Meta Stage Legality Discussion Thread:

[Wintropy]

You know, why don't we treat Miiverse and Dreamland like Omega stages, just for BF? That way they're there for their tiny strategic differences, but they don't take up a spot.

This is how it's done in Ireland (or at least in our local scene).

A ban for Battlefield counts as a ban for Miiverse and Dreamland.

 

[IvanQuote]

A thought: Prism Tower's platform shrinks at a few points. How does this interact with Villager's tree? Or the hydrant?

Tested it a tiny bit. When the platform shrinks/grows, it stays in the same relative location, by that I mean if it's at the 1/3 point on the large platform, it will be at the 1/3 point on the small platform. The difference between the tree and hydrant is that the hydrant can get carried up to the pass through platform that rises when the main platform shrinks.

On another note, why is Tortimer Island not legal? My guess would be large size, but I'm unsure.

 

[Routa]

On another note, why is Tortimer Island not legal? My guess would be large size, but I'm unsure.

The plathform layout is random, too big stage and too close bottom blast zone.

Edit: oh and the trees spawn fruits even when items are turned off.

 

[Xeze]

The plathform layout is random, too big stage and too close bottom blast zone.

Edit: oh and the trees spawn fruits even when items are turned off.

Plus only one of the ledges can be grabbed (the one with that wooden platform) and on which side it is is also random.

You know, why don't we treat Miiverse and Dreamland like Omega stages, just for BF? That way they're there for their tiny strategic differences, but they don't take up a spot.

Dream Land 64 is distinct enough from Battlefield to be considered a separate stage (plaform placement, blastzones and the wind).

 

[wizrad]

Does anyone ever consider going to a specific Omega stage instead of Final Destination? Like, for the walls or the ability to go easily underneath the stage? Asking because, if this makes enough of a difference, they might need to be considered separate stages. Also, I dislike Final Destination for that big, blinding flash at the end of the loop. I would enjoy a replacement.

 

[ZeGlasses!]

Does anyone ever consider going to a specific Omega stage instead of Final Destination? Like, for the walls or the ability to go easily underneath the stage? Asking because, if this makes enough of a difference, they might need to be considered separate stages. Also, I dislike Final Destination for that big, blinding flash at the end of the loop. I would enjoy a replacement.

I just go to omegas for the music, tbh. LMAO

 

[Pazx]

I still think BF and DL are different enough to both exist but I can see it being an issue with smaller (<= 7) stagelists. Miiverse is banned from my ruleset.

Only 1 ban with both BF and DL annoys me. I'm okay that the two stages are different enough to not be in the same spot in the stagelist (like Omegas or Miiverse), but really not by much. Maybe some characters would prefer one over the other, but I don't see a character both loving one and hating the other at the same time. If your opponent loves the global layout and you don't, but you have only 1 ban, you're screwed.

(And why should BO3 and BO5 have a different number of bans ?)

BO3 and BO5 can have a different number of bans because the maximum number of bans in BO5 (particularly with DSR) is smaller than in a BO3.

@this post and the whole discussion that stems from it I'm sorry but that's bull. If you were right then all stage lists would have both BF and Miiverse available. Yet that is never the case.

Because despite their sensible differences (Miiverse platforms being lower and closer to each other and the understage layout being completely symmetrical) they both fill the same strategical role and both give the same strenghts to the same characters.

So if it's true with BF and Miiverse why can't it be true with other stages archetypes. Following this logic a good stagelist would not be one that has all the fair/legal stages, but a chosen set of legal stages that promotes strategical diversity.

Starting from that all there is to do is classify the existing stages under archetypes. Like FD, Omegas and Duck Hunt all fit under the same archetype of a large terrain where platforms don't really matter. Or Delfino, Skyloft and Wuhu all fit the traveling stage with a succession of varying platform layouts and various sceneries.

How about "as many non-redundant fair stages that exist"?

Also, I really hate people classifying the travelling stages together. From a strategic point of view, if you like Delfino you are unlikely to like Wuhu Island and/or Skyloft.

 

[Ansou]

Does anyone ever consider going to a specific Omega stage instead of Final Destination? Like, for the walls or the ability to go easily underneath the stage? Asking because, if this makes enough of a difference, they might need to be considered separate stages. Also, I dislike Final Destination for that big, blinding flash at the end of the loop. I would enjoy a replacement.

