• 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!

Why wouldn't this rule set work?

Status
Not open for further replies.

PieDisliker

Smash Lord
Joined
Jan 20, 2009
Messages
1,579
Location
Utica, NY
NNID
PieDisliker
Skipped the last two pages, but read 1-6. Instead of saying "What If" how about using something that actually happened.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GacPA0v1RVM&feature=related
Fiction vs. SK92

Fiction wins Game 2 as Wario vs. Falco. Fiction bans Japes, Falco's best stage. SK92 CPs to Final Destination. Fiction switches to Ice Climbers, and SK92 switches to MK.

Other ruleset:

Fiction could stay Wario or go ICs. I believe he would probably change to ICs in this case. SK92 now could switch to Metaknight, or go Falco. If he was willing to go MK against ICs on FD, I think he'd switch to MK. Now, Fiction bans Brinstar, RC, Japes, etc. SK92 would probably go some other stage. Then again, maybe Fiction would stay Wario and try fighting Falco on Japes or FD.

I don't think I could really make a call on which ruleset is better, other than which one I'd feel more comfortable with.
 

ADHD

Smash Hero
Joined
Feb 18, 2008
Messages
7,194
Location
New Jersey
And that was already responded too. The MLG stage-list is completely fair, some people just hate losing and were annoyed that because they didn't know the stage they lost. Their fault.
This post is more biased than anything I could say XD

First off, no stagelist is completely fair. Every single one will have a minor flaw here or there, or even a big flaw. Not knowing the stages is only part of the problem--and I don't want to respond to the ridiculousness of this statement either, but in this case it's not talking about just the counterpics but also the 9-starters.

It's not because we've lost, and it's obvious to me that multiple people (whether they won or not) have had issues with the stagelist. Alot more so than the traditional stagelists that most other nationals/regionals have been used.

Yes, because starters are intensive counterpicks for certain characters, and because handing diddy, ICs, and falco a counterpick game one is going directly against the function of game one-a level (this does not mean FD) playing field.
I like how you said intensive, because they're not. Is not every member of the cast good or better on a specific stage in the 5 starter system? Olimar on yoshis island, ganondorf on battlefield, snake on battlefield/FD, DDD on hell.. the majority of the neutrals. If they were intensive, believe me, I'd never lose. These are not hardcore counterpicks, they are light playing fields in which the characters perform better on. Places like castle seige and ps1 are great for DDD and snake. By adding more stages, the most you are doing is creating more of these "intensive" counterpicks.

Wait hang on. You don't think that the better player, the one who put time into a second character, deserves to win if his second character gets time to shine. What?

Your strategy takes ALL strategy out of counterpicking too. Like, say this snake is great on FD. He should check if his opponent has a pocket DDD If they do, then he might have to pick another character after he announces his counterpick-one that can deal with DDD. Or, maybe the opponent doesn't have a pocket DDD. Who knows. The snake has to think about a stage where he isn't only good, but his bad matchups are lousy (unless he knows he's facing a player like most top players who only ever use one character).
The better player is not always the player who is the most versatile with different characters. People will not flock for secondaries other than metaknight (because there really isn't a reason to otherwise) and then we have another situation on our hands. Why should these players placed in these situations be forced to pick up metaknight as a viable secondary? I don't see how that's competitive at all.
 

Grim Tuesday

Smash Legend
Joined
Nov 4, 2007
Messages
13,444
Location
Adelaide, South Australia, AUS
This post is more biased than anything I could say XD

First off, no stagelist is completely fair. Every single one will have a minor flaw here or there, or even a big flaw. Not knowing the stages is only part of the problem--and I don't want to respond to the ridiculousness of this statement either, but in this case it's not talking about just the counterpics but also the 9-starters.

It's not because we've lost, and it's obvious to me that multiple people (whether they won or not) have had issues with the stagelist. Alot more so than the traditional stagelists that most other nationals/regionals have been used.



The better player is not always the player who is the most versatile with different characters. People will not flock for secondaries other than metaknight (because there really isn't a reason to otherwise) and then we have another situation on our hands. Why should these players placed in these situations be forced to pick up metaknight as a viable secondary? I don't see how that's competitive at all.
Wait... what WAS the stage-list again? I think I might be confusing it with something else...
 

ADHD

Smash Hero
Joined
Feb 18, 2008
Messages
7,194
Location
New Jersey
Wait... what WAS the stage-list again? I think I might be confusing it with something else...
Starter Stages
Battlefield
Castle Siege
Delfino Plaza
Final Destination
Halberd
Lylat Cruise
Pokémon Stadium
Smashville
Yoshi’s Island

Counter-Pick Stages

Brinstar
Frigate Orpheon
Green Greens
Norfair
Pictochat
Pokémon Stadium 2
Rainbow Cruise
 

ErikG

Smash Ace
Joined
May 11, 2008
Messages
615
Location
Agawam, MA
Basically you want the rule set to make it so someone's counterpick does not hurt them. So instead of flopping around the order of counterpicking, and suggesting a stagelist (that is not very good), why not just add a rule that says "the winner of a match cannot change their character." I do not support any crazy rule like that.

Your system is pretty much an automatic loss for the winner of game 1 unless they greatly outskill the other player. And therefore game 3 in an automatic win for the winner of game 1 (who would lose game 2). Your system puts a greater emphasis on winning the first game.
 

Grim Tuesday

Smash Legend
Joined
Nov 4, 2007
Messages
13,444
Location
Adelaide, South Australia, AUS
Starter Stages
Battlefield
Castle Siege
Delfino Plaza
Final Destination
Halberd
Lylat Cruise
Pokémon Stadium
Smashville
Yoshi’s Island

Counter-Pick Stages

Brinstar
Frigate Orpheon
Green Greens
Norfair
Pictochat
Pokémon Stadium 2
Rainbow Cruise
Battlefield is fair.
Siege only has walk-offs in one bit.
Plaza is fair (only just, cause of D3)
Destination is fair.
Halberd is fair (Hazards are easy to dodge)
Cruise is fair.
Stadium is fair.
Smashville is fair.
Yoshi's Island is fair.

Only problems with the Starters I can see are MAYBE Siege, Plaza and Halberd.

