Port Town Aero Dive Analysis

[Raziek]

Look, the track not having ledges is not really a legitimate argument. It was exactly the same in melee (On Mute City, which was a legal CP), was tolerated for the same reasons, and because of it, it was a COUNTERPICK. We aren't trying to make the stage neutral, it's supposed to have counterpick elements.

 

[T-block]

^I think it could be legitimate - I used to be on the fence with them, but I'm not pretty sure they're not banworthy because of how often the track is below you.

Can someone confirm PK-Ow's claim? Not that I don't trust you =P

 

[Justin Wiles]

I don't like to compare this stage to Mute City... the IDEA of both stages is the same, but these really are two different games, and character mobility is different between the two games. The track was below you 90% of the time in Mute City, and didn't randomly drop away - you knew at what transformation you'd lose the track.

From the information here, I've learned two things (correct me if I'm wrong):

- Tranformations do not have a set order, they are random, with the exception of transformation 4 to 5.

- Cars do not occur every other transformation as I had been previously informed; they occur whenever the transformation and the cars coincidentially meet.

You end up with a stage where you'd be a moron not to just sit on the edge of the track most of the time. I think I liked this sort of anticipation when I watched Obi-Wan and Qui-Gon take on Darth Maul... but not so much in Smash Bros.

And I still don't like the cars hitting so hard. Sorry. Not only did they not hit as hard in Melee, they also made you less vulnerable because you hit the ground faster and teching mattered more. You could basically shrug them off at any time. That's just how I feel. You can throw all that "but it's your fault for making the chain of decisions that got you slammed into a car from the future" at me, I don't mind. Go read my first paragraph. Re-read this paragraph, even; I'm sure you can figure it out.

 

[Justin Wiles]

I don't like to compare this stage to Mute City... the IDEA of both stages is the same, but these really are two different games, and character mobility is different between the two games. The track was below you 90% of the time in Mute City, and didn't randomly drop away - you knew at what transformation you'd lose the track.

From the information here, I've learned two things (correct me if I'm wrong):

- Tranformations do not have a set order, they are random, with the exception of transformation 4 to 5.

- Cars do not occur every other transformation as I had been previously informed; they occur whenever the transformation and the cars coincidentially meet.

You end up with a stage where you'd be a moron not to just sit on the edge of the track most of the time. I think I liked this sort of anticipation when I watched Obi-Wan and Qui-Gon take on Darth Maul... but not so much in Smash Bros.

And I still don't like the cars hitting so hard. Sorry. Not only did they not hit as hard in Melee, they also made you less vulnerable because you hit the ground faster and teching mattered more. You could basically shrug them off at any time. That's just how I feel. You can throw all that "but it's your fault for making the chain of decisions that got you slammed into a car from the future" at me, I don't mind. Go read my first paragraph. Re-read this paragraph, even; I'm sure you can figure it out.

 

[Raziek]

Correcting you because you asked.The order IS set. What he listed in the OP was which stages were STOPPED at, which is random.

 

[Raziek]

Edit: Double post, god**** Crashboards and the 502 business.

 

[Mr.-0]

I actually think that this stage shouldn't be banned. In fact, I think that the cars arn't really a problem at all as long as you play it right.

 

[mlorenzo]

I think that this stage is fun and a legit counterpick. This stage is the best counter pick for falcon against olimar.

 

[-LzR-]

Exactly, this stage should be a COUNTERPICK. What part of COUNTERpick don't people understand? Just look at Brinstar or Cruise, if your against MK, you are ****ed up anyways. With this legal, I would strongly support a 2 ban system. Making the game more strategical, not like ban brinstar, get gayed in cruise. Ban cruise, get gayed in brinstar.

 

[<π]

in pretty much all the transformations you get a good amount of warning as to wen the cars are coming.

I main sheik and I'm fine with this stage being on.

EDIT:
Its a way better CP than Green Greens........

 

[Eternal Yoshi]

Even the stop that puts the track sideways where you cannot see the cars?

Although it would be cool to see this as a CP, may I ask what warning you get on that stop?

 

[sunshade]

The first few cars on that transformation don't have hitboxes.