I sometimes choose a walled stage just so that it will be easier to snag recoveries with Kirby's Meteor Stone. I don't think that such things are enough to give them a separate spot on the stage list as they are otherwise very much alike. It just wouldn't work very well with stage striking and banning.

You know, why don't we treat Miiverse and Dreamland like Omega stages, just for BF? That way they're there for their tiny strategic differences, but they don't take up a spot.

In Stockholm we treat Battlefield and Miiverse as the same stage while Dreamland gets its own spot on the stage list. I think it works pretty well, even though I can see why you would want Dreamland to be treated as BF/MV as well.

 

[Ajimi]

BO3 and BO5 can have a different number of bans because the maximum number of bans in BO5 (particularly with DSR) is smaller than in a BO3.

So "the number of bans is different because it is not the same". I'm sorry but I didn't understood what you said (really). Why the maximum number of bans is smaller in BO5, if bans are reseted each game ?

Well, except for DSR. But honestly, screw the DSR. It's just a weird and convoluted way to allowing more bans. Each match should be independent one from another (apart from "the winner gets X bans"), and the rules should stay valid even if we did BO99.

 

[SMAASH! Puppy]

Tested it a tiny bit. When the platform shrinks/grows, it stays in the same relative location, by that I mean if it's at the 1/3 point on the large platform, it will be at the 1/3 point on the small platform. The difference between the tree and hydrant is that the hydrant can get carried up to the pass through platform that rises when the main platform shrinks.

On another note, why is Tortimer Island not legal? My guess would be large size, but I'm unsure.

This might not be a reason but I hate the camera in that stage. I mean, I like Kapp'n but I don't care about him when I am fighting. Same with the sharks.

 

[Ghostbone]

What ban method are we talking about here.
The one where both players ban stages after game 1 and those stages are banned for the rest of the set? That method is dumb anyway.

The better one is where all stage bans are reset each game, and the winner of the previous game gets two stage bans. (DSR still in effect for the last stage the counter-picker won on). It's simpler and makes more sense (can adjust stage bans throughout best of 5, can counter-pick a stage you may have banned for a different matchup but want for a different character, it's a deeper system and more intuitive tbh)

 

[ぱみゅ]

Eh....
"Whatever number of fair stages there is" was a simplified answer to the question "how many stages are okay?", it left behind many specifics like FD/Ω and BF/MV/DL.
I personally think the blastzones alone differentiate Dreamland from Battlefield and Miiverse. Then there's wind, platforms height and position, and other factors, but you get the point.

As for Miiverse and Battlefield, they are virtually similar. Sure, is a bit wider and the structure under the stage is different, but at large scale these differences are about as trivial as the differences between FD and any Ω stage.
Of course, if you are allowed to pick the "three platform structure", you should be allowed to take whatever tactical advantage you consider Miiverse has over Battlefield, or the other way around, or even if it's pure preference, all is up to you.
Same with Ω stages.

People straight out banning Miiverse I assure you don't even know what they are doing.

 

[wizrad]

I believe Dreamland's horizontal blast zones are identical to Battlefield/Miiverse's, and the ceiling is very slightly lower, a matter of killing less than ten percent earlier. I agree that the wind is a big enough difference, though.

 

[teluoborg]

@ Pazx please develop : from a strategic point of view what are the different options that Skyloft or Wuhu give that you wouldn't find already in Delfino or vice versa ? I'm talking about big, objectivable differences, not personal preferences.

Because the only thing I can see to clearly differentiate those stages is that Skyloft and Wuhu both have damaging hitboxes at some point and that's not an argument in favor of their inclusion.

 

[MrGame&Rock]

@ Pazx please develop : from a strategic point of view what are the different options that Skyloft or Wuhu give that you wouldn't find already in Delfino or vice versa ? I'm talking about big, objectivable differences, not personal preferences.

Because the only thing I can see to clearly differentiate those stages is that Skyloft and Wuhu both have damaging hitboxes at some point and that's not an argument in favor of their inclusion.

