to Black Chris. You explain yourself very well, but not many people sit around making sure their arguments are logically infallible. And you sound pretentious when you ask people if they know what they're saying holds no weight. No Hate tho.

I actual think that the debating going on in here is pretty good actually

 

[Strong Badam]

It's an interesting question, but I fear that if Kal were to say that he didn't plan on going people would simply ignore his arguments on the (fallacious) premise that his opinion holds no weight due to his lack of attendance. And I don't know whether or not Kal plans to attend, either, and it's probably best to debate assuming that his attendance is irrelevant... as it is. If Kal ends up not attending, his arguments on the validity of stages don't suddenly become false.

 

[Kal]

It's not like I choose a position at random and defend it, Boat Mode. I actually believe what I'm writing. And, as for what he said "holding no weight", I was referring strictly to the question he was asking. As if, at the end of the day, my arguments are somehow invalidated by whether I intend to go to this tournament. I'm not the type of poster to dismiss someone's arguments because of who they are, and asking this sort of question has exactly that intention: "you're not even going to the tournament. Why should we take what you have to say seriously?"

Blackchris, I have every intention of going. Whether I'm able to (some financial and academic issues are arising) is a different question. This doesn't impact the validity of my stance, and it's rather insulting to imply that arguing for what you think is right is somehow condemnable if it doesn't affect you directly.

But I haven't argued a single time that any ruleset is really better. No ruleset is better because what is "better" is a matter of opinion. I personally prefer the game sans Falco, but I've never argued for it. When I do engage in the specifics of this debate, I argue for fairness; if not everyone can agree on what makes the game better, banning something because more than half the community thinks it makes the game worse is unfair to the minority. The only thing we can all agree on is that broken strategies need to be banned.

But, at the end of the day, I agree some pragmatism is necessary. I'm sure this is why the Kishes chose to have only eleven stages legal, instead of something like nineteen.

I think your compromise is another reasonable alternative. I just don't agree with isolating a set five stages just because they're commonly used. The strike system already prevents players from being forced to their worst stage. But I do think it would be worthwhile to force the first stage on one of the MBR5 if it significantly increases attendance.

Damnit Strong Bad, stop ninjaing my ****.

 

[Fregadero]

It's not like I choose a position at random and defend it, Boat Mode. I actually believe what I'm writing. And, as for what he said "holding no weight", I was referring strictly to the question he was asking. As if, at the end of the day, my arguments are somehow invalidated by whether I intend to go to this tournament. I'm not the type of poster to dismiss someone's arguments because of who they are, and asking this sort of question has exactly that intention: "you're not even going to the tournament. Why should we take what you have to say seriously?"

I understand your response to him and agree that your presence should not affect the validity of your argument. And I agree with most of it. You're being a little to objective for my tastes, as I feel that there should be some human aspect to our decisions, but its absolutely a position that needs to be argued.

I'm just sayin like, maybe chill out a bit mang

 

[Kal]

Haha, I'm perfectly calm. For the most part, I won't react negatively unless there is some hostility. But, with regards to the "human aspect," I think it's already there: is there a presence wanting these counterpicks legal? If not, then who cares how fair we are? And that's how it usually goes. But, from what I've seen, there is a strong presence wanting these counterpicks legal. It seems less human and more tyrannical to me to simply adhere to the desire of the majority.

Going for a "tyranny of the majority" reference there. Probably wasn't very well-phrased, so please, nobody think I'm calling anyone a tyrant. Except maybe Cactuar.

 

[Bl@ckChris]

...where'd you see it? if you're talking about from the kishes, then that's certainly more than enough to warrant it (they're the hosts lol), but if you mean from the overall player base...it feels more like there are some that reject the idea and want mbr5, and some that are like "well, this is weird, better start practicing i guess", and then theres overswarm in a corner like "**** yeah, mk2 and japes!!!!"

but maybe there's just a lot of overswarms in a corner that i'm not aware of *shrug*

 

[Kal]

I was under the impression that most of Kish's region like it this way. Of course, we could get into an analysis of whether enough people want it to justify things, but I'm sure you can see how that is sort of dangerous thinking.