Supposedly the largest of the cars is able to just nick the soul of your foot when standing on the top platform however I have never had this happen to be personally.

 

[Eternal Yoshi]

*Checks* It would seem so, and just enough to jump out of the way.

Supposedly the largest of the cars is able to just nick the soul of your foot when standing on the top platform however I have never had this happen to be personally.

I had this happen to a CPU but not me.

He got KO'd.

Only happened once, and never again.

 

[Grim Tuesday]

Look, the track not having ledges is not really a legitimate argument. It was exactly the same in melee, was tolerated for the same reasons, and because of it, it was a COUNTERPICK. We aren't trying to make the stage neutral, it's supposed to have counterpick elements.

So, the problems with this stage are:
• Ledges are un-grabbable.
• Almost walk-off camping in some areas.
• Gameplay having to stop whenever the cars come by (except on like, one transformation).
• Getting HIT by the cars kills you at 50%.
• Many of the transformations are quite large.

I'm not seeing it guys.

 

[T-block]

So, the problems with this stage are:
• Ledges are un-grabbable.
• Almost walk-off camping in some areas.
• Gameplay having to stop whenever the cars come by (except on like, one transformation).
• Getting HIT by the cars kills you at 50%.
• Many of the transformations are quite large.

I'm not seeing it guys.

You're not seeing what? Why it should be legal?

Ledges are unable to be grabbed is not as influential as you might first think. The track is beneath the platform for most of the time. Instead of trying to up-b back onto the platform only to be constantly hit off by your opponent, bounce off the track.

Walk-off camping will never be an issue on this stage, even if there were walkoffs. The stage moves, and "walkoffs" don't stay forever.

PS1 probably leads to just as much stall time.

The cars are easily avoidable unless you're outplayed or stupid.

Large stage is not banworthy ._.

 

[Grim Tuesday]

You're not seeing what? Why it should be legal?

Ledges are unable to be grabbed is not as influential as you might first think. The track is beneath the platform for most of the time. Instead of trying to up-b back onto the platform only to be constantly hit off by your opponent, bounce off the track.

Walk-off camping will never be an issue on this stage, even if there were walkoffs. The stage moves, and "walkoffs" don't stay forever.

PS1 probably leads to just as much stall time.

The cars are easily avoidable unless you're outplayed or stupid.

Large stage is not banworthy ._.

Yes, I'm not seeing why it should be legal.

So... you have to purposely take damage to recover? And there is a chance you might just be unlucky and hit off when there is no track below you?

Well no, the "walk-offs" don't stay forever, but there are a lot of them. And I know they're not "walk-offs", but you can still just stand next to them and 'sheild grab' > 'back throw' the opponent off should they try to approach.

Comparing to another stage isn't good reasoning. Stage legality should be decided only by looking at wether the stage has over-centralizing or skill-marginalizing elements. PS1 doesn't have hazards that kill at 50%.

I don't consider "out-played" to mean the same thing as "being hit by an opponent's attack into the cars". If my opponent actually did something skill-full to get me to hit the cars, then I could understand, but being hit is a part of the game. It doesn't take that much skill to do.
If we used that reasoning, we could consider the Mario Bros. stage as a counter-pick because the turtles can be avoided by paying attention and staying in the middle of the stage, and you will only be hit by them if you are "out-played" by your opponent (obviously there are other reasons why it is banned, but you get my point).

Large stage certainly is ban-worthy. Don't we consider wether stages should be banned partly by how high-ceilings and how far-out blast lines are? I've seen that reasoning used multiple times in the stage-legality thread.

 

[T-block]

Some characters have to take damage to recover. It's unfortunate, and I didn't really like it at first either, but the option is there, and it prevents lack of ledges from being too strong, so why not?

Walk-off camping is considered a problem because one player can sit there and the other player has to approach because he's losing, and the camper is not going to move. If the camper has to move, there's no issue - simple as that.

I compare to another stage because I honestly want to know why you think PS1 is acceptable for stalling but PTAD is not.

No, we've never considered blastzone distance to be a ban criteria (unless they're absolutely ridiculous, but PTAD doesn't have the highest ceiling in the game or anything).