Delfino is known for being especially friendly to vertical killers like Rosalina, in the same vein as T&C is. This is not true of skyloft and wuhu. In addition, skyloft lacks water, while I believe wuhu has it to a lesser degree than delfino does, and given some of delfino's transformations, that's not nothing.

 

[Pazx]

So "the number of bans is different because it is not the same". I'm sorry but I didn't understood what you said (really). Why the maximum number of bans is smaller in BO5, if bans are reseted each game ?

Well, except for DSR. But honestly, screw the DSR. It's just a weird and convoluted way to allowing more bans. Each match should be independent one from another (apart from "the winner gets X bans"), and the rules should stay valid even if we did BO99.

My bad, I was focusing on something else honestly: A bo5 can accommodate fewer bans than a bo3 whilst avoiding repetition, but that isn't necessarily important. Let's number the stages 1 through to 7 and assume each player (players who don't switch characters I guess) has the exact opposite order of preference when it comes to stages and is playing to win (I know this isn't really how it works but it should come up sometimes in practice and almost all of the time in theory)

With 1 ban, stages 1 and 7 are never played on and stages 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6 are played on once in a 5 game set

With 2 bans, stages 1, 2, 6 and 7 are never played on. Game 1 will start on stage 4. Assuming the players alternate winning (ie one player wins, the other player wins, repeat) and modified DSR* is in effect then after 3 games stages 3, 4 and 5 have all been played. If the set goes to game 5 then two of these stages get played twice. I guess my opposition to this is just bias carrying over from past games/rulesets, now that I've thought about it it's probably superior due to lower variance.

*DSR SUCKS. We should just call it a stage clause rule at this point, given that the initial rule is stupid, there are variations of it so that nobody knows what you mean if you say DSR and it completely ruins bo5 sets (if referring to original DSR).

"The Less Stupid But Poorly Named Stage Selection Rule For Games Following Game 1 In A Smash Brothers Set" - During the counterpick process you may choose to play on the stage you most recently won on unless both parties agree.

@ ぱみゅ @ me next time Miiverse is currently banned (and by banned I mean not mentioned at all in the ruleset. You can still gentleman to it, and some people offer this after striking to/selecting battlefield) in my ruleset mostly because I haven't gotten around to deal with it yet. The biggest strike against it is that you can't select Miiverse if a 3DS is connected and given that there are always several people playing with a 3DS I'd rather not make a rule that simply doesn't affect some players. IMO losing a redundant stage is better than making rules that just don't work. If Miiverse was always selectable then I would treat it like I currently treat Omegas in that they are selectable in place of FD (BF in this case) during the counterpick process.

@ Pazx please develop : from a strategic point of view what are the different options that Skyloft or Wuhu give that you wouldn't find already in Delfino or vice versa ? I'm talking about big, objectivable differences, not personal preferences.

Because the only thing I can see to clearly differentiate those stages is that Skyloft and Wuhu both have damaging hitboxes at some point and that's not an argument in favor of their inclusion.

Delfino is a relatively compact stage with relatively low blastzones that get INCREDIBLY SMALL during transformations. It's not very big in any direction. This stage is often picked to get lower percentage kills. Wuhu Island is typically very long and flat both when travelling and when stopped at most locations, because of this I'd compare it more to Final Destination than Delfino (it's kinda like a travelling FD). The blast zones and stage itself are both large and there are very few platforms. Skyloft is to the best of my understanding a little bit smaller than Wuhu Island in terms of blast zones and main platform length (both at stops and when travelling) but still much bigger than Delfino in general. The stage itself also has many platforms whilst travelling and 8 of it's 11 stops have some type of platform (compared to like... 2? of Wuhu's 9 stops).

Blast zones are honestly the biggest factor in determining stage choices in this game, I'd say it's the reasoning behind upwards of 95% of selections of Halberd with Delfino and Town and City following shortly afterwards. Wuhu is (allegedly) a strong Sonic stage and I've taken characters that kill vertically to Skyloft in the past (Wuhu hasn't been legal in my region). These two stages give you so much room to work with, Wuhu is very good for characters who can control horizontal space but not vertical and Skyloft likely demands more flexible stage control than anywhere else. They're very strategically deep. Honestly the only thing these 3 stages have in common is the fact that they travel and have brief moments where you can camp a certain structure or walkoff (which is not a good strategy), otherwise they're completely different stages.

