The Unity Ruleset: Discussion

[The Iron Wolf]

Brinstar, RC, and PS2 must go. That is all.

 

[BSP]

Aww, Cruxis got banned lol

I'd be fine with Brinstar and Rainbow going, but I don't think PS2 is broken or anything. I'm neutral on it for the most part.

 

[infiniteV115]

With MK banned, there's nothing wrong with Brinstar and RC.
Regardless of MK's legality, there's nothing wrong with PS2.

 

[BSP]

That all depends on your opinion on stage interference.

 

[Supreme Dirt]

This is a game with infinites, chaingrabs, and grab releases that invalidate entire characters.

Consider that before you complain about stage gimmicks.

 

[infiniteV115]

There's nothing wrong with PS2 because it's a very balanced stage and it doesn't really give any characters any significant, let alone unfair advantages.

Pretty sure that most stages that are currently banned are banned because of
Permanent walls
Permanent walkoffs
Potential for circle camping
Extreme and/or unannounced randomness

The first 3 provide extreme advantages to various characters and the last is just bad because this is supposed to be a competitive game that relies on skill.

None of the 4 mentioned apply to PS2 (or to Norfair, Japes or Pirate Ship, but one topic at a time)

 

[The Ben]

this is supposed to be a competitive game that relies on skill.

Where does this mind set come from? A game can be competitive and entirely luck based if enough people play it. As far as I know Smash is supposed to be easy to pick and play. At most the game is inherently casual, at the least the game was designed with them in mind.

 

[camden]

It's not possible for everyone to get what they wanted and have a truly unified ruleset. Unified ruleset would require no variables form location to location: no matter where you go you know exactly what to expect without having to look at the rules. As it stands, rule sets range from crazy people who want Japan's supposed 3 stage ruleset to crazy NS's "have all of the stages ever" selection. And then there is of course that apparently 60% of tournaments either support or are neutral enough towards the MK ban to follow through with it, with 40% aren't.

It's not happening.

Lol, have you even seen our stagelist lately? It's not that radical anymore, even with MK gone.

 

[infiniteV115]

Where does this mind set come from? A game can be competitive and entirely luck based if enough people play it. As far as I know Smash is supposed to be easy to pick and play. At most the game is inherently casual, at the least the game was designed with them in mind.

Well, I guess I should have clarified, but basically it's fine if the game is luck-based and played in a competitive setting but I don't think we should have random stages without adding the remaining diverse array of random options (items).

So excessive randomness should be limited in this ruleset. In another ruleset where we want luck+skill, we'll add random stages, as well as items, and get people to choose random characters. That's why we had both All Brawl AND conventional competitive Brawl at Apex, and both were played for money.

 

[Nidtendofreak]

Lol, have you even seen our stagelist lately? It's not that radical anymore, even with MK gone.

Nope, but its still a good example of the other end of the scale.

 

[Strong Badam]

Have fun catering to top tiers.

Surprisingly enough, not everyone makes a ruleset to cater to their own agenda. The Japanese ruleset/stagelist is an excellent attempt to have as little inconsistent impact on results as possible. I'd be very shocked if whoever made their ruleset were to state "We made this ruleset because we like how good MK, Falco, Olimar, ICs are with this stagelist" and not other, entirely reasonable justification.

The stage list is not and should not ever be an opportunity to balance the cast of a game; that was the developer's job long ago. The community's attempt is to make a competitive game out of Brawl. It's a hilariously futile attempt but I commend them for trying this hard. Regardless, "This stagelists make [x set of characters] even better comparably than another stagelist" is not a valid refutation of a stagelist.

 

[Life]

Nah, Unity is the middle. About twenty stages are viable for competition as I see it (scrubbery notwithstanding), three is the minimum any tournament tends to go with, Unity's almost perfectly in the middle. It's just that most people who don't use Unity run fewer stages than Unity, so it feels like it's larger than it actually is.

 

[Supreme Dirt]

SB I'm well aware.

****ty mood combined with not caring for a stagelist claiming to remove bad stages while still having ****ing Yoshi's Island Brawl legal.

Why

the ****

is the stage still legal?

 

[Sanji Himura]

You are horribly misinformed. Gill wasn't banned to keep the console tournaments arcade perfect, Gill was banned because of the same reason Akuma was banned. He doesn't function like any other character, warps the fundamentals of the game, and plays in a way that is functionally different than the rest of the cast.

With that said, I don't know anything about Soul Calibur so I can't speak about any bans pertaining to that series.

I know that was a cheap shot that did not work. I pointed out those specific examples because of the hypocrisy that was surrounding those communities. Everybody knows that Gill is broken in Third Strike and the same is true for Akuma in Super Turbo. No one is questioning that.

 

[Grim Tuesday]

The community's attempt is to make a competitive game out of Brawl. It's a hilariously futile attempt but I commend them for trying this hard.

Its funny because to make Melee competitive, you need to turn off items, ban half the stages and ban specific stalling tactics like Peach Bomber stall.

Melee elitism is hilarious.