 

[Grim Tuesday]

Some characters have to take damage to recover. It's unfortunate, and I didn't really like it at first either, but the option is there, and it prevents lack of ledges from being too strong, so why not?

Walk-off camping is considered a problem because one player can sit there and the other player has to approach because he's losing, and the camper is not going to move. If the camper has to move, there's no issue - simple as that.

I compare to another stage because I honestly want to know why you think PS1 is acceptable for stalling but PTAD is not.

No, we've never considered blastzone distance to be a ban criteria (unless they're absolutely ridiculous, but PTAD doesn't have the highest ceiling in the game or anything).

Don't most characters have to take damage to recover? Considering there are no ledges, the only recovery option is to go back onto the stage, which the opponent can easily telegraph and then Smash them back off the stage. Only characters like MK don't have that hindrance.

Walk-off camping can still be used to Stall, if not KO.

Because PS1's stalling is quite different. The stage isn't as large and there aren't any over-powered cars in your way, making approaching MUCH easier.

I assumed that blast-zones would fall under the "over-centralizing" aspect of gameplay, as it makes attacks less useful. For example, a character with no good moves that can KO sideways will be hindered on a stage with a high ceiling. By no means is this over-powered, but it is worth mentioning.

I see you didn't comment on what I said about the cars... Can I assume you agree with me then?

 

[T-block]

MK, Kirby, GW, ROB, Wario, Snake, Luigi can all make it back, and I'm sure there are more. I would say only characters with poor recoveries will have to rely on the track to recover, and only against some characters.

Walk-off camping cannot be used to KO if the other player doesn't approach... and if the camper truly has an advantage at the edge, then there's no reason for this approach.

Who cares if approaching is "easier" on PS1. Okay, there's no cars that might kill you if you approach on PS1. The fact remains that it's a bad idea to approach on a couple of transformations. How many times do you see Fire and Rock transformations lead to both players waiting it out? It happens with Water occasionally too. It doesn't matter if approach is easier because approach doesn't happen anyways. All we have to look at is how much of a match's time is spent waiting on the stage. If we compare these numbers for PS1 and PTAD, I bet they'd be similar.

Don't throw the term over-centralizing around if you don't know what it means. You said it yourself: "By no means is this over-powered". Large or small blast-zones can't be considered over-centralizing. Stage boundaries is a counterpick quality - if I were up against a character with only vertical KO moves (Fox quickly comes to mind) it might be a good idea to counterpick a stage with a higher ceiling but shorter sides. If you know it's not overpowered, why is it an issue?

No I don't agree about the cars, but it's the type of argument that doesn't get anywhere. One side says avoid the cars, and the other says you shouldn't have to avoid the cars. I will say this though: I bet players who are experienced with the stage and who are smart about how the play it will get hit MUCH less than those who only think about the cars as something disruptive. I've played on it... I don't get hit by the cars unless I'm intend to, or I'm being stupid.

 

[Grim Tuesday]

MK, Kirby, GW, ROB, Wario, Snake, Luigi can all make it back, and I'm sure there are more. I would say only characters with poor recoveries will have to rely on the track to recover, and only against some characters.

Walk-off camping cannot be used to KO if the other player doesn't approach... and if the camper truly has an advantage at the edge, then there's no reason for this approach.

Who cares if approaching is "easier" on PS1. Okay, there's no cars that might kill you if you approach on PS1. The fact remains that it's a bad idea to approach on a couple of transformations. How many times do you see Fire and Rock transformations lead to both players waiting it out? It happens with Water occasionally too. It doesn't matter if approach is easier because approach doesn't happen anyways. All we have to look at is how much of a match's time is spent waiting on the stage. If we compare these numbers for PS1 and PTAD, I bet they'd be similar.

Don't throw the term over-centralizing around if you don't know what it means. You said it yourself: "By no means is this over-powered". Large or small blast-zones can't be considered over-centralizing. Stage boundaries is a counterpick quality - if I were up against a character with only vertical KO moves (Fox quickly comes to mind) it might be a good idea to counterpick a stage with a higher ceiling but shorter sides. If you know it's not overpowered, why is it an issue?