Now, counters:
Brinstar is a fair counter.
Orpheon is a fair counter.
Greens is a fair counter (bombs are pretty easy to avoid)
Norfair is not no-fair (all of the hazards can be predicted, there is a thread on the matter)
Pictochat is a fair counter (safe area)
Stadium 2 is a fair counter (none of the elements are that random/over-centralizing)
Cruise is a fair counter.

What is the problem? It's a great list.

EDIT: I know this isn't really the place to discuss it, give me good reasons and I won't argue it any further XD
 

ADHD

Smash Hero
Joined
Feb 18, 2008
Messages
7,194
Location
New Jersey
Battlefield is fair.
Siege only has walk-offs in one bit.
Plaza is fair (only just, cause of D3)
Destination is fair.
Halberd is fair (Hazards are easy to dodge)
Cruise is fair.
Stadium is fair.
Smashville is fair.
Yoshi's Island is fair.

Only problems with the Starters I can see are MAYBE Siege, Plaza and Halberd.

Now, counters:
Brinstar is a fair counter.
Orpheon is a fair counter.
Greens is a fair counter (bombs are pretty easy to avoid)
Norfair is not no-fair (all of the hazards can be predicted, there is a thread on the matter)
Pictochat is a fair counter (safe area)
Stadium 2 is a fair counter (none of the elements are that random/over-centralizing)
Cruise is a fair counter.

What is the problem? It's a great list.

EDIT: I know this isn't really the place to discuss it, give me good reasons and I won't argue it any further XD
Just because the stages are not cookie-cutter death does not mean the stages do not interefere negatively in the outcome of the match. I'll start with the starters. When obstacles are involved such as statues, and oddly shaped terrain in which characters inherit temporary wall-infinites that changes the matchup into a visible advantage for one character (which is not a counterpick?) then that stage should not be a starter. There are no issues with disruptive terrain on Final destination, battlefield, or smashville such as this and allow easier landing. I will not accept as a response "then just strike it" because you obviously can't strike it when there are multiple stages in this case and all stages without the terrain are struck by the opponent who desires statues and etc. They may be fair, but you must consider that when characters are at play people will be forced into situations in which the terrain can often completely strip all options, and once again the three standard flat "neutrals" do not do this.

Now onto the counterpicks. Orpheon is fine--it's a counterpick. Brinstar is debatable, but it's widely accepted as a counterpick. Green greens is pretty whacky. Wall infinites, random exploding apples, bottoms, very low ceiling and small recovering space? That sounds like an item + FFA scenario. It's not able to be banned when rainbow cruise is a primary concern for those who'd normally want to ban green greens. Pictochat is also debatable, while each hazard is avoidable it's not necessarily "not random." The terrain can instantly change the matchup, as well as deal unnecessary damage that is in fact, unavoidable if you are hit into them or wall infinite'd. Also that single line with the two eyes? Yeah, that really can alter the match and certain recoveries.. Norfair, basically is fine on it's own when you examine it without moving characters upon it, but place metaknight, wario, or an aerial based into the mix. They already limit your options set to very low when you are in the air, but picture a floating lava stream against you and on top of that you have to reach down to the ground safely. Consider yourself ****ed. It's too strong of a counterpick for some.

Again, I don't think simply saying "pick up another character" or "you are wrong for not having so-and-so as a secondary." No one, whether whatever game community or wherever should have to rely on the best character to win, imo. Metaknight is basically what your asking for when you tell me this.

And that is why MLG's stagelist is flawed. It promotes metaknight heavily for success. But why hasn't metaknight appeared too often in the results? Well why would it yet, when there have only been two tournaments of this ruleset? It is going to take a little while before everyone adjusts and learns to abuse the counterpicking system. No one has analyzed it this heavily as a player.
 

Grim Tuesday

Smash Legend
Joined
Nov 4, 2007
Messages
13,444
Location
Adelaide, South Australia, AUS
Just because the stages are not cookie-cutter death does not mean the stages do not interefere negatively in the outcome of the match. I'll start with the starters. When obstacles are involved such as statues, and oddly shaped terrain in which characters inherit temporary wall-infinites that changes the matchup into a visible advantage for one character (which is not a counterpick?) then that stage should not be a starter. There are no issues with disruptive terrain on Final destination, battlefield, or smashville such as this and allow easier landing. I will not accept as a response "then just strike it" because you obviously can't strike it when there are multiple stages in this case and all stages without the terrain are struck by the opponent who desires statues and etc. They may be fair, but you must consider that when characters are at play people will be forced into situations in which the terrain can often completely strip all options, and once again the three standard flat "neutrals" do not do this.

Now onto the counterpicks. Orpheon is fine--it's a counterpick. Brinstar is debatable, but it's widely accepted as a counterpick. Green greens is pretty whacky. Wall infinites, random exploding apples, bottoms, very low ceiling and small recovering space? That sounds like an item + FFA scenario. It's not able to be banned when rainbow cruise is a primary concern for those who'd normally want to ban green greens. Pictochat is also debatable, while each hazard is avoidable it's not necessarily "not random." The terrain can instantly change the matchup, as well as deal unnecessary damage that is in fact, unavoidable if you are hit into them or wall infinite'd. Also that single line with the two eyes? Yeah, that really can alter the match and certain recoveries.. Norfair, basically is fine on it's own when you examine it without moving characters upon it, but place metaknight, wario, or an aerial based into the mix. They already limit your options set to very low when you are in the air, but picture a floating lava stream against you and on top of that you have to reach down to the ground safely. Consider yourself ****ed. It's too strong of a counterpick for some.

Again, I don't think simply saying "pick up another character" or "you are wrong for not having so-and-so as a secondary." No one, whether whatever game community or wherever should have to rely on the best character to win, imo. Metaknight is basically what your asking for when you tell me this.

And that is why MLG's stagelist is flawed. It promotes metaknight heavily for success, and why hasn't metaknight appeared too often in the results? Well why would it yet, when there have only been two tournaments of this ruleset? It is going to take a little while before everyone adjusts.
I forgot about the wall infinites on Green Greens :p I agree that that was a poor choice.

But all of the minor problems with the other stages are just that, minor. Every neutral stage is going to favour characters: D3 and ICs on FD for example.

