The Unity Ruleset: Discussion

[John12346]

I remember that set.

It was Cheese vs Minty
Round 1 was ICs vs Marth
Round 2 was ICs vs ROB
Round 3 Cheese CP'd Random Stage and switched to MK because back then, doing so locked the opponent into his or her character.

 

[Alex Strife]

it wasnt that set but it was another

JG vs Cheese

1st match - they go to BF and cheese wins in MK ditto
2nd match - JGs wins Rob vs Icz
3rd match - Cheese wins Rob vs MK on FD ( a stage he banned <>)

 

[Zankoku]

typically, you can. all a ban does is keep that player from picking it against you. it's actually a really good strategic play to CP to your own ban if you have a good unexpected pocket character.

I do remember such a thing being legal at some point, but I believe time and popular opinion has driven that technicality to obsolescence.

aka not any more

 

[Eddie G]

Rainbow, Brinstar, and PS2 all banned? FINALLY someone has the balls to go through with it, and at the biggest Brawl event to boot. Alex Strife is a god amongst TOs.

Hype! Expect a full car from me.

 

[Alex Strife]

To be clear I banned RC/Brin in melee singles as well its not just a brawl thing

 

[Life]

LOL @ banning PS2 taking balls

 

[Kuro~]

More stage bans accomplishes the exact same thing that DSR does, and more, and it's unbiased.

Also if winning on a stage guarantees that you would win on it for the rest of the set, you wouldn't have people counter-picking stages they lost on, without even changing characters, or even playing an entire set on smashville.

No, because I also proposed two stage bans IN PLACE of DSR.

Nice try though.

Ehhh no. DSR should stay and two stage bans should be in place cuz of mk. If anything the whole mk can not go to brinstar/rc would solve the issue cuz then mk stage issue is gone while allowing other characters to use it w/o fear. Ppl are just too ****ing scared to add another mk specific rule.

DSR is different than a stage ban. You ban a stage, neither player can go there. DSR kicks in only after you have won on the stage, and only applies to the winner.

It would not be the same thing at all lol.

Yes i agree.

Maybe.

For longer sets, hell no.

Yes i agree.

the ban System says "I choose I stage I don't want to play on this set" and not "I choose a stage I don't want to get counterpicked to"

and it's called BAN. So it's not allowed overall.

Yes i agree.

I don't see why that can't be changed, in any case most rulesets allow you to change which stages you ban in a Bo5 set on your opponents 2nd counter-pick. So that already goes against the idea that a ban lasts for the entire set.

Wtf are you talkig about? Bo5 matches only happen in winners, losers, and grand finals. Thats what not even 1/8 of the tournament. I have never seen a rule set hat allows you to change your ban on your opponents 2nd counterpick in a bo5. That would be broken.

 

[Tesh]

Nope, cause that leads to ******** **** where I play IC's, Ban FD, now my opponent can't ban FD, and I turn around and CP there.

Edit: Banning a stage tends to mean removing it from play. If I ban FD in a set, neither one of us can pick the stage for the set. Most exceptions come from both players agreeing to go to the stage someone banned, or people forgetting that banning it means banning it from selection for both parties.

if my opponent bans fd, why cant i ban fd?

also, when has it ever been said in a ruleset what banning means?

 

[Eddie G]

LOL @ banning PS2 taking balls

LOL @ thinking PS2 was the focal point of my post

 

[Jimmyfosho]

well to be fair it was one of your focal points since you did mention it.

 

[Eddie G]

well to be fair it was one of your focal points since you did mention it.

I don't like being fair.

 

[Zankoku]

DSR kicks in only after you have won on the stage, and only applies to the winner.

I just noticed this part.

Actually, DSR states "You cannot counterpick the last stage that has been played on in the set." Modified DSR states "You cannot counterpick the last stage you won on in the set." TBR states "You cannot counterpick any stage you have won on in the set."

Many rulesets run on the third form.

 

[ぱみゅ]

if my opponent bans fd, why cant i ban fd?

also, when has it ever been said in a ruleset what banning means?

That's exactly my thoughts.
If they are for the next round only, 2 stage bans is a better solution
If they are for the whole set, is pretty stupid, imho

 

[Ghostbone]

Wtf are you talkig about? Bo5 matches only happen in winners, losers, and grand finals. Thats what not even 1/8 of the tournament. I have never seen a rule set hat allows you to change your ban on your opponents 2nd counterpick in a bo5. That would be broken.