 

[Strong Badam]

Melee is amazing with items, but let's not stray from the topic at hand.

 

[Tin Man]

The next few months will be an interesting turn of events...

 

[Player-1]

DRN is officially being red carded for bracket manipulation and intentional forfeiting

 

[Grim Tuesday]

DRN is officially being red carded for bracket manipulation and intentional forfeiting

being red carded for bracket manipulation and intentional forfeiting

for bracket manipulation and intentional forfeiting

and intentional forfeiting

intentional forfeiting

 

[Supreme Dirt]

ummm

what

all my whats.

Seriously


how

what

I


what


intentional forfeiting?

as... opposed... to?

"OOPS I ACCIDENTALLY FORFEITED THIS SET"


URC being a joke? Ah, how I missed you guys.

 

[Grim Tuesday]

All of that was implied by my post.

So... ninja'd.

 

[#HBC | Joker]

You could "unintentionally forfiet" a match by leaving to get food or something, and the TO decides that's how they want to punish you for holding up bracket. It could happen... not that it ever has.

 

[popsofctown]

Forfeiting, indicating that the bracket manipulation effect was intentional.

You know what he means.

 

[#HBC | Joker]

I do know what he means, but they're making it seem like using the words "intentional" and "forfiet" together is redundant, and it's not.

 

[Grim Tuesday]

My gripe with it is more of an "Arson, murder and jay-walking" kind-of thing.

 

[Dcold]

Almost makes me twitch like when I hear "What had happened was..."

Personally I don't like PS2 as it pretty much discourages actually fighting on the stage. Rock formation is terribly bad to run over that hill, Wind is just like lol, Ice is scary for some characters, Electric is just dumb with the treadmills, it's actually work to fight against your opponent AND the stage. Can't remember if there's another transformation. But the only place where it's actually viable to fight on is the beginning part of the stage. I feel the same way about PS1 too, but atleast the Grass stage, Windmill, and the normal stage can actually be fought on.

I don't understand how having a smaller stagelist is catering to High Tiers. Only 4 high tiers really, really benefit from it, Falco, Olimar, ICs, and Diddy. Maybe D3. Snake, Marth, Wario, Pika, Lucario, ZSS, GnW, and Tink all do decent on neutrals, but none of them are actually dominant on them. Where as on a bigger stage list they can take you to worse places. Either way, you're gonna get shafted with a larger stagelist as a lower tier main, you get to CP to a stage that's more gimmicky that you can get a win on, but then you can be taken to like, RC lol.

Fight a Wario on Battlefield? Or Brinstar/Rainbow Cruise? Pick your poison.

 

[Supreme Dirt]

I did not say high tiers.

I said top tiers.

Get it straight.

 

[Dcold]

Okay. Top Tiers. That means 4 benefit greatly off of it, and 4 don't. How is that catering to Top Tiers? My point still stands the exact same as it did there, and none of the characters change from the four I named before. You can scroll up instead of me copying it over again, lol.

 

[infiniteV115]

Diddy Falco ICs Oli Marth Snake

6/10 top tiers

 

[Dcold]

Wouldn't compare Marth/Snake on Battlefield to ICs/Olimar on FD imo.

 

[WindMajor]

You said it yourself, you just didn't realize it.

I don't understand how having a smaller stagelist is catering to High Tiers. Only 4 high tiers really, really benefit from it, Falco, Olimar, ICs, and Diddy. Maybe D3. Snake, Marth, Wario, Pika, Lucario, ZSS, GnW, and Tink all do decent on neutrals, but none of them are actually dominant on them. Where as on a bigger stage list they can take you to worse places. Either way, you're gonna get shafted with a larger stagelist as a lower tier main, you get to CP to a stage that's more gimmicky that you can get a win on, but then you can be taken to like, RC lol.

Group 1 (Falco, Olimar, IC's, Diddy, D3) does well on neutrals, but not so well on larger stage lists.

Group 2 (Snake, Marth, Wario, Pika, Lucario, ZSS, GnW, and Tink) does well on neutrals, but also does well or can manage on bigger stage lists.

By shrinking the stage list, you're essentially removing cons from Group 1 (the top tier + D3), as well as removing pros from Group 2 (the high tier). In other words, you're making the better guys even better, and the slightly worse guys even more worse. It's almost like capitalism! Remember that changing the stage list is a global change, therefore, you should examine the changes globally instead of individually.

You also mention stuff like low tiers getting shafted and whatnot in bigger stage lists, but there's data that suggests otherwise. An interesting observation was made back in 2010. It was that MLG was the national with the most liberal stage list (had Norfair, Green Greens, Pictochat, and PS2), and it was also the national with the most character diversity in top placings. Again, it's a simple observation, but it's also good food for thought.

 

[Dcold]

Good points, but I wouldn't say the Top Tiers don't do well on a larger stagelist as that'd counter the fact that they're top tier if it were as easy take them to ________ and they're done. Although that may be extreme, but my point is that for a low tier, sure getting your CP is fine, but the other characters have their own CPs that are just as bad as the one you're taking them to due to the larger stagelist. Personally I'd rather just stay on a neutral.