While I did say "completely fair" in my original post (mainly for forgetting about Green Greens), I still disagree with Jebus (who said "I already talked about this. You can ask any pro player and they will agree that most of the stages that are on the MLG rule set are dumb/ broken".) because while they aren't perfect, none of them are broken or dumb.

Oh, and if Norfair is too strong a counter-pick, strike it.
 

ADHD

Smash Hero
Joined
Feb 18, 2008
Messages
7,194
Location
New Jersey
Maybe. None of them are that broken or dumb, but he is right about every top player having a negative opinion about the stagelist--because I couldn't find one that didn't.
 

SaveMeJebus

Smash Master
Joined
Apr 29, 2010
Messages
4,371
SaveMe you are trying to suggest a change to the current system. Before you make a suggestion you need to first identify a flaw with the current system. Once you identify that flaw you may then suggest your system but while suggesting it you must provide reasons to why it solves the issue and why its better then other possible solutions.

Until you do this I will no longer be posting in this thread and I encourage everyone else to do the same.
the old rule set favors players who main more than one character. With the old rule set, players who main only one character are put in a situation in which they might get countered in their own counter pick. most people would say that thats the players fault for only maining one character. I don't think that someone should have to pick up a character just because his character doesn't do well against a few characters in some stages. with my rule set, the player gets a chance to see what character the opponent is going to choose before he chooses his stage.This way, he can make a better decision on what stage to choose

I feel that with my rule set people won't be afraid to go on other stages besides neutrals because they know that they won't get countered on the stage they use. You can have marth and DK mains counter pick stages like Delfino without the fear of their opponent switching to DDD.
 

Grim Tuesday

Smash Legend
Joined
Nov 4, 2007
Messages
13,444
Location
Adelaide, South Australia, AUS
the old rule set favors players who main more than one character. With the old rule set, players who main only one character are put in a situation in which they might get countered in their own counter pick. most people would say that thats the players fault for only maining one character. I don't think that someone should have to pick up a character just because his character doesn't do well against a few characters in some stages. with my rule set, the player gets a chance to see what character the opponent is going to choose before he chooses his stage.This way, he can make a better decision on what stage to choose
I see no issue for giving players who main multiple characters an advantage. They earned it because of the extra effort they spent, if you realise you have a bad match-up you can't counter, you just get good with a different character. If you don't want to use two different character, main Meta-Knight.
 

Raziek

Charging Limit All Day
Joined
Oct 14, 2008
Messages
9,626
Location
Halifax, Nova Scotia
NNID
Raziek
3DS FC
3866-8131-5247
the old rule set favors players who main more than one character. With the old rule set, players who main only one character are put in a situation in which they might get countered in their own counter pick. most people would say that thats the players fault for only maining one character. I don't think that someone should have to pick up a character just because his character doesn't do well against a few characters in some stages. with my rule set, the player gets a chance to see what character the opponent is going to choose before he chooses his stage.This way, he can make a better decision on what stage to choose
I've been reading this as it's progressed, but I'm going to offer my input now.

Your concept of who should have favor IS FLAWED. That's all there is to it.

You believe that a player who puts effort into ONLY their main should have an advantage. This is contrary TO ALL FIGHTING GAME LOGIC. It is well known and widely accepted that players who want to do well will learn MULTIPLE characters so that they may adjust to different playstyles and to cover their bad matchups.

You want to remove this advantage that they put time and effort into gaining, with little to no justification as to why.

Therefore, you are WRONG.

Can we please lock this already? I don't think there's even a single person other than you who has the delusion that this is a good idea.
 

SaveMeJebus

Smash Master
Joined
Apr 29, 2010
Messages
4,371
I disagree with this completely. How hard is it to tilt lock wolf or fox with sheik? how hard is it to chain grab DK with wario(I could go on with these)? Do these people really deserve these wins when they use these characters for those reasons alone?
you obviously did not read this. Also My rule set does not favor players who only main one character, it just doesn't punish them for doing so like the old set does
 

Grim Tuesday

Smash Legend
Joined
Nov 4, 2007
Messages
13,444
Location
Adelaide, South Australia, AUS
you obviously did not read this.
Yes they do deserve to win for those reasons.
There is actually difficulty involved in playing a character, no matter how simple their tactics are, I can say with 100% certainty that I would beat a D3 player with my Snake if the D3 player only knew how to chain-grab and the basic moves.

There is also this thing called the tier list, if you are playing as Wolf/DK you should expect to have a difficult match-up, if you don't want a match-up where you can get tilt-locked play a different character who can't get tilt-locked.

Simple stuff.
 
Joined
Oct 9, 2008
Messages
8,905
Location
Vinyl Scratch's Party Bungalo
NNID
Budget_Player
I already talked about this. You can ask any pro player and they will agree that most of the stages that are on the MLG rule set are dumb/ broken.
Most pros happen to be extremely scrubby when it comes to stages. :ohwell:

I like how you said intensive, because they're not. Is not every member of the cast good or better on a specific stage in the 5 starter system? Olimar on yoshis island, ganondorf on battlefield, snake on battlefield/FD, DDD on hell.. the majority of the neutrals. If they were intensive, believe me, I'd never lose. These are not hardcore counterpicks, they are light playing fields in which the characters perform better on. Places like castle seige and ps1 are great for DDD and snake. By adding more stages, the most you are doing is creating more of these "intensive" counterpicks.
I define intensive by "would this character pick this stage as their first pick stage? Second?"

Read up about the 15-stage starter system. It literally ensures that most balanced stage for round one-specifically a stage that neither you nor your opponent wants to play on, or both you and your opponent want to play on (or, one of you accidentally struck very wrongly).

Just because the stages are not cookie-cutter death does not mean the stages do not interefere negatively in the outcome of the match. I'll start with the starters. When obstacles are involved such as statues, and oddly shaped terrain in which characters inherit temporary wall-infinites that changes the matchup into a visible advantage for one character (which is not a counterpick?) then that stage should not be a starter. There are no issues with disruptive terrain on Final destination, battlefield, or smashville such as this and allow easier landing.
O.o Easier... landing? Landing on FD is way harder than landing on CSpt2.

Also, let's remember what we're talking about here. Is Delfino incredible for MK? Well... no, not really. It's like his 5th-best-stage in the system. He just happens to be a ridiculously good character. Is FD incredible for Falco/ICs? Well... yes, it's their VERY best stage in the system (I mean including counterpicks and starters).