They're also the most important sets of the tournament...
And it would not be broken lol, in tournaments in my area, you can change what stages you banned after you win, there's no adverse effects, and it barely matters anyway.

Yeah. Never seen a rule like that as well. If you make a stage ban, it's supposed to be a permanent ban for that set unless you and your opponent agree to go to the stage.

Why is it supposed to be like that? Having it like that is seriously flawed.

Nope, cause that leads to ******** **** where I play IC's, Ban FD, now my opponent can't ban FD, and I turn around and CP there.

Edit: Banning a stage tends to mean removing it from play. If I ban FD in a set, neither one of us can pick the stage for the set. Most exceptions come from both players agreeing to go to the stage someone banned, or people forgetting that banning it means banning it from selection for both parties.

Erm, Your opponent can ban FD as well. And why does banning have to mean specifically what you're making it mean? Smash players are so adverse to change ****ing hell, I bet if M2K was the one telling you DSR (the formate it's used in tournaments anyway) is flawed, and that the way stage bans apparently work should be changed, you wouldn't be so close minded.

if my opponent bans fd, why cant i ban fd?

also, when has it ever been said in a ruleset what banning means?

^This this this this this

That's exactly my thoughts.
If they are for the next round only, 2 stage bans is a better solution
If they are for the whole set, is pretty stupid, imho

I'll clarify the set format...
1.Pick characters, strike stages, play game 1.
2.Winner bans two stages, which the loser of the previous game can't counter-pick for the next game.
3.Loser picks stage, winner picks character, loser picks character.
4.Next game.
5.Repeat steps 2-4, except with 3 stage bans for the 2nd counter-pick.

 

[DMG]

M2K saying DSR/stage bans is flawed would not sway my opinion one bit unless he provided a solid argument as to why he is correct.

 

[MK26]

Re: crazy DSR suggestions:

• The Team that won the previous match may announce two "Stage Bans" if they have not already done so in this set.
• The Team that lost the previous match announces the stage for the next match from either the Starter or the Counterpick Stage List. Any stage named as a "Stage Ban" by the opposing team may not be chosen. A stage that the choosing team has won on in a previous match of the set may not be chosen, unless that match was the first of the set. This means that a team may re-select the stage that match 1 was played on if the opposing team does not use one of their "Stage Bans" on it.

Two stage bans, DSR doesnt apply to the stage game 1 was played on because there are at least 3 stages you wanted to play on less than whichever one you agreed on...so unless you got shellacked there or your opponent changed his character, why is it banned?

Of course, DSR would still apply to the game 1 stage if it was also picked at a later game during the set.

 

[Ghostbone]

Actually yea that makes more sense, just give everyone two stage bans for each match, and have DSR only apply to games 2 and onwards.

 

[san.]

I believe DSR was made to promote more variety in stages.

How will the removal of DSR and TWO stage bans accomplish this?
Also, why do you support DSR for games 2 and on, but not the first one?

I always believed that a stage ban removed a stage for the entire set, like you're actually banning a stage. For a longer set, your choice for a ban would be very important.

2 stage bans and no DSR would just support characters who are best on starters even more, while limiting the variety of stages. Do you support this to make sets more balanced, so it would require the character to be good on the starters and at strong on at least 3 stages?

 

[Zankoku]

2 stage bans and no DSR would just support characters who are best on starters even more, while limiting the variety of stages. Do you support this to make sets more balanced, so it would require the character to be good on the starters and at strong on at least 3 stages?

This is exactly what it does, and given that a vocal group of people are pushing for fewer and fewer legal stages, I'm given to believe that that's what the intent behind it is, as well - to avoid having to deal with non-starter counter stages.