No I don't agree about the cars, but it's the type of argument that doesn't get anywhere. One side says avoid the cars, and the other says you shouldn't have to avoid the cars. I will say this though: I bet players who are experienced with the stage and who are smart about how the play it will get hit MUCH less than those who only think about the cars as something disruptive. I've played on it... I don't get hit by the cars unless I'm intend to, or I'm being stupid.

How can Luigi make it back? And it isn't characters with poor recoveries that can't make it back, it's any character WITHOUT a good recovery.

Like I said, if the walk-off camping doesn't lead to KOs, it still leads to unnecessary stalling.

Let's compare these numbers then. I'll find ten tournament matches on PS1, you or someone else can find ten on PT:AD. Then we will compare the numbers. The matches should be recent obviously.

It is an issue because several "not over-powered" things in one stage still add up.

If you don't agree about the cars, then you DO agree that my argument for the Mario Bros. stage stands?

The main issue for me is the cars, the rest is just small stuff that adds to the problem.

 

[<π]

both players for the most part have the same disadvantages. its a CP is your character gets ***** there (link? gdorf? Zelda?) you can ban it.

The edges don't warrant a ban AT ALL. if you made an error and got hit off stage your opponent gets a bigger advantage than normal but the same applies to you as well.

people like to complain about the cars but you almost have to be asleep to not see them coming or at the very least not know to stay away from the danger zones. Its like getting hit by Gdorf's punch in most cases... very very hard to do. (no wonder they kill so low) In the end they are a powerful stage hazard to exploit like the ones on every other stage. norfair, Halbred, etc.
I'd argue the type of hazard on green greens is significantly worse just by the nature of how random and game changing even regular blocks can be.

 

[T-block]

Have you played this game? Luigi's down-b will be enough to get him onto the platform in most cases. There's no such thing as unnecessary stalling. Why do you have such an issue with it? Sure it's boring to watch, but what is it that makes it anti-competitive? Let me rephrase it... matches are far more likely to go to time on PS1 than on PTAD. Even if there were more stalling time on PTAD, the nature of the stage forces combat a lot more than PS1 does.

Large blastzones are not only "not over-powered". They aren't even a bad feature of a stage. They are a counterpick quality. You say we ban stages for "over-centralizing or skill-marginalizing elements". Which one of those does it fall under?

No, your Mario Bros argument is not a valid comparison. It is much more reasonable to expect a player to avoid the cars than it is to expect them not to get hit by a turtle shell. I suspect you haven't played on PTAD seriously very often if you have such an issue with the cars. I know saying "it is much more reasonable" is subjective, but it should be obvious in this case.

 

[Grim Tuesday]

Have you played this game? Luigi's down-b will be enough to get him onto the platform in most cases. There's no such thing as unnecessary stalling. Why do you have such an issue with it? Sure it's boring to watch, but what is it that makes it anti-competitive? Let me rephrase it... matches are far more likely to go to time on PS1 than on PTAD. Even if there were more stalling time on PTAD, the nature of the stage forces combat a lot more than PS1 does.

Large blastzones are not only "not over-powered". They aren't even a bad feature of a stage. They are a counterpick quality. You say we ban stages for "over-centralizing or skill-marginalizing elements". Which one of those does it fall under?

No, your Mario Bros argument is not a valid comparison. It is much more reasonable to expect a player to avoid the cars than it is to expect them not to get hit by a turtle shell. I suspect you haven't played on PTAD seriously very often if you have such an issue with the cars. I know saying "it is much more reasonable" is subjective, but it should be obvious in this case.

I forgot about Luigi's Down B, I was only thinking of Up B's at the time.

If stalling isn't anti-competitive, then why do people want Planking banned?

Like I said before, you can't make claims about PS1 being more likely to go to time than PTAD, you need evidence. I am willing to get some to help my case, but only if I know it will be worth it.

Large blast-zones falls under "over-centralizing", but is only a minor example of such. Like I said, if enough small elements of a stage are put together, it can make a big difference. While the blast-zones weren't a reason to ban the stage, they were support for my main argument on the cars.

