Stage Analysis & Discussion Thread

[bpjk27]

Yes, there would be more of an inventive to run away, and there shouldn't be anything wrong with that playstyle. You can win with it as long as there's any time limit at all, short or long.

The problem is that running away drags matches on far too long with the current 8 minutes. It's so long that the only way time limits factor in a match is if people intentionally camp hard, so everyone now associates intentional camping and time limits with excessively long matches. For 12-13 years straight.

It must be either the running away playstyle and/or that matches are too long. You can play aggressively on Big Battlefield or ANY stage, but it's really just down to the players and what they feel comfortable doing. This is why I was questioning your method of testing, since players won't feel comfortable being aggressive on a stage they're unfamiliar with. It's a losing battle from the start. Here's the big point:

Playstyles can be applied to every stage. If you're testing specific stages, why are you using playstyles instead of the stages themselves as proof of legality?

You can hard ban everything that allows an incentive to camp (proof of camping is cited everywhere as reason enough to ban stages), but that's not directly addressing the issue. There's always character matchups where camping is the smartest idea (vs. any big character), players who have trouble dealing with it, and honestly, people will always camp because that's just the way they play.

OR you can decrease the time limit so the maximum time each match will take is low enough for everyone to be happy regardless of playstyle. Aggressive players will gain more from taking risks early to get the lead and defensive players don't have to hold out as long to get their win. Win-win for everyone since the better player still wins!

It seems like such an obvious thing to try so that more playstyles (and stages!) can be used. I know this has been a thing since Melee, but how much has the time limit really been evaluated since then? It's been 8 minutes for other Smash games as long as I can remember, but why? It MUST be considered because long matches, only caused by our time limits, are being used as evidence to ban stages!

This is something that's worth experimentation in future tournaments. Let people go crazy with stages but dial the time limit back so camping would last as much or a little longer than an average match. I know there's was a thread around here where someone logged average match times, but I can't seem to find it!

EDIT: We have the power to change time limits but not how stages work, so why not take that approach? The stages that are legal now are probably still ok with a lower time limit, so let's try this on stages people like camping on.

I'm not sure, but I think the reason stages are banned based on runaway/timeout tactics is because that kind of gameplay is boring. Also I feel that in a fighting game it is best if players are encouraged to fight each other.

While timing out is a strategy, I don't think that it should be easy to do or the dominant strategy. That's not the kind of game I want to play or watch.

To be clear, I'm not saying Wrecking Crew allows for easy timeouts (I have no evidence), I'm just giving my opinion on timing out as a strategy.

 

[Piford]

If your up on stocks you have no reason to approach ever. We do because on most stages you have to, to keep your lead. If you camp tree while im up be my guest. When you leave tree I'll go camp etc etc...
Just test it in your circles. Thus far I've seen some pretty lame things on that stage. When I get videos I'll post

I was referring to what happens after the player behind gets into the tree, now it's hard for the player in the lead to return the the tree when the player behind has control of that area.

 

[smashmachine]

Slight tangent, but Mr. Wizard asked on Twitter what some of the 100% banned stages are in Smash 4. Link.

just a slight tangent, ya know

 

[ぱみゅ]

Hey Droid, can you make a research on Kalos Pokémon League? I think it's pretty tame, and hazards may be annoying but manageable.

 

[ParanoidDrone]

Hey Droid, can you make a research on Kalos Pokémon League? I think it's pretty tame, and hazards may be annoying but manageable.

Yeah, I can cover it. If I'm being honest I find it exceedingly unlikely that it'll ever find widespread acceptance but that's not the point of the topics so whatever.

Also it's Drone, not Droid. <.<;

 

[LiteralGrill]

Slight tangent, but Mr. Wizard asked on Twitter what some of the 100% banned stages are in Smash 4. Link.

What's that? Mr. Wizard responded directly to me and I reported what a lot of folks here and on reddit thought? I'm a hero?

EHEM!!!

Anyways...

Hey Droid, can you make a research on Kalos Pokémon League? I think it's pretty tame, and hazards may be annoying but manageable.

What about the part where it turns you metal? Or where some attacks go through the fire making it big camping material? Or sword platforms that if I remember correctly hurt you? The legendary Pokemon? I know a lot of folks have written off the stage and maybe we're wrong but I'm not seeing the potential. Studying it would be nice though.