 

[JPOBS]

Kal will argue anything to the death even if it doesn't affect him personally.

Because he's the hero smashboards deserves, but not the one it needs right now.
So we'll debate with him, because he can take it. Because he's not our hero.
He's the silent guardian.
A watch full protector.
A white knight.

 

[Kal]

Wait, can you compare me to Iron Man instead? The Dark Knight was a ****ty movie.

Though I guess, with Batman as my avatar, I sort of deserved that.

 

[ORLY]

i just now caught up and see why kal made the jump over to marvel. well done, kal

 

[Mahone]

LOL.... are you saying The Dark Knight was worse than Iron Man...

I can't take any arguments you make seriously anymore, you can point out how unrelated ur preference in movies is all you want, idgaf

 

[Kal]

Marvel is, on the whole, better than DC. I was just playing a lot of Arkham City and got hung up on Batman.

But Iron Man is better.

Mahone, The Dark Knight was an overrated movie. It was "ok" at best. Apparently Heath Ledger, like Jesus, died for our sins. The difference is that he was involved in a film, rather than our salvation, so he gets an equally loyal, albeit smaller, fanbase.

 

[Violence]

Just needed to say:

Not much to add yet, but it's clear that 95% of people in opposition of bunk bed stages have no idea how they work. It's hard to take their arguments seriously because there's no ground for what they're saying. Especially regarding Klaptrap.

If we ban JJ, we're banning YI YS. If you don't want to die 'randomly' by KT, then I don't want you living 'randomly' by a cloud save.

Randall is not random at all. I'm not even good, and even I know when Randall is coming well enough to tailor my recoveries and edgeguards to him. I don't buy this analogy one bit.

Out on 4's, in on 9's, even numbered 10's place on the left. It's really easy.

 

[JPOBS]

Marvel is better than DC on the whole, but Dark Knight is the best super hero movie of all time. OF ALL TIME.

Until Dark Knight Rises.

oh and that cracked article is talking about iron man vs batman begins. Nice try brah

 

[Kal]

It's actually talking about the characters in general, and referencing the movies as the most recent iterations. The Dark Knight is still a ****ty movie.

 

[Lovage]

i get what you're saying kishsquared but please don't compare a fantastic stage like yoshi's story, that has a tiny random platform that saves ur life somtimes, to ****y *** jungle japes that no one likes to plays on that will randomly ceiling spike you at 0% and kill you if you get sent off the edge at the wrong moment.


****TY STAGES SUCK

 

[Silent Wolf]

@kal

Yes I did see that, and obviously its not enough to get certain players to attend this tournament. Which was the point of my post by the way. I want everyone to go. My compromise was allowing the option of the current rule set, which is pretty much the cap of what it deserves for a tournament such as this in my opinion.

Which sounds better to you; a relatively imbalanced novelty tournament with less people, or a legit tournament with larger attendance with a splash of fun experimentation applied accordingly. To me the answer is obvious

 

[Mahone]

Marvel is, on the whole, better than DC. I was just playing a lot of Arkham City and got hung up on Batman.

But Iron Man is better.

Mahone, The Dark Knight was an overrated movie. It was "ok" at best. Apparently Heath Ledger, like Jesus, died for our sins. The difference is that he was involved in a film, rather than our salvation, so he gets an equally loyal, albeit smaller, fanbase.

I enjoyed that article, i did have some good points. Dark Knight was overrated, but it was still an amazing movie. I dunno what you have against Ledger, I've seen like every movie ever made and that truly was some of the best acting I've ever seen.