 

[MK26]

forgot to mention...at this point in time, with only 13 stages legal, 2 bans each is a bit much even with loosening dsr
that rule i have (and the post i linked to) applies to a brawl ruleset with 9 starters and 7 counterpicks

===

@san: i dont like dsr for game 1 because the stage chosen wasnt a counterpick...it was a stage you both agreed on

thus there shouldnt be much of a reason to stay away from it, unless your opponent cp'd a different character or you realise that you made a huge mistake in going there...in which case, you can still ban it and have room to ban your worst stage as well

but ideally, the stage that game 1 is played on is the average stage in the matchup, not one of the polar extremes like the counterpicks
if its a middle ground, the winner of game 1 has better stages to pick and the loser of game 1 has worse stages to ban
thus it really shouldnt be either chosen nor banned unless you messed up while striking...in which case you can still ban it and something else

think of it this way

the rule we have now gives you two stage bans if you lost game 1 and won game 2: the stage the first match was played on, and your own choice
the only thing my rule does is allow you to switch that first ban to any of the other legal stages, or you can leave it there if you so desire

does that make sense?

and since it allows players to ban two cps, they could be more open to allowing questioned stages into the ruleset - if you dont like the new stage, you can just ban the new one as well as your old favourite

or is that a pipe dream, and this would just be another way to restrict counterpicks even further?

tl;dr: the more stages there are in the ruleset, the better my rule is. right now, and until more stages are added, it wouldnt make a good addition.

 

[san.]

I was asking since I was curious if you felt that 3rd best stage was a good focus. Also asked to see if you had a good explanation other than MK on Brinstar and RC.

I also agree that it would work better once we have a more variety of stages. At least we have an established 7 starter ruleset at the moment, 5 stages (with FD) was not very functional.

I was wondering about the DSR under the conditions such that the opponent is good on a good number of starters.

However, I believe this DSR was abusable under the 5 starter ruleset in a best of 5 if the opponent's best stages were starters, since you would be able to block access to 3 starters by game 5.

It seems plausible under a larger stage list. There isn't much reason to have 2 stage bans except for MK on Brinstar and RC, but that isn't enough justification.

It would shrink the number of options with our current shrinking stagelist, because of how it would affect the other characters' freedom of stage choice.

tl;dr pretty much agree on most points. I feel DSR for first stage is still fine, though.

 

[ADHD]

ur all gay.

 

[san.]

Gay recognize gay.

 

[Chuee]

ur all gay.

Really?
because I think you are the gay one around here

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

Rainbow, Brinstar, and PS2 all banned? FINALLY someone has the balls to go through with it, and at the biggest Brawl event to boot. Alex Strife is a god amongst TOs.

Hype! Expect a full car from me.

More balls than brains. Also, why the hell does it take balls to do a popular thing that is also massively flawed?

 

[san.]

Legalize Japes and Pirate Ship. That takes "balls"

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

Legalize Japes and Pirate Ship.

That's an unpopular thing that is incredibly smart. HEY ALEX, WANNA PROVE YOU HAVE BALLS AND BRAINS?

 

[Deleted member]

You're forgetting Norfair....

 

[san.]

That would be too smart Auspher. We can only handle so much.

 

[WindMajor]

I'll show everyone...

I'LL SHOW THEM ALL!!!!!

 

[Vinylic.]

^ chillax.

Pirate Ship should definitely be legalised.
But Japes is a different story. Replace that with that....stage from kid icarus. (I forgot the name)

 

[Grim Tuesday]

...

Are you joking.

Have you ever played a competent Meta Knight on that stage?

 

[Zankoku]

Skyworld is hilarity.

Wario Ware would be awesome if it didn't randomly turn one guy huge and give the other one invincibility.

 

[Sinister Slush]

Or heal them...
Also Skyworld being legal = No!

Not just cause of MK, but cause of the fact the platforms break and also make hitboxes last longer which gives MK more fun to play with by Dsmashing all day.

 

[Vinylic.]

Well screw it then. Players get cheap too often.
I was "experimenting" and I got one thing.
Rainbow Cruise gave me a surprise moment. I threw a lucario and he goes right through the solid platform.

Give me some reasons not to have Green Greens legalised as well...

 

[Ghostbone]

Give me some reasons not to have Green Greens legalised as well...

Bombs, apples, walls, camping, blocks.

 

[Grim Tuesday]

Bombs = the only legit reason imo.

 

[Ussi]

Sides are way to close to the blastzone :x

You can get randomly hit into a bomb block falling down

Just gonna state bomb blocks themselves as well since the stage tends to revolve around elimating the bomb blocks so it doesn't get in your way.

 

[Vinylic.]

^Now that's a good reason.

I needed it more detailed and {idk what gender} gave it to me.

 

[Grim Tuesday]

The stage doesn't revolve around getting rid of the bomb blocks, lol.