A stage that is "disruptive" to, say, the point of PTAD is when you could start to cry foul with the hazards. But when the hazards are easily visible, and easily avoided unless your opponent throws you into them (in which case you got outplayed), then it is really up to you to learn the stage.

I will not accept as a response "then just strike it" because you obviously can't strike it when there are multiple stages in this case and all stages without the terrain are struck by the opponent who desires statues and etc.
"All stages without the terrain" would be the stages you want to go to. AKA the stages he wants to strike, because they are really good for you. Or, at least, not bad for you (your character never gets a big advantage due to stages except on like FD, SV, PTAD, and Pictochat).

They may be fair, but you must consider that when characters are at play people will be forced into situations in which the terrain can often completely strip all options, and once again the three standard flat "neutrals" do not do this.
When the HELL does CS strip you of all options even remotely long enough to matter? How about Halberd (unless you got, say, thrown into a lazer and pressured to stay in, in which case you got outplayed severely)? Delfino? NORFAIR?

Now onto the counterpicks. Orpheon is fine--it's a starter.
Fixed. It's a better starter than delfino, and probably a better starter than FD.

Brinstar is debatable, but it's widely accepted as a counterpick.
Why the hell is this stage debatable and not "easily a counterpick by any definition"?

Pictochat is also debatable, while each hazard is avoidable it's not necessarily "not random."
Note:
-predictable 13-second timer between hazards
-No hazard can come up more than once a match
-Safe zone at the bottom left.

Pictochat is a perfectly fine counterpick. L2P (on stages).

The terrain can instantly change the matchup, as well as deal unnecessary damage that is in fact, unavoidable if you are hit into them or wall infinite'd.
Again, you got mercilessly outplayed if this happens. It's up to you to play it safe.

Also that single line with the two eyes? Yeah, that really can alter the match and certain recoveries..
Show me where this happened in a competitive match. At all.

Norfair, basically is fine on it's own when you examine it without moving characters upon it, but place metaknight, wario, or an aerial based into the mix. They already limit your options set to very low when you are in the air, but picture a floating lava stream against you and on top of that you have to reach down to the ground safely. Consider yourself ****ed. It's too strong of a counterpick for some.
Brinstar and RC are better for almost anyone who likes norfair, and if you airdodge through that lava spout, are they going to follow you? It's a strong counterpick, but not game-breaking unless your character is obscenely bad at dealing with it... Oh wait you main Diddy. Too ****ing bad, ban it.

And that is why MLG's stagelist is flawed. It promotes metaknight heavily for success. But why hasn't metaknight appeared too often in the results? Well why would it yet, when there have only been two tournaments of this ruleset? It is going to take a little while before everyone adjusts and learns to abuse the counterpicking system. No one has analyzed it this heavily as a player.
All right. Then you know what it needs? MORE TESTING. Make your tournaments in NY run the MLG ruleset. Make tournaments everywhere run it. Really see if the MK dominance rises. If you would ban this because "on paper it makes MK better" then you are a terrible, terrible scrub. Oh, added bonus: on paper, it only makes MK better in long sets.
 

AvaricePanda

Smash Lord
Joined
Jan 30, 2009
Messages
1,664
Location
Indianapolis, Indiana
Jebus, what you're complaining about doesn't change in your counterpick system. The only way that'd actually change is if you made the people counterpicking do a double blind or something, but still

In the current system, I CP anywhere, you pick Fox, I pick Sheik. That's a bad match-up. In your system, you tell me you're going Fox before I pick Sheik, so while you get one stage ban I'm still taking you to your second worst stage. This generally doesn't happen in the current format because when there's a hard stage CP against your character, a lot of people don't stick with or change to a character with their worst stage (I'm not going to pick Ganondorf if I win game 1 against an MK and they CP RC).

There are PLENTY of match-ups in this game where the stage choice doesn't heavily influence it, or where there's a good amount of "bad" or "good" stages for a character to the point where a ban just comes down to preference. MK on Brinstar and RC is not the only example, and banning these stages to make a ruleset change that has no reasonable benefits over the current one isn't warranted.

Your proposed system STILL PUNISHES YOU FOR MAINING ONLY ONE CHARACTER. Pretty much every system will punish you for maining only one character. On paper it's not smart for me to stick with Diddy Kong when my opponent CPs Brinstar or RC when I could optimize those choices with Wario and MK respectively. However, since I'm leagues better with my Diddy, I stick with him anyway. tl;dr while I'm technically getting punished it's something I have to deal with and something that comes with maining one character.

The counterpick system, both in stages and characters, is supposed to "punish"—although not really punish people who only use one character but reward people who use multiple. Obviously if I have a main and secondary I'm covering more match-ups than I would with my main so I have an advantage. That's a choice you have while playing a fighting game and you have to deal with the consequences.

i rambled lol

EDIT: BPC how can you tell people they're scrubs for not knowing stages and argue their legality to death yet say this?
-[pictochat has a]predictable 13-second timer between hazards
If you've ever played a match on pictochat ever you'd know this is false.


Brinstar and RC are better for almost anyone who likes norfair, and if you airdodge through that lava spout, are they going to follow you? It's a strong counterpick, but not game-breaking unless your character is obscenely bad at dealing with it... Oh wait you main Diddy. Too ****ing bad, ban it.
Also, Diddy isn't that bad on Norfair, I'd actually like never ban it except against G&W and probably Wario. Overall though it's alright for him, AZ's strategy of camping the bottom when you get a lead is actually really effective against most characters (and other random gimmicks/perks to the stage too). It's certainly better than Brinstar and RC for Diddy IMO.

either way, it's definitely really unfair to blame his disagreement with you because, "oh you just want a conservative stage list because you main Diddy"

Most of these arguments are stupid because you aren't doing it right. You argue to the death that the controversial stages aren't intrusive enough and ADHD argues to the death that they're too intrusive. The only thing you can actually do instead of repeat the same information yet word it to fit your argument is to actually play high or even decent level matches on the stage, see how "intrusive" stage elements of them actually are, try to abuse the stage as much as possible and see if beating X strategy is easy or reasonable, and analyze that. Sure there'll still be opinions but it's much better than, "no just avoid the lava" "no the lava comes up too much and punishes too hard"

and either way, this is something completely under the TO's decision. being a non-TO arguing about it and insulting a non-TO over it without getting much of actually anything accomplished isn't going to change an entire region's ruleset lol. if you care that much about it in your region then present your arguments to your local or regional TOs, but otherwise you really shouldn't be telling another region (who's individual opinions on stages might be all different and they might all love their region's stagelist) what stages to put on their tourneys.
 