Iron man the movie was complete trash though... i have never seen such blatant direct characterization. I was forced to watch the Avengers recently and it just reminded me how much i hated that ****. It's so charming how he just says hes a genius and handsome and a playboy, etc. I can't believe how cool he is!!! He has tons of money and a hot girlfriend OMG!!! What an amazing superhero, to bad he can't work well with others... OH wait, he can... what a perfect guy, like that cracked article said, he does everything perfect, his ethics are perfect, but at the same time he's like me and you, you know? He likes to drink and bro out OMFG SO PERFECT!!!

That cracked article sorta explains exactly why Batman IS better than Iron Man, its because Iron Man is always better in every way. It's like when people argue that Superman is cooler because he is stronger, and they make lists of the strongest superheroes and ****... what does **** does that matter? They aren't real people.. i could write a superhero that is stronger than all of them right now. They just write Iron Man as this super cool perfect guy, and that's cool and all, but it's boring... Batman morals DON'T really make sense, he does worse by not killing them most of the time. He's not a super fun cool guy, he seems like he's a downer and he is just obsessed to the point where no one wants to hang out with him. Irl, you would never wanna hang out with batman, you would wanna BRO OUT with Iron Man cuz he drinks and is funny and cool and rich... anyway, you see my point, my point is that MK2 shouldn't be legal.

 

[Alex Strife]

i'd take this out somewhere else...cause tbh here are my thoughts


Cartoon wise : DC > Marvel
Translating characters to film : Marvel > DC
Best Superhero movie : Superman 1979 ( You will believe a man can fly )
Best Modern Superhero movie : Dark Knight/Spider-man 2/Capt America
First series to make a team up : Marvel...DC is still up in the air and probably will
Worst Superhero film : FF2 ( chris evans was in it lol )


But ya make a thread for it, let ppl argue and let ppl talk about FC...which...no matter what...will be fun.

 

[Kal]

The point, Silent Wolf, is that your "compromise" isn't a compromise. It's the MBR5 ruleset. What's the difference between "if players disagree on the stagelist, use the MBR ruleset" and "use the MBR ruleset, but players can agree to any stage?" Nothing, because the rulesets are identical.

In other words, you can just make your point explicit, without hiding it behind the word "compromise:" you think the tournament would yield a better turnout and be an overall better experience if it ran the MBR ruleset. There's nothing wrong with feeling this way. It's just that you're not allowing the "option" of using the MBR ruleset. It's being forced on the person who doesn't prefer it.

And it's somewhat rude to phrase your question so that the answer appears obvious. Calling this ruleset "imbalanced" and "novelty," and not even making a case for how many more entrants we would expect if we were to use the other ruleset, and calling the other ruleset "legit." If you're not going to take different viewpoints seriously, it's really unfair to expect a real response.

Mahone, I'm not going to debate which movie is better in this thread. I have nothing against Ledger, though, and I think his performance was good. I just think that all of The Dark Knight's praising is a result of Ledger's death and that, if he had survived, we wouldn't see everyone pretending The Dark Knight was some Shakespearean masterpiece. However, I don't agree with any of your interpretations of Iron Man. If you want to discuss this more in a PM or on AIM or something, I'm down. Or just copy your post to the social thread and I'll reply.

 

[Mahone]

Ya, silent wolf... people can already do what you said at every tournament. If both players agree, they can even play on icicle mountain, so thats not really a compromise.

I think the ONLY reasonable compromise I've heard here is the Taj rule, where you can ban like all CPs or one neutral... not necessarily exactly that, but something similar could be cool.

In my opinion, MK2 and JJ are too random for competitive play, but I have no proof to back this up, and i will admit I haven't played on these stages a long time, thats just how they have been feeling the past couple days, now that I am practicing them.

I honestly felt that RC, Brinstar, Mute, Corneria, KJ, was fine, and I generally enjoy CPs, but i really dislike JJ and MK2.