But what if an opponent knocks you into a turtle shell? Do you feel it is fair you died at a low percentage and just got "out-played" by your opponent. I have played on Port Town Aero Dive seriously, and each time my opponents and I have abused the cars and poor recovery (thanks to the edges) to get ridiculous kills on each other which took no skill at all to achieve.

PTAD should stay banned because gameplay is over-centralized on avoiding the cars, this can lead to long periods of stalling which is detrimental to competitive gameplay.

The un-grabbable ledges force players who aren't using 1/3 (if that) of the cast to get damaged (several times in some cases) to recover, and in other cases just fall to their deaths. It also takes out any skill revolving around ledges like edge-guarding and hogging.

Overall, the gameplay on the stage would play out like this: Normal battle on a small amount of the transformations, camping on the transformations with cars, and getting gimpy kills on the transformations with the ledge-less platform.

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

I forgot about Luigi's Down B, I was only thinking of Up B's at the time.

If stalling isn't anti-competitive, then why do people want Planking banned?

Not because it's "stalling" but because it's anticompetitive. It overcentralizes the metagame to literally "Play MK and plank" as the only viable strategy.

Like I said before, you can't make claims about PS1 being more likely to go to time than PTAD, you need evidence. I am willing to get some to help my case, but only if I know it will be worth it.

Except... you're the one making the case for PTAD to be banned.

But what if an opponent knocks you into a turtle shell? Do you feel it is fair you died at a low percentage and just got "out-played" by your opponent. I have played on Port Town Aero Dive seriously, and each time my opponents and I have abused the cars and poor recovery (thanks to the edges) to get ridiculous kills on each other which took no skill at all to achieve.

The difference is centralization. If the only strategy that is even remotely considerable as good on a stage is "throw the opponent at the obstacles, throw the obstacles at the opponent", then the stage is probably overcentralizing. If you try to fight without abusing the obstacles on Mario Bros, you will lose. And then it turns the game from brawl into "get the shell", and places a far higher value on reflectors than is warranted. Additionally, it has other factors that make it THE worst stage in the game.

PTAD should stay banned because gameplay is over-centralized on avoiding the cars,

Hard to overcentralize gameplay around an element which is there for like 3 seconds every minute or so in a match.

this can lead to long periods of stalling which is detrimental to competitive gameplay.

Long? Dude, have you seen the length of that traffic? That is NOT long.

The un-grabbable ledges force players who aren't using 1/3 (if that) of the cast to get damaged (several times in some cases) to recover, and in other cases just fall to their deaths. It also takes out any skill revolving around ledges like edge-guarding and hogging.

Anecdotal evidence time!

Playing against a mario literally 3 minutes ago. I daired him offstage. ANY normal stage, he would've died. Instead, he hit the road, bounced up, and recovered. This is why the ledges are less important. Sure, he's still in a bad position (coming up through the stage in some hitstun), but he isn't DEAD.

Overall, the gameplay on the stage would play out like this: Normal battle on a small amount of the transformations, camping on the transformations with cars, and getting gimpy kills on the transformations with the ledge-less platform.

And this is overcentralizing?

 

[SFA Smiley]

I don't see why everynoe is tripping over the cars as if our matches don't last 7 minutes anyway

 

[Grim Tuesday]

Not because it's "stalling" but because it's anticompetitive. It overcentralizes the metagame to literally "Play MK and plank" as the only viable strategy.

Except... you're the one making the case for PTAD to be banned.

The difference is centralization. If the only strategy that is even remotely considerable as good on a stage is "throw the opponent at the obstacles, throw the obstacles at the opponent", then the stage is probably overcentralizing. If you try to fight without abusing the obstacles on Mario Bros, you will lose. And then it turns the game from brawl into "get the shell", and places a far higher value on reflectors than is warranted. Additionally, it has other factors that make it THE worst stage in the game.

Hard to overcentralize gameplay around an element which is there for like 3 seconds every minute or so in a match.

Long? Dude, have you seen the length of that traffic? That is NOT long.

Anecdotal evidence time!

Playing against a mario literally 3 minutes ago. I daired him offstage. ANY normal stage, he would've died. Instead, he hit the road, bounced up, and recovered. This is why the ledges are less important. Sure, he's still in a bad position (coming up through the stage in some hitstun), but he isn't DEAD.

