An Option for Stage Select in Tournaments

[Bibulus]

Many people have been saying we should use a veto system for stage select in tournaments. I am one of them so I decided to write up a bit about how a veto system can work. While I do include my opinion on what to use at the end, the body of this post is just the options for how a veto system COULD work. So if you guys think you know how to make it work better than I, you now know how to shift the variables around to suit your needs.

Here is the short of it:

Players take turns removing stages from the pool of play. Then they 50/50 the first stage. Loser's choice for following stages for the rest of the match. Stages that have been played are removed from being selected later in the set.

Here is the long explanation:

When the match starts both players get to choose a non-veto stage and the random plays it's part. After a game is finished the loser gets to choose rematch or character select (for the sake of stage or character select) and upon entering character select the stage already played upon is added to the veto list and can not be played again in the series at hand.

There are 2 systems for veto that would work given our situation: Draft and Blind (no this is not a parity on league of legends champ selects)

The easiest IMO is a draft. Which is simply one person chooses then the other does and so on and so forth until it's done. The start can be decided by a coin flip if necessary. Possibly take 1st veto for choice of side.

The other option is Blind Veto, where you choose your veto stages at the beginning of an event and ride them the whole way down.

How you select stage after is another point of contention, loser picks or another random on non veto stages.

My own recommendations:
There are 22 (arguably 23, because of jokers asylum) unique stages, I propose we remove 10% per player, so it amounts to:

2 veto stages.
Draft format.
Losers choice on stage.

So at the beginning of each match the players each choose 2 stages to veto in draft, if only one player wants to take first veto in exchange for side select that works, otherwise flip a coin. Both players choose non-veto stages and let the 50/50 run it's course. The loser gets to choose stage out of the non-veto pool for the rest of the match... Which includes the vetoed stages AND the stages played already in the series at hand.

Here's to hoping I didn't fuck this up because I started writing this at like 4 AM while drunk

 

[smokey]

Something like this needs to happen, i would have said something along the lines of "Dave's Stupid Rule" on smash melee, this is more of a close variation as both players can choose a stage;

Both players choose to ban a stage, and then make their choices. They cant choose the stages banned for that set.

After game 1 the loser can opt to change the stage. Both players re-choose a stage (still accounting the bans from earlier).
Neither player can choose a stage that they have already won on

So heres how it would look in a tournament setting;

Player 1 bans Ferris Aircraft. Player 2 bans Atlantis.
P1 picks Jokers Asylum, p2 picks Watchtower. Watchtower wins and Player 2 wins the game.

Second game now looks like this:
Neither player can choose Ferris or Atlantis as they were banned.
Player 2 cannot re-choose Watchtower as he won the last game there.
Both players pick their stage; P1 picks Jokers Asylum , P2 picks Metropolis.
Jokers asylum wins, and P1 takes round 2.

Now in the 3rd match, Ferris and Atlantis still banned, so they cant be picked.
Player 1 Cannot pick Jokers Asylum, and p2 cannot pick Watchtower, as they have won there during the set, so they would both have to go with other choices.

This means that players wont be able to fully counterpick the stage to their best option (Kabal rooftop for example) as the smart player will ban that stage from the start.
This also means that if a player wins on a stage, that stage cannot be their counterpick for the rest of the set, so for example someone wins on Fortress of Solitude with a 100% combo(lol), then the opponent takes the next game on whatever stage, the first player cant just go straight back to Fortress for another "easy" win.

What can happen though is that the losing player could choose to run it back on the stage they already lost on, so in that situation the winner would get their favourite stage as many times as they like unless both players have won there, meaning its no longer a valid pick.

 

[eolson3]

I think you have to go with the Blind Veto, just to streamline at least part of this. Who is going to keep track of all this information? People were fucking up the random stage in the first game for weeks. It is going to take half an hour just to get through one set.

Is there a local tournament that will give this a try, because it seems like a headache.


E

 

[Juggs]

So many rules just for stage select. I know stages actually play a big role in the game, but damn, I'd think we would have come to an agreement on something by now. By the way, why even use the 50/50? Why not let the first stage be random, then loser can re-random if they want? Just because the 50/50 is in the game doesn't mean we need to use it. Just like the option to disable interactables/transitions doesn't need to be used just because we can use it.

 

[c_brandon]

Many people have been saying we should use a veto system for stage select in tournaments. I am one of them so I decided to write up a bit about how a veto system can work. While I do include my opinion on what to use at the end, the body of this post is just the options for how a veto system COULD work. So if you guys think you know how to make it work better than I, you now know how to shift the variables around to suit your needs.


When the match starts both players get to choose a non-veto stage and the random plays it's part. After a game is finished the loser gets to choose rematch or character select (for the sake of stage or character select) and upon entering character select the stage already played upon is added to the veto list and can not be played again in the series at hand.

There are 2 systems for veto that would work given our situation: Draft and Blind (no this is not a parity on league of legends champ selects)

The easiest IMO is a draft. Which is simply one person chooses then the other does and so on and so forth until it's done. The start can be decided by a coin flip if necessary. Possibly take 1st veto for choice of side.

The other option is Blind Veto, where you choose your veto stages at the beginning of an event and ride them the whole way down.

How you select stage after is another point of contention, loser picks or another random on non veto stages.

My own recommendations:
There are 22 (arguably 23, because of jokers asylum) unique stages, I propose we remove 10% per player, so it amounts to:

2 veto stages.
Draft format.
Losers choice on stage.

So at the beginning of each match the players each choose 2 stages to veto in draft, if only one player wants to take first veto in exchange for side select that works, otherwise flip a coin. Both players choose non-veto stages and let the 50/50 run it's course. The loser gets to choose stage out of the non-veto pool for the rest of the match... Which includes the vetoed stages AND the stages played already in the series at hand.

Here's to hoping I didn't fuck this up because I started writing this at like 4 AM while drunk

the time travel in the movie Primer was easier to follow than this

 

[Bibulus]

Here's the simple version:

Players take turns removing stages from the pool of play. Then they 50/50 the first stage. Loser's choice for following stages for the rest of the match. Stages that have been played are removed from being selected later in the set.

Better now?

 

[MorbidAltruism]

I know stage selection is a vital part of the game. I honestly think it should just be random though. I don't really care one way or another. It is just that random seems like the most fair. You can also see the stage at the character select screen. So you always know what you are getting into. This just seems like the most reasonable option to me. The 50/50 is neat though. :16Bit

 

[Bibulus]

See as much as I like random, the random select in this game is just begging for he said she said bullshit. Dude A doesn't like it so he moves it to the side and selects saying "oops". Then dude B demands you go back to the proper stage and dude A says hey it wasn't that stage.

What do you do when that happens?

 

[Juggs]

See as much as I like random, the random select in this game is just begging for he said she said bullshit. Dude A doesn't like it so he moves it to the side and selects saying "oops". Then dude B demands you go back to the proper stage and dude A says hey it wasn't that stage.

What do you do when that happens?

You see the stage in the background at the character select screen.

 

[Bibulus]

Which gives people time to know if they don't want it and they want to try their luck arguing until a TO gives them a new random