@Kal, eh, i wouldn't mind talking about this irl, but i don't really care enough to take it to the PMs, if you have skype though, we could do that if u really wanted lol

 

[omgwtfToph]

So a lot of good arguments have been made on both sides.

I think a really big downside of the new ruleset, compared to any oldschool ruleset that had these stages, is that the new ruleset doesn't have a list of neutrals. Which means, like Peef mentioned, that it's possible to strike down to a janky stage in a matchup like IC's vs. floaties. I think winning the first game in your set is important because it gives you the benefit of the counterpick, but having to win on what are essentially two "counterpick" stages in a particular matchup seems really rough.

Mind you I'm not making these arguments from a personal point of view because I thrive on weird stages and so does my character. It just seems like there have been enough complaints regarding the new ruleset to warrant re-consideration. And, while I'm a fan of the stage list, I think that non-top-tier characters get reamed pretty hard by this list, as top tier mains can force you into playing on a weird (and bad for the given matchup) stage on the FIRST stage, whereas the first stage would be relatively neutral.

With all this in mind, I think Strong Bad's compromise or something like it (i.e. if players can't agree between MBR or FC10R ruleset then perhaps a middle-of-the-road stage list of 7 or 9 stages can be used) is a great idea.

Or just having a neutral stage list (say, the 5 MBR neutrals - FD FoD BF YS DL) for the first stage, you strike to one, and then you have the big counterpick stage list of 11 stages, from which each player bans, say, two or three, and then you go from there. You'd get all the strategy/variety of having the current proposed FC stage list without having to force people into playing bad stage/matchups on the very first stage of the set.

 

[Lovage]

i dont even know what the MBR ruleset is lol. i just know that, in the last 3 national's i've been to, they've all had increasingly better and better rulesets, and i really hope this tournament will have at least on par with what we're all used to! aka: no one wants to play...on ******** *** stages.

 

[Mahone]

Lovage you are a smart guy, stop just calling them ******** lol, we really need people to explain why they are bad in detail and what makes them uncompetitive, even if you and me think its obvious, other people might not.

Also, i really dislike the Strong Bad idea...

Don't ****ing SETTLE... EVER.

Thats not just smash, its a life lesson.

You should either do the MBR ruleset, or do the ruleset you guys truly feel is competitive, with all the stages u want and no/1 ban, this awkward middle ground is making me physically sick.

 

[omgwtfToph]

It's not "settling." I think the idea behind the new stage list is nice but that there are some problems with it. I would like to solve these problems and make the greatest number of people happy. How is that "awkward" lol.

Kishes, I have two questions.

1. Is the first FC in which there has been no distinction between "neutral" and "counterpick" stages? i.e. this will be the first FC where it'll be possible for something like Peef's IC's vs. Floaty scenario to occur, where a character like IC's are forced to play on a stage like Jungle Japes right off the bat and have Battlefield as their best counterpick? I think that's probably the biggest issue with the stage list, in my opinion, anyway. I think differentiating between "neutral" and "counterpick" stages will solve a lot of the problems people have been raising, i.e. floaties or spacies banning a lot of neutral stages against weaker characters right off the bat and then abusing stage properties, or just being forced into an awkward matchup+stage combination on the first match in a set. Having the 1st match take place on a MBR5 "neutral," or say disallowing the banning of more than 1 neutral stage, might be simple ways to improve the ruleset without actually changing the current stage list.

2. Also, what is the reasoning for the rule "you can't choose a stage that has already been played on?" If you lose on your counterpick in a Bo5, why aren't you able to go back to that stage? Hasn't Dave's Stupid Rule, or a variant thereof, been standard since old tournaments? Is this the first FC that will be implementing the "you can't choose a stage that has already been played on" rule?

I guess my point is that I think there are some aspects to this ruleset that aren't a compromise between FC's rules and the "standard" MBR ruleset, and these aspects aren't really desirable.

