I wasn't. I was THROWN into the water. god ****it.you could also just not hang around that area at that time
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!
I wasn't. I was THROWN into the water. god ****it.you could also just not hang around that area at that time
you mean hit?I wasn't. I was THROWN into the water. god ****it.
Maybe you'll understand if you were gayed by a stage at a large tourney.It sounds like your opponent skillfully put you in a bad position. Jungle Japes didn't do anything to you. It was either you boneheadedly throwing yourself into it or your opponent manipulating you into it. The stage geography enabled it, but then again, it also enabled you getting hit by a stage spike while on the ledge (you won't see that happen on Mario Circuit!).
Stage positioning always dictates punishment from attacks. If you get hit by my fsmash near and toward the blast zone, you die ridiculously lower than if I fsmash you across the whole stage. If you get thrown downward near the croc as it appears, you die ridiculously lower than otherwise. It's all the same, and it's all fair.
I don't really understand the whole idea of being killed by the stage. Not even Mario Bros. is truly so dangerous that you are at any risk there except insofar as your opponent's skillful play forces you into dangerous positions (or I suppose your own extremely unskillful play causes you to be harmed by the hazards unprovoked, but we needn't consider such a low level of play). Now, Mario Bros. is a broken stage on a lot of levels so don't misunderstand, but if even there there is no such thing as "the stage killed me", then I propose there is not such a thing on any stage.
I'm new to Smashboards (this is my first post) so I guess I'm a little late to the punch but...
Corneria - Corneria really shouldn't have been banned. I've heard people say it should have been banned because of the laser. To be quite honest, you'd either have to be a complete idiot to get hit by that laser, or get spiked into it (which would have probably KO'd you anyway). Others say it should be banned because it has a permanent wall, allowing you to get infinite chain grabbed against a wall. In this case, I think we should ban the tactic, not the stage. Infinite grabbing is an incredibly cheap tactic (I'm both a Meta Knight main and a Jew, so when I say something's cheap, it must be incredibly cheap). Infinite wall grabbing, or using an excessively large grab chain is unsportsmanlike, and shows that you can only win by using a broken tactic and NOT by your own skill.
We ban Corneria due to the wall - and we hugely prefer banning stages over tactics. It's much easier to just tell people to "never play on Corneria" rather than "never do this on Corneria". It's much more applicable that way.
Rumble Falls - This stage is RIGHTFULLY banned. Characters with terrible jumps, like Link or Ganondorf can keep up with the scrolling, but in order to do so, the have to focus on keeping up with the scrolling and not their opponent. This means fighting the stage and not the opponent, which is one of the exact parameters by which a stage is banned.
Not exactly. By that definition, Halberd, PS1, anything with a hazard would be "fighting the stage." Even FD, with it's massive lean toward projectiles can be considered "fighting the stage." This is Smash, you're always "fighting the stage" - I believe only when it becomes overbearing that a stage is banned. A good example would be Brumble Falls.
Hanenbow - Could somebody explain to me why Hanenbow is banned? There are no real hazards to fight on this stage except for the ledges getting angled. Sure, it's a large stage (I only guess this as a reason for banning because it's allowed in doubles), and projectile spammers can have a good advantage on it, and there can be some circle camping, but these all just contribute to having a strategy. The stage is really just a collection of tilting ledges, and the tilting is caused by the players.
Circle camping is enough to warrant a ban.
Green Greens - Just a quick question: Aside from D3's chain grab (which, as I explained earlier, should be banned, not the stage), why is there even a movement to have it banned outside of personal stage preference? Yes, there are bomb blocks, but they can be used to both hurt you and help you if you know what you're doing.
The walls are a pretty important part of it's current ban status, and as I explained above we ban stages before we can tactics.
Also, as far as walk-off KO's go, I personally think that they only put a stage up for bannination if they happen on BOTH sides of the screen, keeping you from staying on one side for safety. This is why I support the bans on Onett, Bridge of Eldin, Flatzone 2 and Mario Circuit, but will always defend Distant Planet and Yoshi's Island (Pipes).
Wow, I agree with this - though Onett is a special case.
Thank Jeebus.Thank you for enjoying my name. I promise to only make references to the first 8 seasons.