SaveMeJebus

Smash Master
Joined
Apr 29, 2010
Messages
4,371
Yes they do deserve to win for those reasons.
There is actually difficulty involved in playing a character, no matter how simple their tactics are, I can say with 100% certainty that I would beat a D3 player with my Snake if the D3 player only knew how to chain-grab and the basic moves.

There is also this thing called the tier list, if you are playing as Wolf/DK you should expect to have a difficult match-up, if you don't want a match-up where you can get tilt-locked play a different character who can't get tilt-locked.

Simple stuff.
I don't think that it's that simple when you have been maining this/these chararcters for years.
 

Grim Tuesday

Smash Legend
Joined
Nov 4, 2007
Messages
13,444
Location
Adelaide, South Australia, AUS
I don't think that it's that simple when you have been maining this/these chararcters for years.
It is that simple actually, speaking from experience I learnt the tactics of every single character soon after Brawl's release and use Random now. Now, I am not a professional at any character by any means, but just the fact that I know how every character is played should be enough to show that learning two characters at high-level play isn't that bad.
 

SaveMeJebus

Smash Master
Joined
Apr 29, 2010
Messages
4,371
Jebus, what you're complaining about doesn't change in your counterpick system. The only way that'd actually change is if you made the people counterpicking do a double blind or something, but still

In the current system, I CP anywhere, you pick Fox, I pick Sheik. That's a bad match-up. In your system, you tell me you're going Fox before I pick Sheik, so while you get one stage ban I'm still taking you to your second worst stage. This generally doesn't happen in the current format because when there's a hard stage CP against your character, a lot of people don't stick with or change to a character with their worst stage (I'm not going to pick Ganondorf if I win game 1 against an MK and they CP RC).

There are PLENTY of match-ups in this game where the stage choice doesn't heavily influence it, or where there's a good amount of "bad" or "good" stages for a character to the point where a ban just comes down to preference. MK on Brinstar and RC is not the only example, and banning these stages to make a ruleset change that has no reasonable benefits over the current one isn't warranted.

Your proposed system STILL PUNISHES YOU FOR MAINING ONLY ONE CHARACTER. Pretty much every system will punish you for maining only one character. On paper it's not smart for me to stick with Diddy Kong when my opponent CPs Brinstar or RC when I could optimize those choices with Wario and MK respectively. However, since I'm leagues better with my Diddy, I stick with him anyway. tl;dr while I'm technically getting punished it's something I have to deal with and something that comes with maining one character.

The counterpick system, both in stages and characters, is supposed to "punish"—although not really punish people who only use one character but reward people who use multiple. Obviously if I have a main and secondary I'm covering more match-ups than I would with my main so I have an advantage. That's a choice you have while playing a fighting game and you have to deal with the consequences.

i rambled lol

EDIT: BPC how can you tell people they're scrubs for not knowing stages and argue their legality to death yet say this?

If you've ever played a match on pictochat ever you'd know this is false.




Also, Diddy isn't that bad on Norfair, I'd actually like never ban it except against G&W and probably Wario. Overall though it's alright for him, AZ's strategy of camping the bottom when you get a lead is actually really effective against most characters (and other random gimmicks/perks to the stage too). It's certainly better than Brinstar and RC for Diddy IMO.

either way, it's definitely really unfair to blame his disagreement with you because, "oh you just want a conservative stage list because you main Diddy"

Most of these arguments are stupid because you aren't doing it right. You argue to the death that the controversial stages aren't intrusive enough and ADHD argues to the death that they're too intrusive. The only thing you can actually do instead of repeat the same information yet word it to fit your argument is to actually play high or even decent level matches on the stage, see how "intrusive" stage elements of them actually are, try to abuse the stage as much as possible and see if beating X strategy is easy or reasonable, and analyze that. Sure there'll still be opinions but it's much better than, "no just avoid the lava" "no the lava comes up too much and punishes too hard"

and either way, this is something completely under the TO's decision. being a non-TO arguing about it and insulting a non-TO over it without getting much of actually anything accomplished doesn't do much.
you are not really putting any thought into what you are saying. In your example, if you won as ganondorf against an MK then why the hell should you be worried about playing him in Rainbow cruise? The way I see it, with his lack of skill, its a 50-50 MU
 

sunshade

Smash Ace
Joined
Jun 12, 2009
Messages
863
you are not really putting any thought into what you are saying. In your example, if you won as ganondorf against an MK then why the hell should you be worried about playing him in Rainbow cruise? The way I see it, with his lack of skill, its a 50-50 MU
I laughed really really hard when I read this.
 

Mikachiru

Smash Ace
Joined
Jun 8, 2009
Messages
632
Location
Hawaii
lol at this thread.

Look, obviously logic doesn't work with this guy. This thread should be locked, ignored, and never spoken of again.

Maybe if we leave Jebus alone, he might reflect on what everyone's been telling him or find what his mistakes are and fix them idk. Seriously, this is getting nowhere.

This kinda reminds me of a certain situation involving a doctor, a patient, and sugar pills... Except there's more than one doctor...
 
Joined
Oct 9, 2008
Messages
8,905
Location
Vinyl Scratch's Party Bungalo
NNID
Budget_Player
FTR, this discussion is far more interesting than the rest of this thread. Which is why I will continue it. Here's still hoping for a lock.


EDIT: BPC how can you tell people they're scrubs for not knowing stages and argue their legality to death yet say this?

If you've ever played a match on pictochat ever you'd know this is false.
I'm fairly certain there's a set timer between when one hazard disappears and a new one appears. I think you thought I meant "between when this one appears and the next one appears" or something.

either way, it's definitely really unfair to blame his disagreement with you because, "oh you just want a conservative stage list because you main Diddy"
But that's the only thing I'm really getting from his posts, that argue not much.