 

[Fregadero]

Pro MRB5 players will feel that they are being slighted the way it is, with both players having to agree to MRB5. Pro FC players will feel the same way with Silent Wolf's idea. Pro FC players will argue that a larger stage list is fairer, while Pro MRB5 players will argue that using the standard is fairer.

Unstopable force, meet immovable object?

Seriously though, no side with budge without the being some compromise from MRB5, and more comprmise from FC, assuming they're willing to.

We should be focusing less on each side is (more) right/wrong and focusing more on how far each side will compromise before we reach an acceptable stage/rules list.

Once again, assuming the Kishes will change their minds.

 

[Strong Badam]

Also, i really dislike the Strong Bad idea...

man that's really harsh

It's a difficult situation. In hindsight, I think the Ship would have been better suited to release their stagelist with 13 or 15 stages, and be willing to compromise from there. When the FC Staff (which has some newer school players, including myself) were looking over the ruleset KishPrime suggested, we viewed it as a great compromise between the MLG Rulesets of 2005-2007 and the current MBR Ruleset. I was originally opposed to it, and eventually came around. People here are viewing it as something they should be compromising with between the current FC-Legacy Ruleset and the MBR ruleset; this would lead to a lopsided compromise leaning toward the MBR Ruleset, and isn't fair.

Lovage, I respect you as a player and a person, but when you use such arguments like "****ty stages suck," you leave very little to discuss and reason with.

On the DSR vs. FC rule issue, I think it's a legitimate one that was brought up. I'd like to see it discussed more. I was also against being able to no longer choose your counterpick in a Bo5, as well as not being able to go to a stage you've lost on.

 

[Mahone]

It's not "settling." I think the idea behind the new stage list is nice but that there are some problems with it. I would like to solve these problems and make the greatest number of people happy. How is that "awkward" lol.

Kishes, I have two questions.

1. Is the first FC in which there has been no distinction between "neutral" and "counterpick" stages? i.e. this will be the first FC where it'll be possible for something like Peef's IC's vs. Floaty scenario to occur, where a character like IC's are forced to play on a stage like Jungle Japes right off the bat and have Battlefield as their best counterpick? I think that's probably the biggest issue with the stage list, in my opinion, anyway.

2. Also, what is the reasoning for the rule "you can't choose a stage that has already been played on?" If you lose on your counterpick in a Bo5, why aren't you able to go back to that stage? Hasn't Dave's Stupid Rule, or a variant thereof, been standard since old tournaments? Is this the first FC that will be implementing the "you can't choose a stage that has already been played on" rule?

I guess my point is that I think there are some aspects to this ruleset that aren't a compromise between FC's rules and the "standard" MBR ruleset, and these aspects aren't really desirable.

"greatest number of people happy"...

Is this even ****ing English, where do you think you are? Real life?... this is SMASHBOARDS son, we are in super theory world now son, get used to it. Logic prevails, and if they think MK2 should be legal, LOGICALLY, other stages that are just as "random" as that should be legal.

You're not understanding what this is Toph... this isn't about making people happy, the Kishes are drawing a line in the sand.... this is bigger than FC, its bigger than us now.

 

[Silent Wolf]

The point, Silent Wolf, is that your "compromise" isn't a compromise. It's the MBR5 ruleset. What's the difference between "if players disagree on the stagelist, use the MBR ruleset" and "use the MBR ruleset, but players can agree to any stage?" Nothing, because the rulesets are identical.

In other words, you can just make your point explicit, without hiding it behind the word "compromise:" you think the tournament would yield a better turnout and be an overall better experience if it ran the MBR ruleset. There's nothing wrong with feeling this way. It's just that you're not allowing the "option" of using the MBR ruleset. It's being forced on the person who doesn't prefer it.