And this is overcentralizing?

Okay, you win
I can see how the stage is fair, I just really hate being attacked into those cars, or playing as a character with a tether recovery/poor recovery who can't come back.

 

[T-block]

Is that sarcasm? ._.

Honestly, I'm going to stop using the term over-centralizing. It's becoming one of those terms that people throw around without really knowing what it means.

Anyways, Mario Bros. is an awesome stage. I was talking with AA yesterday about how I think a 10-stock 1v1 on this stage would definitely yield consistent results. It's not Brawl... it's a different game, but it could actually be competitive.

 

[Grim Tuesday]

Is that sarcasm? ._.

Honestly, I'm going to stop using the term over-centralizing. It's becoming one of those terms that people throw around without really knowing what it means.

Anyways, Mario Bros. is an awesome stage. I was talking with AA yesterday about how I think a 10-stock 1v1 on this stage would definitely yield consistent results. It's not Brawl... it's a different game, but it could actually be competitive.

No it isn't sarcasm. I'm not one of those people who is to stubborn to change their mind during an argument.

I certainly know what over-centralizing means, I used it incorrectly for lack of a better word. I could have said 'centralizing' but it doesn't really mean the same thing.

I gotta try that Mario Bros. thing XD

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

Is that sarcasm? ._.

Honestly, I'm going to stop using the term over-centralizing. It's becoming one of those terms that people throw around without really knowing what it means.

Anyways, Mario Bros. is an awesome stage. I was talking with AA yesterday about how I think a 10-stock 1v1 on this stage would definitely yield consistent results. It's not Brawl... it's a different game, but it could actually be competitive.

Pit/Fox/etc. I win. It's a totally different game than the brawl we want to be playing-that is, the actual game of brawl. It would be one thing if it was proposed as such, but I don't think many people would play it. And I meant it would be overcentralizing in comparison to the rest of brawl-you are limited to exactly one strategy, and only a few characters who are decent on the stage.

 

[T-block]

You missed my point. I wouldn't even call it brawl. It'd be Super Smash Mario Bros. or something. A completely different game.

I would money match your Fox with my Diddy on that stage any day.

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

Oh shi- nanners

 

[<π]

Ooo... that'd be an awesome CP for diddy huh?


Um... anyone find it ironic people are talking about planking in this thread? I do.

 

[IYM!]

i hope this stage will become to a counter pick, there, characters with poor recovery like link, can come back to safe ground

 

[Elyssa Xey Hexen]

i hope this stage will become to a counter pick, there, characters with poor recovery like link, can come back to safe ground

Or get screwed by it. Constantly whacking the track adds like 10%. Then, they have to deal with the person on the main platform who keeps knocking them off it again. Plus, the track is not always there. With poor recovery they could easily die. So, it is still the advantage of those with good recovery over those with poor recovery.

 

[<π]

thats the whole point of a CP, you take the good with the bad.

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

Additionally, the difference for, say, a link main between going offstage on PTAD and on FD against a decent character is that on the former, he has a chance of surviving.

 

[Elyssa Xey Hexen]

thats the whole point of a CP, you take the good with the bad.

And I'm trying to say, "Don't use this as your CP if you are link!"

 

[<π]

I go off stage to gimp all the time as link I wouldn't on PTAD though.

 

[IYM!]

Or get screwed by it. Constantly whacking the track adds like 10%. Then, they have to deal with the person on the main platform who keeps knocking them off it again. Plus, the track is not always there. With poor recovery they could easily die. So, it is still the advantage of those with good recovery over those with poor recovery.

Well, get hit by the road and get 10% of damage is better than die, dont you think?

And I'm trying to say, "Don't use this as your CP if you are link!"

i am a Link main and i think that this stage can help me, besides Link is not the only with poor recovery.


PD: that girl dancing is funny jajaj

 

[The_Jiggernaut]

This is awesome work.

So is the order of the transformations random or set?

Are the cars on a set path? Like, are the cars actually going through the racetrack and happen to meet up with you or do they just appear at random during a transformation?