 

[ParanoidDrone]

What's that? Mr. Wizard responded directly to me and I reported what a lot of folks here and on reddit thought? I'm a hero?

EHEM!!!

Anyways...



What about the part where it turns you metal? Or where some attacks go through the fire making it big camping material? Or sword platforms that if I remember correctly hurt you? The legendary Pokemon? I know a lot of folks have written off the stage and maybe we're wrong but I'm not seeing the potential. Studying it would be nice though.

Off the top of my head the fire and swords do 4% on hit, the swords are totally solid including the hilt, the legendaries are actually not that bad except for Registeel, and if you're unlucky you can get ping-ponged to your death at the end of the Steel form as the swords rise up.

Also the Fire legendary is Ho-oh and it just makes all the fire pillars rise higher than normal for like 15 seconds.

Kalos Pokemon League is a...complex stage. It'll be a couple of days before that topic's ready to go.

But on the bright side Cynthia's battle theme hnngh.

 

[chipndip]

Hey Droid, can you make a research on Kalos Pokémon League? I think it's pretty tame, and hazards may be annoying but manageable.

Isn't the dragon variant a really powerful hazard, though? Like, possible KO powerful? Also, there's free buffs on the metal variant. That's a moderate bit of input for a stage to have.

 

[ParanoidDrone]

Isn't the dragon variant a really powerful hazard, though? Like, possible KO powerful? Also, there's free buffs on the metal variant. That's a moderate bit of input for a stage to have.

Controversy! (Actually that's more reason to cover it now that I think about it.)

Being metal isn't necessarily a straight buff since it drastically increases your fall speed. Depending on % it may also open you up to combos that would otherwise send you too far away, similar to what Buster Shulk does.

 

[chipndip]

Controversy! (Actually that's more reason to cover it now that I think about it.)

Being metal isn't necessarily a straight buff since it drastically increases your fall speed. Depending on % it may also open you up to combos that would otherwise send you too far away, similar to what Buster Shulk does.

The thing: I'm only gonna want to be metal when I'm in danger of being blown away at KO %s. Why would you want to touch it otherwise? Besides, as much as stage variety is nice, this stage does A LOT of crap in the match between trying to blow you the hell up, sucking people towards the center of the stage, turning people into metal variants...it's just way too much input and takes away from the 1v1 nature that I thought we were going for here.

 

[ParanoidDrone]

The thing: I'm only gonna want to be metal when I'm in danger of being blown away at KO %s. Why would you want to touch it otherwise? Besides, as much as stage variety is nice, this stage does A LOT of crap in the match between trying to blow you the hell up, sucking people towards the center of the stage, turning people into metal variants...it's just way too much input and takes away from the 1v1 nature that I thought we were going for here.

I'm not trying to argue for or against the stage's legality. My research threads are strictly to provide information in an objective manner.

 

[chipndip]

I'm not trying to argue for or against the stage's legality. My research threads are strictly to provide information in an objective manner.

Well...now you have more insight...I guess...>_>

 

[HavocThunder]

BTW, a few weeks back I went into training mode on Mario Circuit and I got a bunch of glitches. Lemme find my post about it.



Well, I'm not really here to debate that.

It just seemed like you were saying because Yellow Devil is telegraphed, then you're not fighting the stage when its literally what you are doing.

Personally, I think it depends on the hazard and going on a case-by-case basis is best when it comes to stages, and subsequently uncompetitiveness and stage legality.

I brought all that up because I think you can turn "fighting the stage" into "using the stage to your advantage". I wanted to highlight that you have options, and you're not completely helpless against it. In fact, you can use the hazards to your advantage if you're aware of how they work. Wily's Castle should be considered because there's nothing inherently unpredictable about it and you have options for everything Yellow Devil does.

Big giant edit to avoid double posting below:

I'm not sure, but I think the reason stages are banned based on runaway/timeout tactics is because that kind of gameplay is boring. Also I feel that in a fighting game it is best if players are encouraged to fight each other.

While timing out is a strategy, I don't think that it should be easy to do or the dominant strategy. That's not the kind of game I want to play or watch.

To be clear, I'm not saying Wrecking Crew allows for easy timeouts (I have no evidence), I'm just giving my opinion on timing out as a strategy.

I think you're misinterpreting what I'm saying a bit. Regardless of how you or I feel about it (I'm not much of a camper myself), the amount of camping that happens really depends on the players. I'm pointing out that the rules right now surprisingly allow 8 minute camping. Stages are being considered banned around something that's perfectly legal and can happen anywhere with the right players.

One way to actually encourage players to fight each other is to have a reasonable time limit. With the way the rules are now, there's honestly no reason to be aggressive ever if it's 2 minutes in and there's *6* minutes left to go on the clock. (I'd probably win a lot more tournament matches if I remembered this)

If we cut the 8 minutes down to like...4 or 5 minutes, what effect that would have on matches? I think most people wouldn't notice, especially on the currently legal stages. However, it makes a BIG difference on stages with more incentive to run away.

This wasn't fully directed at Wrecking Crew, but it is relevant to every stage being considered banned for circle camping or being too big. Capps' comment about dragging matches out on purpose in Big Battlefield made me wonder why the time limit allows for that.

 

[Ticker]

I brought all that up because I think you can turn "fighting the stage" into "using the stage to your advantage". I wanted to highlight that you have options, and you're not completely helpless against it. In fact, you can use the hazards to your advantage if you're aware of how they work. Wily's castle should be considered because there's nothing inherently unpredictable about it and you have options for everything Yellow Devil does.

Most people playing competitively don't want to deal with stage hazards. Losing because of something completely out of you or your opponents control is a horrible idea for competitive play. Even just playing casually, my group of friends and I hate most stage hazards as they are just an annoyance. In my opinion, it;s not worth legalizing, as nobody would ever counter pick to this stage.

 

[ぱみゅ]

Most people playing competitively don't want to deal with stage hazards. Losing because of something completely out of you or your opponents control is a horrible idea for competitive play. Even just playing casually, my group of friends and I hate most stage hazards as they are just an annoyance. In my opinion, it;s not worth legalizing, as nobody would ever counter pick to this stage.

Now you're just being irrational.
Telegraphed and easily avoidable hazards are fine, as long as they can be worked around (predictable/telegraphed/avoidable), which is the main reason I'd like to see KPL looked into (I'd do it myself, but I do not own or have access to a Wii U).

Also it's Drone, not Droid. <.<;

I'll be sure to remember that in the future, my mistake!

 

[Piford]

Wily Castle is bad becuase of the Camping the Yellow Devil Creates, as he makes a huge wall between you and your opponent, and then attacks the opponent when he disappears. On top of that, if your opponent tries to attack him you can just wait till the last hit to get the explosion for yourself. Because of this, no one would ever destroy him.

 

[HavocThunder]

Most people playing competitively don't want to deal with stage hazards. Losing because of something completely out of you or your opponents control is a horrible idea for competitive play. Even just playing casually, my group of friends and I hate most stage hazards as they are just an annoyance. In my opinion, it;s not worth legalizing, as nobody would ever counter pick to this stage.

I'd counterpick Wrecking Crew or Wily's Castle and would definitely do it all the way to Grand Finals. Nearly all the time. Especially knowing that 95% of my opponents probably didn't do the research about how they work. Top players should do it too, that way everyone's forced to learn strategies for them. I'll take my free wins until then, though

Another edit to avoid double posting:

Wily Castle is bad becuase of the Camping the Yellow Devil Creates, as he makes a huge wall between you and your opponent, and then attacks the opponent when he disappears. On top of that, if your opponent tries to attack him you can just wait till the last hit to get the explosion for yourself. Because of this, no one would ever destroy him.

Now we're getting into some interesting match strategies to try out. Being behind YD sounds SUPER risky! I did some quick testing and some projectiles like Link's boomerangs + arrows and Fox's lasers go through him but bombs don't. YD's shots can be reflected. I think it's fair to say space animals + Mega Man himself have an advantage here, but character advantages exist everywhere in legal stages.

One big issue: If the opponent blows him up and you're BEHIND it, especially on the left side, you're done. You can't dodge through the explosion and the opponent can have their way with you on the ledge due to explosion immunity. If you're a character with no projectiles, it seems like the best idea is to focus on killing YD. Learn how much dmg your aerials do, track his health, and be smart about that last hit.

It's a matter of weighing the risks and benefits during a match, which sounds like another great reason to allow this stage!

 

[Killtrox]

What's that? Mr. Wizard responded directly to me and I reported what a lot of folks here and on reddit thought? I'm a hero?

EHEM!!!

Anyways...



What about the part where it turns you metal? Or where some attacks go through the fire making it big camping material? Or sword platforms that if I remember correctly hurt you? The legendary Pokemon? I know a lot of folks have written off the stage and maybe we're wrong but I'm not seeing the potential. Studying it would be nice though.

While playing with friends, a smash attack at the right time actually caused them to get carried off of the top of the screen by the swords. I smashed them into the left sword, and the swords then began to rise. The left sword knocked them into the right sword, the right into the left, and so on, until they were juggled off of the screen. While the chances of it happening are fairly low, I imagine people will eventually learn to time it and use it to their advantage, much like Randall.

Isn't the dragon variant a really powerful hazard, though? Like, possible KO powerful? Also, there's free buffs on the metal variant. That's a moderate bit of input for a stage to have.

I've been KOed by the dragon. It was confusing because I didn't realize I got hit at first until I realized I was no longer on the screen and was down a stock.

 

[Shadó Chimera / シャドーキメラ]

A thing happened to me today.

No idea how many characters can do this, but I know Yoshi and Shulk in speed monado can.

 

[Davis-Lightheart]

How did that happen? Does it just happen when you latch onto the stage?

 

[Shadó Chimera / シャドーキメラ]

No. just do an attack so you don't grab the ledge and fall onto some kind of platform inside the wall. I think it might be dependent on air speed or the attack used.

 

[SirKenneth]

I was referring to what happens after the player behind gets into the tree, now it's hard for the player in the lead to return the the tree when the player behind has control of that area.

Yes I know maybe I worded my response wrong.

If player one is up in stocks and player two is camping tree player one is in no danger. Player one never has to approch player two because player one is winning thus he never has to do an unsafe approch vs player two tree camping. If player two leaves tree player one can then just rush up there and proceed to camp until he is forced down and repeat the cycle. Due to the placement of the tree it becomes pretty easy to abuse this unlike easier platforms like bf for instance

 

[Piford]

A thing happened to me today.

No idea how many characters can do this, but I know Yoshi and Shulk in speed monado can.

I believe something similar to this happened in Brawl.

Yes I know maybe I worded my response wrong.

If player one is up in stocks and player two is camping tree player one is in no danger. Player one never has to approch player two because player one is winning thus he never has to do an unsafe approch vs player two tree camping. If player two leaves tree player one can then just rush up there and proceed to camp until he is forced down and repeat the cycle. Due to the placement of the tree it becomes pretty easy to abuse this unlike easier platforms like bf for instance

But what I'm saying is even after player two leaves the tree, he still has control over that area. I can see what your saying, but I think if it does work, it would only happen against Ganondorf and Little Mac as they are the only characters who can't reach the tree. I think every other character agile enough to stop it.

 

[Pazzo.]

Is there a full list of the stages and counter picks yet?

 

[LiteralGrill]

A thing happened to me today.

No idea how many characters can do this, but I know Yoshi and Shulk in speed monado can.

Meta Knight could do this back in Brawl as well. Not entirely new, but interesting for sure. Is it easy to do on accident?

Is there a full list of the stages and counter picks yet?

Not really no. However if you'd like I can show you the results from the /r/smashrbos poll (over 400 responses) as well as what we've talked about here. I think this is what you'd be looking at when combining those together:

Spoiler

Legal:

• Battlefield
• Final Destination
• Lylat Cruise
• Town and City
• Smashville
• Delfino Plaza
• Kongo Jungle 64
• Halberd
• Pokemon Stadium 2
• Castle Siege
• Duck hunt
• Skyloft
• Wuhu Island

Questionable/Needs Testing:

• Luigi's Mansion
• Norfair
• Mario Circuit (Wii U)
• Mushroom Kingdom U
• Port Town Aero Dive
• Wii Fit Studio
• Windy Hill Zone

(Speaking on that we're testing all of those this Saturday with $50+ in prizes including an Amiibo. So yeah, they will be tested!)

Banned:

• Everything Else

 

[Shadó Chimera / シャドーキメラ]

I guess it's easy to do on accident? I'm not sure how to measure that, but I'd assume it'll happen again to someone else at some point. I certainly wasn't trying to find it in the middle of a match.

 

[LiteralGrill]

I guess it's easy to do on accident? I'm not sure how to measure that, but I'd assume it'll happen again to someone else at some point. I certainly wasn't trying to find it in the middle of a match.

Well back in the day when you did it with Meta Knight you pretty much had to go out of your way to do it on purpose to make it happen so it was easy to say "don't do that". But if it was something many characters could do on accident easy enough that may actually be a problem we'd have to figure out since it kinds ruins the match part way through.

 

[ぱみゅ]

That doesn't look like a huge threat, the character isn't protected or anything, he's just in a different ground (and a pretty small one). Most projectiles and disjointed attacks seem to be able to reach there.

 

[HavocThunder]

Legal:

• Battlefield
• Final Destination
• Lylat Cruise
• Town and City
• Smashville
• Delfino Plaza
• Kongo Jungle 64
• Halberd
• Pokemon Stadium 2
• Castle Siege
• Duck hunt
• Skyloft
• Wuhu Island

Questionable/Needs Testing:

• Luigi's Mansion
• Norfair
• Mario Circuit (Wii U)
• Mushroom Kingdom U
• Port Town Aero Dive
• Wii Fit Studio
• Windy Hill Zone

Banned:

• Everything Else

[/collapse]

I still think it's weird that stages need "testing". Either they're legal or they're not. People camping on these stages comes down to their choice. Then, when they make that choice, especially after the encouragement to do it, their choice will be used as evidence that the stage won't be used. Now people will forever cite camping as why Big Battlefield and Woolly's World are banned, even though nothing was shown to prove any person A at this position literally cannot catch up to any person B at this position in scenario C, even considering stage aspects D, E, and F or using characters G, H, and I. If the scenario exists, explain it and make it very clear so there's no confusion. Otherwise, they and every other banned stage should be allowed until the proof is shown.

It's simply assumed that the instabanned stages are so terrible, no one would ever want to play on them so why bother? Because banlists affect everyone. As someone who feels comfortable on stages like Wrecking Crew, Pac-Land, Pyrosphere, or Wily's Castle, simply just from playing the game normally, unlocking the custom moves, and spending time in training mode to learn their quirks, seeing them not even be *considered* with no explanation that I can verify and reproduce myself is mind-boggling. Why am I expected to just believe these stages are broken if I can't even reproduce what's broken on my own console? It ruins a lot of credibility of the competitive scene in my eyes, where people call to ban things they don't understand or don't want to adapt to.

I'm speaking up on these boards because these rash decisions to quickban have a real effect on me and my ability to play people on these "banned" stages. People are reading these lists with no explanations or scenarios and honestly believe if they don't like the stage or how people play on it, NO ONE should play on it. Literally ever. This'll affect my local TO's, any friendlies, even local gatherings with my friends, because they'll give me a crazy look instead of actually providing a real scenario when I ask why *insert instabanned stage* here isn't allowed.

 

[KlefkiHolder]

You can just tech the actual stage instead of the track to avoid that.

For Diddy on Duck Hunt, you can just catch his Banana's and Peanuts and throw them back at him. And if your up there and they run down, what's stopping you from hitting them on their way back up?

Wasn't talking about that.

Rather the invisible platforms that can spawn, as well as the unavoidable killing that the stage can cause.

You can find it in this post with video evidence.

Also teching the stage doesnt really work as you get hit after the tech IIRC? Don't quote me on that though, but the video did mention it

 

[Viriquin]

Has anyone else had this weird occasion when you're standing on the edge of the platform in Smashville, and you keep landing on the edge in a sort of wavedash-esque manner? This has happened to me at least twice now.

 

[Jaxas]

Has anyone else had this weird occasion when you're standing on the edge of the platform in Smashville, and you keep landing on the edge in a sort of wavedash-esque manner? This has happened to me at least twice now.

It's happened to me on T&C as well, though I wouldn't say it was wavedash-esque at all.
Basically what happened to me (and a few of my opponents) has been they tried to walk off a platform the direction it's moving with probably the same air speed as the platform, so they were constantly falling->landing->falling until they realized and hit a different direction

 

[Piford]

Wasn't talking about that.

Rather the invisible platforms that can spawn, as well as the unavoidable killing that the stage can cause.

You can find it in this post with video evidence.

Also teching the stage doesnt really work as you get hit after the tech IIRC? Don't quote me on that though, but the video did mention it

Darn I should've watched that all the way through my bad. Even so unless you can recreate that glitch (as that's not doesn't even remotely make sense, it's probably a loading error). You can tech the stage, the guy said he kept teching the top, so he kept getting hit by the stage after he teched the hit.

I still think it's weird that stages need "testing". Either they're legal or they're not. People camping on these stages comes down to their choice. Then, when they make that choice, especially after the encouragement to do it, their choice will be used as evidence that the stage won't be used. Now people will forever cite camping as why Big Battlefield and Woolly's World are banned, even though nothing was shown to prove any person A at this position literally cannot catch up to any person B at this position in scenario C, even considering stage aspects D, E, and F or using characters G, H, and I. If the scenario exists, explain it and make it very clear so there's no confusion. Otherwise, they and every other banned stage should be allowed until the proof is shown.

It's simply assumed that the instabanned stages are so terrible, no one would ever want to play on them so why bother? Because banlists affect everyone. As someone who feels comfortable on stages like Wrecking Crew, Pac-Land, Pyrosphere, or Wily's Castle, simply just from playing the game normally, unlocking the custom moves, and spending time in training mode to learn their quirks, seeing them not even be *considered* with no explanation that I can verify and reproduce myself is mind-boggling. Why am I expected to just believe these stages are broken if I can't even reproduce what's broken on my own console? It ruins a lot of credibility of the competitive scene in my eyes, where people call to ban things they don't understand or don't want to adapt to.

I'm speaking up on these boards because these rash decisions to quickban have a real effect on me and my ability to play people on these "banned" stages. People are reading these lists with no explanations or scenarios and honestly believe if they don't like the stage or how people play on it, NO ONE should play on it. Literally ever. This'll affect my local TO's, any friendlies, even local gatherings with my friends, because they'll give me a crazy look instead of actually providing a real scenario when I ask why *insert instabanned stage* here isn't allowed.

Except there are real reasons why stages aren't included in his list (I'd still say some more stages could use testing to get more evidence for bans, but that's besides the point). Stages like Pyrosphere need to be banned because they marginalize player skill. A match on Pyrosphere comes down to who owns Ridley, not who's the more skillful player. And Ridley doesn't even seems to work consistently (whether that's intended or not), one match he came in already owned by one player, and another match I was the only one who attacked him for like 5 minutes straight, he finally becomes mine, and then my friend hits him once to get him back.

 

[LiteralGrill]

Snip'd

When players are playing for a large sum of money, you don't want something questionable ruining said match. Brawl at Evo with items and how folks reacted would show this as an intense example.

Yes, every stage should be legal until proven otherwise. How do I prove otherwise? Testing them. Since players would not normally want to play on a stage they worry could have an unfair aspect normally I offer incentives to test these stages specifically so not only will they actually get chosen (since many players would just ignore them in events) but people will play to win and try to break them as much as possible to show if they work or not. If some stages are legal, lots of people wont even show up to an event, you can't compete with no people. So those stages are not on the radar for testing.

There are reasons many stages are "instabanned". In competitive play your comfort level matters little, but if stages give a character or player a seriously unfair advantage they are going to be banned. The ability for a highly mobile character to nail a hit and run around a massive stage is one of those things. Maybe even the match can happen if both players pick the same characters but we also don't want to centralize the game that way either, so stages that make the game revolve around only one strategy are also going to be banned.

All of the stages I am not testing have either been used in other events and have been shown to cause these problems, or have been played on, studied, and we have decided they have these problems.

If you want, list every stage on that list you think should be legal and we in the thread can discuss why or why not it should be.

 

[HavocThunder]

Except there are real reasons why stages aren't included in his list (I'd still say some more stages could use testing to get more evidence for bans, but that's besides the point). Stages like Pyrosphere need to be banned because they marginalize player skill. A match on Pyrosphere comes down to who owns Ridley, not who's the more skillful player. And Ridley doesn't even seems to work consistently (whether that's intended or not), one match he came in already owned by one player, and another match I was the only one who attacked him for like 5 minutes straight, he finally becomes mine, and then my friend hits him once to get him back.

I think the best point is that Ridley's HP might not work consistently. Players would expect he would take x amount of damage and plan around that, someone gets that last expected hit, but oh wait Ridley needs to take more damage to switch sides with no warning. Sometimes it'll take me 6 Lucina f-airs to stun him, sometimes 8, sometimes way more. (I believe Lucina's f-air is consistent with it's damage?)

I have some theories, though. Does he take more damage from the back? Can you only stun him during particular attacks? Does it take more to move him from one player's ownership to another? How much damage does he need to take after blinking? Is the total damage needed to completely kill him consistent? Does he heal back damage or need to take more as time goes? It's a mystery that really does need testing. Yellow Devil's HP is consistent, so why would Sakurai do that with Ridley?

I've never, ever seen him come in (when the background changes tint) already owned, but maybe it just hasn't happened to me yet? Do you know what might've caused that? Count that as two things that would shock me.

 

[Piford]

I think the best point is that Ridley's HP might not work consistently. Players would expect he would take x amount of damage and plan around that, someone gets that last expected hit, but oh wait Ridley needs to take more damage to switch sides with no warning. Sometimes it'll take me 6 Lucina f-airs to stun him, sometimes 8, sometimes way more. (I believe Lucina's f-air is consistent with it's damage?)

I have some theories, though. Does he take more damage from the back? Can you only stun him during particular attacks? Does it take more to move him from one player's ownership to another? How much damage does he need to take after blinking? Is the total damage needed to completely kill him consistent? Does he heal back damage or need to take more as time goes? It's a mystery that really does need testing. Yellow Devil's HP is consistent, so why would Sakurai do that with Ridley?

I've never, ever seen him come in (when the background changes tint) already owned, but maybe it just hasn't happened to me yet? Do you know what might've caused that? Count that as two things that would shock me.

Ridley definitely has a hidden damage percent meter and not HP, as he is killed like a normal fighter and gets knocked back further the more damage he takes (he might also have HP on top of that, but it's still combined with the damage percent). And even if Ridley was consistent, the fact that you can own him is extremely marginalizing player skill, which is something we cannot have. If you own Ridley you now have an insanely huge advantage that basically wins you the game, as your opponent is forced to deal with Ridley while you can kill your opponent.

 

[CatRaccoonBL]

I have some theories, though. Does he take more damage from the back? Can you only stun him during particular attacks? Does it take more to move him from one player's ownership to another? How much damage does he need to take after blinking? Is the total damage needed to completely kill him consistent? Does he heal back damage or need to take more as time goes? It's a mystery that really does need testing. Yellow Devil's HP is consistent, so why would Sakurai do that with Ridley?

I'm sorry man, but the fact of the matter is none of this matters. At the end of the day, even if calculated every single pixel of Ridley, he just provides to unfair of an advantage to a player.

You really have to think of this in terms of money. No one wants to say "I lost my chance at making some major money because Ridley," or "because I was timed out trying to avoid or deal damage to Ridley."

Money money money.

This may seem strange, but tournaments aren't always about having fun. They may be fun to people, but this isn't just a game to some people. Some people can't afford to face such huge obstacles that aren't fair for the purpose of "fun." No matter how much studying the person does, having Ridley will always be an advantage. An advantage that loses money.

There is also fighting to gain fame. Which you don't do by winning unfairly. No one cares if you win because of circle camping or a boss helped you. It didn't show your skill.

Same thing with Dominant camping, if someone is able to get a hit in, and just run away until time out to win, why should that stage be legal? It's losing people money. Which is why stages like Palutena's temple and GCO can't work for example.

 

[KlefkiHolder]

I recreated the Circuit glitch when I was just messing around in training mode for 20 min. It happened on its own.

Thats the only time I've gone into Circuit in Training however, but I got it and it recurred at the same point in the transitions. I think I detailed it in a post in that thread.

 

[ぱみゅ]

Don't want to discredit you but... we still lack evidence of this glitch being consistent....so far is still anecdotal.

 

[Leisha]

Hey has anyone encountered this werid glitch on Lylat Cruise before?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=shGJSuOWDco

It makes you randomly fall onto the ground and I actually get punished in the video near the end. It seems rather stupid and I dont understand why it happened.

Anyone have an Idea? =S

I posted this on a few fourms beforehand but though I'd probably get a better response here. Has anyone seen this happen on lylat Cruise before? It seems asif the stage has a glitchy terrain and It makes you fall down like whats shown in the video.

Just thinking this could cause some problems with the stage being a starter and such. If anyone can provide a good explanation as to why this happened let me know.

Thanks