And it's somewhat rude to phrase your question so that the answer appears obvious. Calling this ruleset "imbalanced" and "novelty," and not even making a case for how many more entrants we would expect if we were to use the other ruleset, and calling the other ruleset "legit." If you're not going to take different viewpoints seriously, it's really unfair to expect a real response.

everything you said is right lol. i wasnt "hiding behind" my "compromise" tho lol. i was simply mistaken. i dont know how many more people would come if the MBR rule set was implemented, but i dont see it as worth it to sacrifice any number of players attending for this rule set.

i like strong bads idea of a compromise. ill prob elaborate more on that when im not at work lol

also, i see little value in arguing about why stages are really gimmicky. leffen (and others, cant remember) made a ton of really good points which were countered with poor responses imo. one that comes to mind is comparing klap traps to stitch face turnips and how kish lost at fc cuz of turnips. leffen or someone else made a really good point on how klap traps cannot be avoided or reacted to, whereas stitch faces can. just cuz kishprime lost cuz of them doesnt really counter that solid point. guess what, i lost at last fc in the bracket in game 3 vs a jiggs cuz i got hit by a klap trap. the stage can be prevented, the turnip cant.

im just gonna stop and post a real argument when i get home lol

 

[Violence]

goddamn, Mahone. I can no longer look at your avatar without cracking up anymore.

And yeah, I pretty much agree that Japes is too random for competitive play. I was messing around on it, and you can do some fun cool stuff in the water, but you just eventually die to the Klap trap. You can't react to it, you can't do anything to counter it. Really the only way to beat it is to not go near the water.

Say I'm playing Oscar, and at low percents, Oscar shines me off into the water. I double jump and he reads it because I suck and shines me again. He holds his shine to shine stall so that when I up B he can just jump and shine me. Water carries me off, and I manage to Up B to a ledge he wasn't covering. Oscar sees this and goes to double jump toward the platform I recovered to, only a klap trap jumps out of the water and kills him. If not for this stage hazard, which Oscar had no way of seeing, knowing about, predicting, or countering, he would still be rightfully in an advantageous position. Suddenly, due to no fault of his own while trying to gimp me, he ends up just straight up dead. I didn't even do anything, I just recovered.

I don't know how this is comparable with Randall, which is completely, 100% predictable, or Peach's turnips, which are absolutely reactable to.

It's a stage hazard that's completely unpredictable, and has a huge impact on the game. I don't think it's healthy to have the stage on, personally.

 

[omgwtfToph]

The video Lucky brought up was another good example of a stage hazard that can't be reacted to. He successfully read SS's tech, then the lava quickly rose out of nowhere which lead to Lucky getting death combo'd. Exciting to watch, because it's a Falcon combo, and everyone loves those, but not really "fair."

 

[Violence]

I don't agree with Lucky's vid, because the lava follows a set pattern. If you take the time to memorize the set pattern, you know when it's coming and when it's going. What happened to him was unfortunate, but it wasn't like there was no way he could've seen it coming.

In my scenario, it doesn't matter if I was playing you, Otto, Oscar, Mango, anyone. It literally doesn't matter who you are, there was no way you could've predicted that klap trap.

 

[KishSquared]

Just needed to say:


Randall is not random at all. I'm not even good, and even I know when Randall is coming well enough to tailor my recoveries and edgeguards to him. I don't buy this analogy one bit.

Out on 4's, in on 9's, even numbered 10's place on the left. It's really easy.

THANK YOU. Yes, its randomness is controlled. This is exactly what we're saying. The cloud follows a set path, and it's random whether it happens to be in position or not. It's been repeated many times that KT is not random, and that it follows a set pattern. It might vary slightly, but it's the same thing.

Doesn't matter that it's out on 4s. If I happen to get edgehogged at a 4, this is entirely random.

i get what you're saying kishsquared but please don't compare a fantastic stage like yoshi's story, that has a tiny random platform that saves ur life somtimes, to ****y *** jungle japes that no one likes to plays on that will randomly ceiling spike you at 0% and kill you if you get sent off the edge at the wrong moment.