Most of these arguments are stupid because you aren't doing it right. You argue to the death that the controversial stages aren't intrusive enough and ADHD argues to the death that they're too intrusive. The only thing you can actually do instead of repeat the same information yet word it to fit your argument is to actually play high or even decent level matches on the stage, see how "intrusive" stage elements of them actually are, try to abuse the stage as much as possible and see if beating X strategy is easy or reasonable, and analyze that. Sure there'll still be opinions but it's much better than, "no just avoid the lava" "no the lava comes up too much and punishes too hard"
I'd do that analysis myself, but I'm not a top level player. I actually do try to pick these stages (with MK, no less, so even raising the abuse to the highest level in most cases), but usually about when I pick norfair and win (my win ratio on Norfair is shockingly consistent for some reason), or pick PTAD, they disconnect and john in the AiB chat about me picking "gay stages" (after having gone to FD 8 times, BF 6 times, and SV 9 times...). And I also said that they need more testing above all. If you guys can show that Norfair, PTAD, GG, YI(M), Brinstar, Luigi's Mansion (2 in there are REALLY out there), etc. are highly anticompetitive, so be it, they get banned. But until then, you need to test them.

and either way, this is something completely under the TO's decision. being a non-TO arguing about it and insulting a non-TO over it without getting much of actually anything accomplished isn't going to change an entire region's ruleset lol. if you care that much about it in your region then present your arguments to your local or regional TOs, but otherwise you really shouldn't be telling another region (who's individual opinions on stages might be all different and they might all love their region's stagelist) what stages to put on their tourneys.
I'm the most prominent smasher I know of in my region and I don't run tournaments. :( Bavaria ****ing blows chunks for smash.
I'm just trying to publicize this, and trying to convince people to expand their stagelists and check this **** out. The very best thing that could happen is that this is conclusively and expansively tested-it means we're right, or we learn something.
 

ADHD

Smash Hero
Joined
Feb 18, 2008
Messages
7,194
Location
New Jersey
Most pros happen to be extremely scrubby when it comes to stages. :ohwell:
Or would just rather focus on fighting as opposed to being distracted by giant obstacles.

I define intensive by "would this character pick this stage as their first pick stage? Second?"
Why? The word "intensive" is too strong for your usage, then.

Read up about the 15-stage starter system. It literally ensures that most balanced stage for round one-specifically a stage that neither you nor your opponent wants to play on, or both you and your opponent want to play on (or, one of you accidentally struck very wrongly).
I might as well just main metaknight. Haha.

O.o Easier... landing? Landing on FD is way harder than landing on CSpt2.
I strongly disagree. On FD, landing is easier because you can use b-reversals and airdodge while DI'ing inward or outward to avoid being hit or even simply DI to the ledge. The tier of castle seige with the statues and large platforms prohibit safe landing. These are not battlefield or lylat platforms we're talking about, these are massive yoshi's island platforms. What if you are out of jumps? You cannot airdodge through platforms. And what if metaknight is about to shuttle loop, or DDD is ready to back air? Good luck.

Also, let's remember what we're talking about here. Is Delfino incredible for MK? Well... no, not really. It's like his 5th-best-stage in the system. He just happens to be a ridiculously good character. Is FD incredible for Falco/ICs? Well... yes, it's their VERY best stage in the system (I mean including counterpicks and starters).
So what if it's his 5th best stage? Metaknight is still much more advantageous and much more threatening from Delfino than Falco and Ice Climbers on Final Destination. This notion that "characters should not start on their best stage" is pointless if you are inviting an even more severe scenario--metaknight playing on a stage in which he performs even stronger than other characters on their best stage, even if that stage is not his best. Metaknight can repeatedly shark in between stage transformations, and characters other than metaknight and lucario have a very hard time stopping it if they can at all. Sure, he is perfectly compatable on every transformation except the one with the three large grass pillars, but within half of the stage playing time he has an outright strong advantage.

A stage that is "disruptive" to, say, the point of PTAD is when you could start to cry foul with the hazards. But when the hazards are easily visible, and easily avoided unless your opponent throws you into them (in which case you got outplayed), then it is really up to you to learn the stage.
As I said, a stage and its obstacles do not necessarily have to be "cookie-cutter extreme." Outplayed? Because I was caught by an unavoidable scenario in which I was thrown/hit into an obstacle with hitboxes and hit again, I was outplayed? That is merely the stage dealing more damage than your character could have at that moment in the first place. What if the obstacle appears before you are hit, then you were outplayed? That is what many would refer to as luck.


"All stages without the terrain" would be the stages you want to go to. AKA the stages he wants to strike, because they are really good for you. Or, at least, not bad for you (your character never gets a big advantage due to stages except on like FD, SV, PTAD, and Pictochat).
PTAD? What? Metaknight beats Diddy Kong on Pictochat, as well as snake, falco, and pit + a few others. Gnes may disagree about the Metaknight part, but he only has one high-level metaknight in his region. I have about 3-4 tough cookies. I would much rather counterpick to a stage without obstacles, or ps1 in which the obstacles do not have hitboxes. Why do you direct this statement at me? I am not fighting for myself, I am fighting so that each player whether they won or lost were content that their set was legitimate. Each player and their respective character had performed actions that were based out of skill, and the better man won. I refuse to accept that because stage obstacles had dealt damage or caused a player to be dealt damage, that he or she lost because the better man (or woman, I guess) won.

When the HELL does CS strip you of all options even remotely long enough to matter? How about Halberd (unless you got, say, thrown into a lazer and pressured to stay in, in which case you got outplayed severely)? Delfino? NORFAIR?
I'm not sure if you knew, but snake is arguably a better camper on Castle Seige, even more than Final Destination or halberd. While you are not out of options, certain characters with strong aerial abilities and camping abilities are better-suited here. I'm not going to accept as a response "just strike it" because the same certain characters that benefit from CS benefit from about 5 other stages on that list more so than everyone else. This is a counterpick stage, and should be in the counterpick stage section of the MLG stagelist. The reason FD should not be in the counterpick stage section for Falco or Ice Climbers is because there is no scenery or obstacles that suddenly place a character into a disadvantaged spot or scenario.