As for the diversity in the more liberal stagelist, does it include if those characters actually capitalized on the stages that usually would be banned? Because if not then it would then just be an assumption that the two are connected. Seems interesting.

 

[ぱみゅ]

lol this discussion.
I personally don't add stages to cater characters or something like that.
I start from a 41-stage list, and start banning depending on their features and how abusable they are.
My ideal stagelist is 23-stages long that there's nothing with

Spoiler

I have MK banned under that rulset, tho

 

[Luxord]

Adding/Removing stages from the stage list is fine, but it has to be considered twice, one situation where MK is allowed and another where he isn't. Frankly if someone want's to add a stage to the list that for the most part seems reasonable but grants an excessive advantage to MK then it would be an issue, but if MK isn't a factor then why not?

Also: Multiple stage bans, did any TOs test it in a tournament with the Experimental Ruleset??

 

[popsofctown]

Although that may be extreme, but my point is that for a low tier, sure getting your CP is fine, but the other characters have their own CPs that are just as bad as the one you're taking them to due to the larger stagelist. Personally I'd rather just stay on a neutral.

There aren't any stages flatter than FD. And Smashville, Battlefield, and Yoshi's Island are the runners up. Characters like Olimar, Falco, and Ice Climbers counterpick neutral legal stages because those are their best stages, the liberal stagelist does not open up a counterpick that is "just as bad", because the ultimate counterpick for those characters is legal for game one, even in the most conservative regions of Japan.

 

[The Iron Wolf]

This is a game with infinites, chaingrabs, and grab releases that invalidate entire characters.

Consider that before you complain about stage gimmicks.

Quip. I believe minimizing the stupidity is optimal, thanks. Just because there are inherent flaws in the game, that does not by any means justify keeping these ridiculous stages.

 

[DRDN]

It does if the stages mechanics aren't as game breaking as a chars gimicks...

Is anything worse then ICs grab=stock?

 

[The Iron Wolf]

The point I raised has nothing to do with character gimmicks. It's about which stages can be banned to cater most to a competitive environment. Why use stages where external factors and stage design can greatly alter the course of a match? Granted, this applies to Frigate and Halberd as well(i.e. stage flipping and the various lasers/claws/bombs on Halberd's main base transformation respectively), but they aren't nearly as wonky as Brinstar, PS2, or Rainbow Cruise. PS2 can alter the physics of a match itself, RC's stupidity is self-evident in that it differs drastically in it's design from every other legal counter pick, and most of the cast isn't even viable on Brinstar(the lava also deals external damage). I'm referring to the concepts of these stages in relation to a competitive environment. MK's legality only strengthens my sentiments but I hold them regardless if he's legal or not. I honestly cannot fathom why one can even justify utilizing the above mentioned CP's as legitimate stages in competitive play as a whole. It boggles my mind.

 

[ぱみゅ]

The point I raised has nothing to do with character gimmicks. It's about which stages can be banned to cater most to a competitive environment. Why use stages where external factors and stage design can greatly alter the course of a match?

>Implying "competitive"
>Implying you're not already playing with stage changes
>Implying stage play is not a skill
>Implying flat-stage play is the standard to determine the "course of a match"

Granted, this applies to Frigate and Halberd as well(i.e. stage flipping and the various lasers/claws/bombs on Halberd respectively), but they aren't nearly as wonky as Brinstar, PS2, or Rainbow Cruise. PS2 can alter the physics of a match itself. I honestly don't see how or why you can even justify utilizing that as a legitimate stage in competitive play. It boggles my mind.

It seems like we have different apporaches: while some people start form static and add stages to make people think their stagelist is diverse, others start having 41 stages and then remove the ones that are potentially problematic (as in, have abusable elements), and find that RC, BS, and PS2 has nothing wrong with them.
And that's pretty much how I see it.

 

[The Iron Wolf]

>Implying "competitive"
>Implying you're not already playing with stage changes
>Implying stage play is not a skill
>Implying flat-stage play is the standard to determine the "course of a match"

To reply to these points in order:
- I'm not implying competitive. I believe that was explicitly stated.
- The stages changes when CP'ing BF after SV or Frigate after SV are there, yet aren't nearly as drastic as switching from a standard neutral to something along the likes of RC/Brin/PS2.
- You missed my main point here. I'm not looking at skill. I'm focusing on the concept and design of certain stages themselves, as compared to neutrals.
- Replace 'flat-stage' with 'neutral' and you're on the mark.

It seems like we have different apporaches: while some people start form static and add stages to make people think their stagelist is diverse, others start having 41 stages and then remove the ones that are potentially problematic (as in, have abusable elements), and find that RC, BS, and PS2 has nothing wrong with them.
And that's pretty much how I see it.

I'm more of a Japanese stagelist supporter along with Lylat, YI, while being indifferent to Frigate/Halberd/Castle.


Are you saying that RC/BS/PS2 don't have abusable elements?