Per your arguments, YS is a horrible stage. Cloud interferes with gameplay and Shyguys extend hitboxes. You want the stage to be an inert observer, and yet you're calling a stage full of variance 'fantastic'.

I agree that YS is fantastic, but that's because it's consistent with my main points. You're showing obvious bias to YS by ignoring your own claims. You like YS and dislike JJ, so you adjust your arguments to match your preference. This is call 'bias'.

 

[Prince_Abu]

i think it says something that all these good players (lovage, leffen, armada, silent wolf,) are arguing against the ruleset whereas not one top player has taken the other side (kish ruleset > mbr)

 

[Mahone]

Ya, lucky's video is sorta iffy...

the lava does follow a set pattern, but my argument has always been that i don't think it's reasonable to keep track of the lava at all times while playing a match, melee is hard enough just focusing on player vs player stuff and the few player vs stage things, like platforms...

of course the counterargument is that player vs stage isn't worse than player vs player, just different and possibly more interesting and more competitive etc., which i agree with. It just comes down to personal preference and most people like less stage involvement so i think we should do that... even though its a shame for those who don't like it.

The klaptrap seems like a really obvious ban. Simple examples show it is pretty unavoidable and a OHKO... the main counterargument kish used was that you can stay away from that area of the stage and I understand what he is saying, but that just promotes camping imo, although i don't feel like camping is overpowered on that stage, so I'm not sure if it warrants a ban afterall...

 

[Violence]

THANK YOU. Yes, its randomness is controlled. This is exactly what we're saying. The cloud follows a set path, and it's random whether it happens to be in position or not. It's been repeated many times that KT is not random, and that it follows a set pattern. It might vary slightly, but it's the same thing.

Doesn't matter that it's out on 4s. If I happen to get edgehogged at a 4, this is entirely random.

First of all, please tell me the exact way to tell if, when, and where a klap trap is going to show up. I could be mistaken and just ignorant about this.

If you cannot predict, 100% of the time, with 100% accuracy where that klap trap is, I don't think that stage should be allowed.

If you are getting edgeguarded at a 4, both players have the information available to them that Randall is coming out. Even I can continue an edgeguard knowing that my Falco opponent side b'd into the wall on the right side as the clock strikes 14 seconds, and I can go and continue killing him because I know to expect Randall. Randall is 100% known 100% of the time.

The random elements in legal stages right now are(correct me if I'm wrong): Dream Land's Wind, FoD's platform height, car position on Mute City, Klap Trap, Birdo and carpet and waterfall logs, Yoshi's Story shyguys, and Pokemon Stadium transformations.



Of ALL of these things, nothing here straight up kills you, except for the Klap Trap.

Nobody goes: oh no wispy started blowing, guess I'm dead now. ._.
ROCK STAGE!? ****, I'm down a stock.(although sometimes this is the case, haha)
Oh no, a shyguy... guess I'm dead.

These things don't happen, except on Japes. Whenever you drop below a certain height, whether you're ahead or behind, aggressive or defensive, you have a chance of just randomly DYING. This is most drastic thing that can happen by randomness in all of the legal stages, and personally don't think it should be allowed.

 

[Strong Badam]

I just think the Klaptrap argument is amusing. A stage hazard that discourages ledgecamping, something that players such as Hax and Mew2King should be rejoicing over, as they posted til their faces were blue claiming that ledge camping is a serious issue in Super Smash Bros Melee, despite its clear lack of abuse in tournament play. Being near a ledge is also usually a disadvantageous position in most cases save for the occasional DD grab -> bthrow -> edgeguard with some characters, so I don't see how a stage hazard you have to be literally off the stage to be hit by is suddenly a new thing to look out for. But if you really find the stage to be disadvantageous for you (It certainly is for certain archetypes of characters, just like how Yoshi's Story is disadvantageous for some), then you have 3 bans, one of which you can quite easily use to eliminate it from selection in any of your sets.