Halberd: Low ceiling, crane, bombs, and lasers? Do you want to fight snake, DDD, metaknight, or falco on this stage? Did you know that DDD has a dthrow infinite at the tier with the cannon? I'm not sure if you did. This is also a counterpick stage, and does not belong within the 9-starters. And yes, I was outplayed because I was chaingrabbed into a laser/bomb/gimmicky edge where I could be infinite'd and uptilted. Or maybe, I was also outplayed because metaknight sharked the entire time and then already had a strong ground game to begin with well enough for the other scenery stage changes.

Delfino? Metaknight can shark here half the time/has a very natural ability to air camp, DDD has wall infinites, kirby has a better pressure game here, and the water allows early spikes to take off stocks. It is like the rest, a counterpick stage and does not belong in the starter list.

Norfair is a touchy subject. I'll leave that alone for now. However, I will say this. You claim that you are not stripped out of options long enough for it to matter, and yet if you are stripped out of options and are forced to take high damage or even a stock off than that affects the outcome of the match. That's long enough to matter!

Fixed. It's a better starter than delfino, and probably a better starter than FD.
LMAO. Do you know how many characters are **** on this stage? Rob, DDD, MK, even snake and wario?! Not to mention the annoying stage slipping and odd ledge switching which yes, can sometimes kill people even if you are metaknight. It does not matter where you are on the screen at times either, you can die at any time from a stage flip.

Why the hell is this stage debatable and not "easily a counterpick by any definition"?
Brinstar is what you refer to as an "intensive" stage, or I'll use that term to describe an extreme counterpick. Characters (cough metaknight) have the ability to shark here, and when you are forced into the air because of the lava some people will benefit visibly. Also, if you would normally ban norfair because you are afraid of this happening, norfair practically has the same characteristics. What will you do, then? Don't say pick up metaknight as an answer, please.

Note:
-predictable 13-second timer between hazards
-No hazard can come up more than once a match
-Safe zone at the bottom left.

Pictochat is a perfectly fine counterpick. L2P (on stages).
The hazards can instantly change a matchup, or if you are hit into them cause a massive amount of damage to be done to a character or KO him/her. Certain terrain also promotes heavy camping, such as the boxes, lines, or fence spikes. When the rockets appear, basically, you will be disadvantaged if you do not choose to attempt to throw your opponent into them, lol. That is very distracting to both players.

Lol at "lrn2 plei on staegz." So if I learn to play on these stages, the obstacles go away, right? Not really. If I learn to play on these stages, I will not be grabbed and thrown/hit into the obstacles, right? Not really. Just because you learn to play on these stages does not mean you have an instant advantage, nor does it determine the outcome of the match or give you more options when you really need them. Invalid response.

Again, you got mercilessly outplayed if this happens. It's up to you to play it safe.
Yes, because I was hit into a rocket despite playing "safe" and camping/shielding I was outplayed. I'm glad you see it my way (sarcasm).

Show me where this happened in a competitive match. At all.
It wasn't recorded, but snakeee vs random Buffalo, NY diddy kong. Frank (snakeee) was up a full stock damage wise game 3, last stock. The line appeared and he couldn't recover. Guess what happened. He died. If you are falco and below the ledge, just kill yourself because you can't do (pardon my lack of words) ****.

Brinstar and RC are better for almost anyone who likes norfair, and if you airdodge through that lava spout, are they going to follow you? It's a strong counterpick, but not game-breaking unless your character is obscenely bad at dealing with it... Oh wait you main Diddy. Too ****ing bad, ban it.
So when I ban norfair and am taken to brinstar with the same qualities then what do I do? This isn't about just diddy kong. The fact is, multiple characters are prone to this.

Oh, and it's absolutely HILARIOUS that you said to avoid a hit, you mentioned airdoding through a lava sprout. What if it goes wrong and you are hit back into them, then hit again into the lava sprout? Smart, I will remember your advice BPC the next time I am at MLG on norfair. I will be sure to airdodge into lava-sprouts!

All right. Then you know what it needs? MORE TESTING. Make your tournaments in NY run the MLG ruleset. Make tournaments everywhere run it. Really see if the MK dominance rises. If you would ban this because "on paper it makes MK better" then you are a terrible, terrible scrub. Oh, added bonus: on paper, it only makes MK better in long sets.
Happened at Bum's tournament in NY. Most metaknights refused to use the MLG stagelist because the sudden alterations where alot to keep track of and too time consuming. The only one who saw the advantages and used them was atomsk. Atomsk won the tournament.



I really want to see what you're going to come up with now. I bet it's going to be nitpicky things that don't matter.
 

SaveMeJebus

Smash Master
Joined
Apr 29, 2010
Messages
4,371
I am going to try to help ADHD's 5th argument. I don't know how everyone here does there MU chart, but I am pretty sure that the Diddy kong boards create their MU charts based on the 3 original starters. We all naturally assume that they are going to ban FD so we base our MUs on stages like BF or SV. Now, If you look at most of Diddy Kong's MUs you will notice that while playing on these stages, most of his MUs are 50-50(not in his favor). This is one of the reasons why I think that Diddy Kong is one of the most balanced in the game.

But when you use the MLG rule set, everything changes and now the stages that made it so that our matches were even, can be taken away in a heart beat. Leaving us stages like Delfino and Helberd which puts us at a disavantage from one of our old 50-50 MUs, MK. I think that the MLG stage list is going to push out balanced characters like Marth and diddy kong from the top of the tier list and replace them with characters like DDD and wario, with many stage lists that put MUs in their favor.

At seagull, what the hell is wrong at my MU chart? I think it helps me illustrate my point on how balanced Diddy Kong is.
 

AvaricePanda

Smash Lord
Joined
Jan 30, 2009
Messages
1,664
Location
Indianapolis, Indiana
I am going to try to help ADHD's 5th argument. I don't know how everyone here does there MU chart, but I am pretty sure that the Diddy kong boards create their MU charts based on the 3 original starters. We all naturally assume that they are going to ban FD so we base our MUs on stages like BF or SV. Now, If you look at most of Diddy Kong's MUs you will notice that while playing on these stages, most of his MUs are 50-50(not in his favor). This is one of the reasons why I think that Diddy Kong is one of the most balanced in the game.

But when you use the MLG rule set, everything changes and now the stages that made it so that our matches were even, can be taken away in a heart beat. Leaving us stages like Delfino and Helberd which puts us at a disavantage from one of our old 50-50 MUs, MK. I think that the MLG stage list is going to push out balanced characters like Marth and diddy kong from the top of the tier list and replace them with characters like DDD and wario, with many stage lists that put MUs in their favor.