Or... we can just ban Corneria! There's only a few stages with walls, and like I said it's much easier to implement a stage ban than a tactical ban. Just tell people not to play there and the whole issue is averted, meanwhile if we install a tactical ban, we always have to have a judge present to go "ah ah ah!"I'm not saying that we should say "Never do an infinite chain grab against a wall on Coneria." I'm saying that we should say "Never do an infinite chain grab against a wall. Ever."
Which is why I'm pro-Green Greens. :DAlso, on Green Greens, the wall can be destroyed.
Aside from just discussing tactics, if MK has a percent / stock advantage you are forced to approach him.Meta Knight can't tornado spam you off the room ceilings of the house if you're on the roof.
Ever try running away from somebody, alone, around a big table?Also, if circle camping is the issue on Hanenbow, then why is it allowed for doubles?
So you're saying that the stage gives a large advantage to 3 characters? I'd say that makes it a CP. You can give it your personal ban against an opponent who uses DK, Oli or MK. I don't think stages should be banned just because 1 or 2 (or 3) characters can **** on it. To me, that makes it a CP for mains of those characters to try to use against you. If you're worried about an Oli or MK CPing it against you, pick up DK as a secondary and live to 999%, or just use your personal ban on that stage against the player.Luigi's Mansion is just stupid for a LOT of characters.
DK can quite literally live to 999% by just DIing into the ceiling and spamming upB.
Olimar's ground game gets a huge buff because in many places of the stage, you can't get around it. Usmash spam just *****.
I remember seeing somewhere on the Falco boards that described some type of boost pivot CG that works because of the ceiling.
But I know most about MKs gayness on the stage, so I'll talk about that first.
MK can spam tornado. We know that. If you get caught, bye 50% damage at least (if you get out, they're doing it wrong). If you destroy the stage to the first floor, MK can just ledgecamp for 20 seconds until the mansion spawns again. When the mansion is full, MK can camp behind a pillar, and what can the opponent do? All projectiles are completely nullified because of the pillar. All the opponent can do is
1) Try to approach through the pillar.
2) Try to destroy the top pillar to make the bottom one eventually destroyed.
3) Try to approach from the top.
MK has range; he can dtilt/ftilt/tornado against approaches from the bottom. 2 and 3 are similar in placement; he can just uair, tornado to beat out most character's options.
So, by your definitions, which banned stages should not have been banned? I'd be very interested in hearing your explanations for which banned stages should not be banned1. The stage has extreme character biases to the point of making otherwise winnable matchups unwinable (like, Temple and Mushroomy Kingdom 1-2)
2. The stage introduces a large extent of variance in matches such that play between two similarly but non-equally skilled high level players will produce effectively a coinflip result (like WarioWare Inc.)
WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHH
ROFL.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wB6ZKApeZqw&feature=channel_page
^^^^^That's why japes is ****ing ********. Anyone who disagrees only likes it because the crocodile ALWAYS gives them hopes of winning because sometimes they just know that they will never win otherwise. Oh my god, I can't believe how ****ing stupid this stage is. A couple days ago, I considered quitting brawl because of ******** stages like this, but I need a way to entertain myself during the summer.
Tch, whatever. I guess I'll just have to keep banning this stupid stage everytime I play.ROFL.
Just rofl.
The first time it happened was less avoidable and was more surprising. The Lucario could have DId his dtilt in the first place, but probably wasn't expecting that to be happen. Hardly broken though, given that Lucario didn't have to have gotten dtilted in the first place.
The second time it happened was avoidable in so many ways. He would have been wary of dtilt, could have shieldgrabbed, could have DId his dtilts, missed his tech, AND could have recovered even after he got hit out of the klap-trap, but instead of actually timing a jump he was probably spamming B, why he died.
And honestly, when the stage is actually used more, people will be more wary of things like MKs and Marth's dtilt near the ledge and will avoid them, just as people will avoid Falco's CG to spike (which you won't die from anyway unless you're to the left of the left platform or you get spiked in a klap-trap).
Thing is, they haven't been proven counter-pick either.Banning two stages makes sense if you allow all the stages that haven't been proven ban-worthy.
That is, if we're looking at the lists of AA or Linkshot.
That is, if we're not being scrubs.
Innocent until proven guilty.Thing is, they haven't been proven counter-pick either.