 

[ぱみゅ]

@ ぱみゅ @ me next time Miiverse is currently banned (and by banned I mean not mentioned at all in the ruleset. You can still gentleman to it, and some people offer this after striking to/selecting battlefield) in my ruleset mostly because I haven't gotten around to deal with it yet. The biggest strike against it is that you can't select Miiverse if a 3DS is connected and given that there are always several people playing with a 3DS I'd rather not make a rule that simply doesn't affect some players. IMO losing a redundant stage is better than making rules that just don't work. If Miiverse was always selectable then I would treat it like I currently treat Omegas in that they are selectable in place of FD (BF in this case) during the counterpick process.

Huh. I had no idea.
Good to know though, that kind of mechanics however silly they are.
I apologize for the callout, but still....
I wouldn't have it banned, but wouldn't have a separate slot for it either. Treating it like Omegas seems as a good option to me, with the understanding that under certain conditions, it literally can not be selected.

 

[Ajimi]

My bad, I was focusing on something else honestly: A bo5 can accommodate fewer bans than a bo3 whilst avoiding repetition, but that isn't necessarily important. Let's number the stages 1 through to 7 and assume each player (players who don't switch characters I guess) has the exact opposite order of preference when it comes to stages and is playing to win (I know this isn't really how it works but it should come up sometimes in practice and almost all of the time in theory)

With 1 ban, stages 1 and 7 are never played on and stages 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6 are played on once in a 5 game set

With 2 bans, stages 1, 2, 6 and 7 are never played on. Game 1 will start on stage 4. Assuming the players alternate winning (ie one player wins, the other player wins, repeat) and modified DSR* is in effect then after 3 games stages 3, 4 and 5 have all been played. If the set goes to game 5 then two of these stages get played twice. I guess my opposition to this is just bias carrying over from past games/rulesets, now that I've thought about it it's probably superior due to lower variance.

*DSR SUCKS. We should just call it a stage clause rule at this point, given that the initial rule is stupid, there are variations of it so that nobody knows what you mean if you say DSR and it completely ruins bo5 sets (if referring to original DSR).

"The Less Stupid But Poorly Named Stage Selection Rule For Games Following Game 1 In A Smash Brothers Set" - During the counterpick process you may choose to play on the stage you most recently won on unless both parties agree.

Thank you for the long answer. I now understand what you were saying about how the number of bans affects BO3 and BO5. But I'm still sceptic on why a DSR is necessary in the first place.

- If the DSR is "a stage previously won on", it is equivalent to "number of bans = X (fixed) + loss count" (which I find is a better formulation for it). I see how it can prevent from always playing on the same stage, but as I said I think each match should be independent, and that the ruling should stay valid even in BO99.

- If the DSR is "last stage won on", then it is equivalent to grant one more all the time. So we may as well directly do that.

All of that is confusing really. I just don't understand why the DSR (whatever version) is a given for most players, when I don't see it necessary at all.

 

[Ansou]

I kind of agree. I'm sceptical to if DSR is actually a necessary rule... It obviously forces the players to be slightly more varied when choosing stages, but it feels like stage bans are enough.

 

[Infinite901]

@ Pazx please develop : from a strategic point of view what are the different options that Skyloft or Wuhu give that you wouldn't find already in Delfino or vice versa ? I'm talking about big, objectivable differences, not personal preferences.

Because the only thing I can see to clearly differentiate those stages is that Skyloft and Wuhu both have damaging hitboxes at some point and that's not an argument in favor of their inclusion.

Delfino and Wuhu are like night and day to each other. Delfino is know for it's tiny blastzones, while Wuhu has HUGE blastzones, and Skyloft is in the middle but leaning towards Wuhu. Basically, Delfino is to Wuhu as Yoshi's Story is to Melee's Dreamland 64. They seems similar at first, but their integral aspects are like night and day.

 

[Ghostbone]

DSR isn't a "necessary" rule, but if you don't have it you need an extra stage ban, and the issue in Bo5 becomes that you get to counter-pick the same stage twice (because they'll just ban your best 3 stages and you'll pick your 4th best stage both times)

I do like the modified one, ie. that you can't counter-pick the last stage you won on. Otherwise you have to do things like giving you extra bans for winning more games to basically achieve the same effect that modified DSR would.

 

[Ajimi]

DSR isn't a "necessary" rule, but if you don't have it you need an extra stage ban, and the issue in Bo5 becomes that you get to counter-pick the same stage twice (because they'll just ban your best 3 stages and you'll pick your 4th best stage both times)

Is it that much of a problem to counter-pick to the same stage twice ? Because now a) 90% of matches are played on Smashville regardless, and b) I don't see the rule applied very often, because of the "unless both players agree" clause.

 

[wizrad]

@ Pazx please develop : from a strategic point of view what are the different options that Skyloft or Wuhu give that you wouldn't find already in Delfino or vice versa ? I'm talking about big, objectivable differences, not personal preferences.

Because the only thing I can see to clearly differentiate those stages is that Skyloft and Wuhu both have damaging hitboxes at some point and that's not an argument in favor of their inclusion.

We shouldn't have to provide reasons why things should be included. Every stage in the game was designed to be played on and is innocent until proven guilty. You have to provide reasons why they should be banned.

 

[ZeGlasses!]

Just because a stage can be legal, it doesn't mean it has to be.

 

[NegaNixx]

Just because a stage can be legal, it doesn't mean it has to be.

What kind of logic is that?

 

[ZeGlasses!]

Wuhu and Skyloft are both stages that can technically be legal, but we don't really NEED them. What do they add to the game? Is it actually a worthwhile counterpick for certain situations? What do they do that other legal stages don't?

I personally feel that the current stagelist is perfectly fine as is.

 

[Tobi_Whatever]

Wuhu and Skyloft are both stages that can technically be legal, but we don't really NEED them. What do they add to the game? Is it actually a worthwhile counterpick for certain situations? What do they do that other legal stages don't?

I personally feel that the current stagelist is perfectly fine as is.

People still autopicking Smashville is a clear indicator that we haven't reached a point where we are able to say that a stage list is fine or not.

 

[NegaNixx]

Wuhu and Skyloft are both stages that can technically be legal, but we don't really NEED them. What do they add to the game? Is it actually a worthwhile counterpick for certain situations? What do they do that other legal stages don't?

I personally feel that the current stagelist is perfectly fine as is.

Wuhu is a transforming stage with large blast zones. If you have trouble killing or play on the ledge I'm most likely trying to go there. Skyloft is a transforming stage with average blast zones and no water. I could go there instead of Delfino and Wuhu if I'm afraid of getting spiked and the aforementioned ledge play.

We should at least have 9 stages legal. That list of 7 from SoCal(?) is sort of ridiculous.

Battlefield, Final Destination, SmashVille, Town and City, Lylat Cruise, Duck Hunt, DreamLand 64 are all fine, this is true but what's wrong with Castle Siege?

Prove without a shadow of a doubt that stages like Castle Siege, Delfino, Kongo Jungle 64, Halberd, and Skyloft are ban worthy.

I don't even like Halberd but that's not a reason to ban it. And that seems to be the traps we're falling in, banning things because we don't like it.

Conclusion: Ban
Premise: Jank
Premise: Defensive Play

Those aren't sound arguments to reach a conclusion for a ban and those are the top two I see everywhere.

If you're trying to get rid of something the ownest is on you Majority or not, to prove why it should be gone. Start from the max and work your way to what's necessary by proving the unnecessary is literally broken. Not start from the minimum because of tradition and work your way up, tradition doesn't work because the laws are different in this game.

 

[Pippin (Peregrin Took)]

Does anyone ever consider going to a specific Omega stage instead of Final Destination? Like, for the walls or the ability to go easily underneath the stage? Asking because, if this makes enough of a difference, they might need to be considered separate stages. Also, I dislike Final Destination for that big, blinding flash at the end of the loop. I would enjoy a replacement.

Xanadu had palutena's temple omega as the stage of choice because of the blinding flash - now I think it's only an unofficial rule

I still think omega boxing ring is the most fitting for obvious reasons

 

[teluoborg]

Hi @ NegaNixx you are 2 years late in the discussion. People using the straw man "you ban them just because you don't like them" has been outlawed in 2013, this is the place for intelligent discussion.

@ Pazx & @ MrGame&Rock I get your arguments and admit that Wuhu and Skyloft are both different from Delfino. If I get it right :
-Skyloft has no water
-Delfino has close blastzones
-Wuhu has very few platforms and wide stages

Now let's move on to the next point of discussion : all of those characteristic can already be found in other, non transforming stages, so what do transforming stages (as a whole or individually) bring to the competition ?
Here are the things that I'm seeing those stages can bring :
1-A main stage with varying platform layouts, it can also be found in TC though
2-A set of 9/11 transformations that last from 15 to 18 seconds. The order of those transformations is randomized by sets with each stage layout having from 25% to 75% chance of spawning. While it is possible to know which transformation to expect from a set of 2-4, it is almost never possible to know in advance where the travel will take you. Around 44% (13/29) of the transformations have walkoffs.
3-The ability to pass through the main platform from under.

Point 1 isn't exclusive to Wu-fi-loft so I won't talk about it. So we have point 2 and 3 to discuss (maybe more but I don't see them, it's late and I need sleep).
Point 2 is imo a big argument against the inclusion of transforming stages. Yes it is their big selling points, but having an always changing layout that, unlike Castle Siege can be reacted to but not anticipated puts a big part of the outcome of a match in the hands of RNG and that is a big no-no in my book. I know everyone doesn't have the same opinion about the player vs player vs stage component, but since the consensus is to reduce it to a strict minimum I'd say this is why most people dislike those stages and don't want it legal.
Point 3 is imo the saving grace and the true thing that can bring some interest in picking those stages. It gives you the possibility (for more or less half the match time) to have extra recovery options, to remove the risk of stage spiking and to increase your options at the ledge. This is the kind of thing I want to see when I'm talking about strategic diversity.

So yeah, if those stages had a reason to be legal that would be for the ability to pass through the main platform because that is the one thing that can't be found on any other stage and that has some strategic application. On the other hand we don't need 3 stages giving people that option (because in a tournament set you want people to be able to ban this option from their adversary, just like you want them to be able to ban the BF layout) and there is a lot of RNG going on with the variation of the transformations. So is the strategic diversity worth the RNG ? I'd say yes, but which one of the 3 stages is the best for that ? I don't know.

We shouldn't have to provide reasons why things should be included. Every stage in the game was designed to be played on and is innocent until proven guilty. You have to provide reasons why they should be banned.

You are mistaken. The game was designed to be played with 8 players and items on.
Yet those criterias are not fit for competitive play where you want to judge the skills of players.
In a competitive mindset you want to remove as many factors that could prevent the results from reflecting the true skills of the players as you can, and hence make the rules as simple as possible. If you want to complicate the ruleset by adding stages you have to provide reasons why they should be legal.
Example : wanting to switch out FD for an omega version in the stagelist because of the Taiyoken is a valid reason because "who is the most resistant to the blinding flash" is not a skill you want to evaluate during a Smash tournament. With this choice you complicate the ruleset for the competitive health of the game.

 

[wizrad]

I'm not mistaken at all. We don't add things to the game. We can't. That's why we subtract them when we realize that they're not conductive to competitive play. That's how we settled upon the ruleset we have now. People used to play competitively with items on and every stage legal. Soon, they realized this is not a fair test of skill.

What Nintendo/HAL provides us with is a block of clay. Nothing special, but meant to be sculpted into something special. In order to sculpt a competitive game out of this block of casual fighting, we cut things away. Items, equipment, timed battles, free for alls, eight players, and stages must be cut out to make our simple children's game into the art form we make it. But we can't just run in, slicing away randomly with our sculptor's knives. We must subtract carefully, planning and understanding every inch of clay we cut through. We can't just arbitrarily ban things without testing unless they are obviously unbalanced and unfair.

Thus, through testing we understand many things about the debated stages. Pilot Wings makes it too easy to camp and ruin other people's experience through giving mobile characters an unfair advantage. Skyloft has wonky stage transitions that can randomly kill competitors. Pokémon Stadium has physics changes that are debatably too intrusive and game changing. Mario Circuit (MK8) has hazards in every transformation. Wuhu Island used to have a glitch where Ness could instantly kill people with his down throw. That's why these stages were originally banned.

However, as we all know, the Wuhu Island glitch has long been fixed. So, there is no legitimate reason why this stage needs to be banned. Pokémon Stadium was generally banned in Brawl, and that serves as a precedent until someone can prove that the stage is competitive. If Skyloft's jank is patched out, it should be legal too. Sadly, Pilot Wings is just poorly designed, and I can't think of anything short of it giving its name to another stage that would make it legal.

 

[Zage]

Wuhu can technically be legal, but we don't really NEED it. What does it add to the game?

Why legalize Shiek's bad stage when you can just take her to Smashville and Battlefield :U.

 

[teluoborg]

Why legalize Shiek's bad stage when you can just take her to Smashville and Battlefield :U.

Can you maybe develop as to why Wuhu is a bad stage for Sheik, like what part of her gameplay does that stage hinder or something ? Because everyone can make random claims with no facts to back them up.

@ wizrad But Wuhu is banned for a legitimate reason, people want to have the option to ban transforming stages, just like they want to be able to ban BF-likes.

 

[Ghostbone]

Why legalize Shiek's bad stage when you can just take her to Smashville and Battlefield :U.

Omfg can we stop with this.

Sheik is amazing on every stage, the stagelist has nothing to do with Sheik being amazing. If we had like 20 stages legal Sheik would be even better as she suffers on no stage and can abuse other characters far harder.

 

[Zage]

Can you maybe develop as to why Wuhu is a bad stage for Sheik, like what part of her gameplay does that stage hinder or something?

It's one of the biggest stages in the game, with some of the biggest blast zones, there isn't much else say. Shiek is not killing you until excessively high percents. Couple it with the fact that some transformations make F-air chains virtually impossible, there would be no reason not to take Shiek to Wuhu if it were legal.


Yeah, there's one beach transformation that's a straight walk off, but its nearly as big as GCO in length. The threat of being F-air'd to KO is nearly non existent unless you're already near the edge.

With the glitches removed, the only remotely valid reason to keep this stage banned boils down to not wanting to deal with zoners. Which serves to only give Shiek and other rushdown-centric characters an unnecessary edge.

Literally the only people I ever see who want Wuhu banned, non-surprisingly, main rushdown characters. Which is ten-fold more degenerative to the game than any single stage in the game could be.

Omfg can we stop with this. Sheik is amazing on every stage.

No. Please don't spread misinformation.

 

[Ghostbone]

No. Please don't spread misinformation.

K bro, continue to ignore reality and the rest of us will not legalise stages that top tiers auto-win vs half the cast on.

Wuhu island isn't actually one though, that stage should be legal.

Edit: So reading back you're only talking about wuhu island, I don't think the stage is actually bad for Sheik after playing on it a bunch (big stages are fine for her because needle camping and she can still kill off the top fine), so I don't know why you think it's her worst stage basically.

 

[wizrad]

@ wizrad But Wuhu is banned for a legitimate reason, people want to have the option to ban transforming stages, just like they want to be able to ban BF-likes.

… is that the reason why it's banned? Because that's not a reason why we ban things. Transforming stages are neither obstructive nor intrusive unless their transformations are, which almost all of Wuhu's are not. Delfino and Halberd are both legal, too.

 

[Pazx]

I'm still not sure if Wuhu is better than Skyloft or not but I'm confident that both stages are better than Delfino. @ teluoborg does your "legitimate reason" for banning Wuhu also extend to banning Delfino?

Thoughts edited in later: DSR isn't necessary, Kongo is a pretty good stage.

 

[wizrad]

Kongo Jungle 64 might be just a tad too big for singles play, but I'd like to see it tested out at some tournaments first.

 

[ParanoidDrone]

I'm still not sure if Wuhu is better than Skyloft or not but I'm confident that both stages are better than Delfino. @ teluoborg does your "legitimate reason" for banning Wuhu also extend to banning Delfino?

Thoughts edited in later: DSR isn't necessary, Kongo is a pretty good stage.

I'm inclined to agree if only because Delfino is the only stage of the 3 that has those stupid blast zone changes going on. (My personal favorite is Wuhu because reasons.)