At seagull, what the hell is wrong at my MU chart? I think it helps me illustrate my point on how balanced Diddy Kong is.
The Diddy boards haven't really seriously discussed any match-ups in a year, and last time I checked we consider the entire set, not just neutrals lol. It's weird that you bring up Halberd and Delfino because they aren't that bad for Diddy, actually like the only stage I would never actually CP anyone to is Brinstar. Every other stage is situationally useful in some match-ups; sometimes I CP Snakes to Delfino and MKs to Halberd (only cause of HL2 lol), and I've won sets because of my counterpicks to Seige and Delfino (vs. a falco for the first and an olimar to the second).

And your match-up chart goes against like all common opinion of Diddy mains, with things like even with Snake, Wario, and MK. You can't consider a match-up to only be played on a neutral (otherwise then maybe the latter two would be more reasonable) but because of how a set works there's no way a lot of your match-up numbers are correct. A lot of the numbers, even some of the advantages, seem misinformed.

but tl;dr: no the diddy boards do not base their MU charts on the 3 original starters

And to not get off topic, your counterpick ruleset suggestion isn't better than the current one, a lot of people have made points you've either ignored or misunderstood.
 

SaveMeJebus

Smash Master
Joined
Apr 29, 2010
Messages
4,371
The Diddy boards haven't really seriously discussed any match-ups in a year, and last time I checked we consider the entire set, not just neutrals lol. It's weird that you bring up Halberd and Delfino because they aren't that bad for Diddy, actually like the only stage I would never actually CP anyone to is Brinstar. Every other stage is situationally useful in some match-ups; sometimes I CP Snakes to Delfino and MKs to Halberd (only cause of HL2 lol), and I've won sets because of my counterpicks to Seige and Delfino (vs. a falco for the first and an olimar to the second).

And your match-up chart goes against like all common opinion of Diddy mains, with things like even with Snake, Wario, and MK. You can't consider a match-up to only be played on a neutral (otherwise then maybe the latter two would be more reasonable) but because of how a set works there's no way a lot of your match-up numbers are correct. A lot of the numbers, even some of the advantages, seem misinformed.

but tl;dr: no the diddy boards do not base their MU charts on the 3 original starters

And to not get off topic, your counterpick ruleset suggestion isn't better than the current one, a lot of people have made points you've either ignored or misunderstood.
In a 2 out of 3 set with the old stage list, If our opponent struck FD, Diddy players got to choose whether to take their opponent to SV or BF and if they won the first match and lost the 2nd(assuming they ban FD), they could take them to either BF or SV depending on which on they won on. In most cases, there was really no need to discuss other stages as those were the only stages we needed to go to in order to win.
 

Veel

Smash Apprentice
Joined
Jun 23, 2010
Messages
129
Location
Jacksonville, Fl
You are making a counter pick system that gives both the winner and loser an advantage. A counter-pick is a counter-pick because it counter picks them. If you give them both equal advantage why not just take out the whole counter-pick system and have all double blinds on neutrals? This system fails because it eliminates the counter-pick system to make it more fair for both the winner and loser. The current rule set gives the winner of the 1st match the overall advantage between the three matches. Since the 1st match is a neutral with double blind characters its not counter picking and is based majorly on skill. To eliminate the counter-pick system is deconstructive to the metagame.
 

SaveMeJebus

Smash Master
Joined
Apr 29, 2010
Messages
4,371
Finally finished writing it:

The reason I think the old rule set does not work is because it gives too much of an advantage to people who main more than one character. With the old rule set, you can have a player who mains marth and DDD, play a far better player who mains Lucario and win simply because DDD counters lucario. My rule set does not fix the fact that Lucario has a bad MU against DDD. It does however make it so that the player who mains lucario isn't stuck fighting DDD in his best stage. He may have to fight DDD in his second best stage, but the difference between playing DDD in his best stage and playing DDD in his second best stage could mean the difference between winning that match or loosing the set.

Alot of people here have been saying that In order to be good in this game you have to main more than one character. But did you guys ever stop and think that maybe the only reason why we need more than one character to be good is because the current rule set is forcing us to pick up a secondary? Think about it, in order for us to counter pick a stage, we need to make sure that our opponents don't have a character that can counter our character there and if he does happen to have a character that counters our character there, then we need a secondary that can safely counter both of his characters(mk). So Basically, with the old rule set, the only way you can counter pick someone without shooting yourself in the foot is to main or second main MK.

My rule set does not favor any player. A person could main one character or the whole cast and it won't punish them for doing so. This is because of the way that the rule set is built. If I only main one character this rule gives me an slight advantage when I lose. this is because no matter what the rule set, I would always be sticking to my main and with this rule set I can see my opponent's character before I counterpick a stage. this is however balanced out by the fact that the opponent can ban your best stage. This changes when you win though as now you are at a slight disadvantage because no matter what, you have to stick to your character and depending on how good your character is and how many characters your opponent mains, your opponent now has the option to counter your character. All is not lost though, as you still have a chance to ban your opponent's best stage which is made easier by the fact that you now know what character he is choosing

This rule set also does not hurt players who main more than one character. More often than not, when you main more than one character you are going to have one character that preforms better than the rest. This is the character that you use in your first match unless you have a bad MU with the opponents character. Lets just say that for this example you are using your best character. You win with your main against your opponent. When you win, you are put at a slight disadvantage because you don't know if you are going to get countered by your opponent or if he is even going to switch characters, but the same thing happens in the old rule set. In this situation, my rule set trades the ability to know what counter pick the opponent is going to choose for the ability to ban the opponents best stage by knowing what character he is going to choose (which in my opinion is a fair trade). Now when you lose against your opponent you now have a slight advantage against him because you now have a chance to counter your opponents character because you know what character he is going too choose. Now, your opponent may have the opportunity to ban your best stage, but you still have your second best stage and the advantage that your character has on your opponent's.

I know some of you guys may be thinking, why is it that the players who only main one character got more of an advantage than those who main more than one and my answer to that is that they don't. The old rule set was too unbalanced and it gave players who main more than one character an advantage and it gave players who main only one character a disadvantage. My rule set is just making it so that both sides are balanced now.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom