We need to talk about Lylat Cruise.

[Ulevo]

The purpose of this thread is to discuss Lylat Cruise under two separate facets. The first is whether or not Lylat Cruise deserves to be used as a starter stage over the two alternative options, Duck Hunt and Delfino Plaza. The second is whether or not Lylat Cruise deserves to be a legal stage.

My reasons for initiating this discussion are pretty simple. The first is that out of the three stages available to choose from as a 5th starter in our starter list (Lylat Cruise, Duck Hunt, and Delfino Plaza), I feel that Lylat Cruise is by far the most prejudice, and the one with the least characteristics that comprise an ideal starter. The second is that the stage affects and interrupts gameplay in semi predictable yet nonsensical fashion.

I realize that some of these reasons may seem controversial on face value, but I encourage legitimate discussion.

Lylat in Smash 4 will interrupt characters while the stage is tilting. This happens because the stage will tilt and result in the character model going from ground to air. Unfortunately, this can happen at any time during the tilt. I have experienced it while shielding, during rolls, performing jabs, tilts, smashes, et cetera. The effects of this can vary. Sometimes the character will go in to a neutral air stance and land back on stage almost instantly, while other times the character will go in to a tumble animation.

Players who has made the effort to research Lylat Cruise have noted that the stage does tilt in a semi predictable pattern. The way in which it tilts is based on the background transformation. While the order in which these backgrounds appear are not set, the order in which the stage tilts per each background is set. In theory, a player well versed with the stage could account for these factors and accommodate accordingly. However, at least in my experience, the instances in which a character can be interrupted by the stage are not so clear. As long as the stage is tilting, there is a chance that the character can be interrupted so long as they are grounded and performing a particular action:

Of note is the effect that the tilting stage has on the fight. In addition to the obvious interference with projectiles, it can also make recovering troublesome as the ledges move back and forth. Lastly, as the stage tilts, certain attacks which physically move the fighter can end up placing the fighter in an airborne state instead of leaving them on the ground. This effect seems to be localized at the ledges and the engines, where there exist sudden height differences. Bowser's jab is notable for being particularly easy to trigger this effect with; stand on the ledge while facing the middle of the stage and use his jab as the ledge tilts up.

The way it works is that some moves in their animation shift the user on the ground a bit and the game has to correct for that movement at some point. In order to keep attackers on the ground when the stage tilts, the game has to correct as well. If you are standing on the engines (where the stage "bucks" just a bit) or right on either ledge and use such a move, the sum of the necessary corrections gets greater than the game is willing to automatically do and you pop into the air in the middle of the animation. You pop very low; on the engines you tend to be in the air for only a frame or two which pretty much just means it instantly cancels whatever you were doing to trigger the effect. On the ledges you often fall off the stage which doesn't seem very useful but does come up.

It is 100% non-random. It's just very hard to determine which moves in particular will trigger it and just how much tilt is needed per move (some moves need less tilt than others; Bowser's jab needs way less tilt than most others). It's also more often than not unhelpful for the user since it seems very easy to cancel a move before it hits, but I'm pretty sure there's some really clever stuff to be done with this by a knowledgeable player. In general I look at this as a super specific AT more than a "problem" with the stage.

The problem with this mechanic is it's exactly like Brawl tripping. We know what causes Brawl tripping. The instance in which your character dashes, you have a 1% chance to trip. Just because we know there are odds to trip does not mean we know when we'll trip, and that's the problem. It's not reasonable to tell players "just don't dash" any more than it is to tell players "don't use attacks or actions on the ground that move you." We know attacks or actions associated with movement (read: that's a lot) can be interrupted during stage tilts (read: it tilts a lot) can trigger this, but we don't know when we'll actually be interrupted.

It is also worth noting that because of the nature of how these mechanics work, Lylat discriminates against characters with ground based play while favouring characters that are able to employ more aerial styled tactics and movement.

What thoughts do people have on Lylat?

 

[ぱみゅ]

I stopped reading when you talked about the 5th starter as if it was a standard thing.
Well, not really stopped reading, but definitely stopped caring.
At least stopped caring about that one point because I don't believe in starters in the first place.
If you really want that to be discussed, we should start with defining what makes a stage "starter-worthy". So far, the only pattern to these stages is Flat+plat.


About its whole legality..... I don't know.
I have seen it, but I'm not entirely convinced it is game-breaking.

 

[Ulevo]

I stopped reading when you talked about the 5th starter as if it was a standard thing.
Well, not really stopped reading, but definitely stopped caring.
At least stopped caring about that one point because I don't believe in starters in the first place.
If you really want that to be discussed, we should start with defining what makes a stage "starter-worthy". So far, the only pattern to these stages is Flat+plat.

About its whole legality..... I don't know.
I have seen it, but I'm not entirely convinced it is game-breaking.

Would you care to elaborate on what constitutes game-breaking to you?

Also, the notable theme with starter stages is not that they're flat and have platforms, but that they are the most neutral amongst the widest variety of characters out of the given stages. Lylat is relatively flat-ish and has some platforms, but this alone does not make it congruent with the underlying theme most starters have.

 

[TheHypnotoad]

Would you care to elaborate on what constitutes game-breaking to you?

Also, the notable theme with starter stages is not that they're flat and have platforms, but that they are the most neutral amongst the widest variety of characters out of the given stages. Lylat is relatively flat-ish and has some platforms, but this alone does not make it congruent with the underlying theme most starters have.

"Neutral" is a buzzword. It doesn't mean anything. There's no such thing as a "neutral" stage. We just decide that a stage deserves to be a starter because it's bland and doesn't make stage conservative regions start crying about "muh jank". The more boring the stage is, the more likely it is to be a starter.

There are MUCH jankier stages than Lylat that have been legal. There is no reason not to have it legal at least as a counterpick.

 

[ぱみゅ]

I don't think elaborating will make much of a difference, it's an arbitrary line. If I elaborate a lot most people might still not agree with my view, and that's okay because it's an opinion afterall.
But if you want a hint of it, I'd play on Yoshi's Island, Mario Circuit and Kalos (specially Kalos).
Anyway, I'll say it again, I'm not entirely convinced of Lylat being banworthy terrible, though I'm not closed to change my opinion either.


Now, Starters are not the more neutral stages. There is no evidence that the 3-5 stages commonly listed as "starters" are more fair than the others commonly listed as "legal". The only thing they all have in common is that they are simple. I like the idea of pushing for a more dynamic starter stage though (maybe Castle Siege, too?) to help broadening the character archetypes favored in this list.

 

[cot(θ)]

I would honestly rather play on Gamer than Lylat. At least Gamer warns you before it's about to mess you up.

 

[Jaxas]

I'm going to agree with @ ぱみゅ on the "Starter/Counterpick distinction makes absolutely zero freaking sense" thing.

As for whether Lylat should be legal:
Yes? The only 'problems' with it are the ledge being hard to sweetspot (not banworthy) and the glitch that you were discussing (which you can learn when and where it happens, and watch out for... or use to your advantage).

 

[Linq]

I'd also like to point out Lylat can randomly cause Farore's Wind (and possibly other teleport moves that function similarly, but I cannot personally verify this) to move horizontally rather than vertically. This basically removes one of Zelda's best kill options, as whether it happens makes the difference between the opponent being elevatored and KO'd or teleporting off to the side and SDing.
Additionally the interruption of moves seems far too random for a character to use to their advantage. "Hey I can do unsafe move X because if he tries to punish me, the stage might interrupt him". The tilting is in effect a damaging hazard. The only difference is whether it does damage is random, and the effect would be difficult to spot by a spectator.
If the tilting did not cause these glitches, Lylat would be a great stage. However, the glitch affects almost every match played on it in some way, and thus I feel like for a true competitive environment it is not ideal. From a spectator's standpoint, however, it's amazing. Up to TO's, I guess, whether the variety and excitement it can offer is worth the salt that will inevitably accompany a loss due to these glitches.

 

[Aunt Jemima]

I don't think Lylat should be a starter, but I do think it should be legal as a counterpick. It's pretty much just that -- a counterpick. The ledges and tilting really screw some characters over, so I don't understand why it's a starter in the first place.

EDIT:

Now, Starters are not the more neutral stages. There is no evidence that the 3-5 stages commonly listed as "starters" are more fair than the others commonly listed as "legal". The only thing they all have in common is that they are simple. I like the idea of pushing for a more dynamic starter stage though (maybe Castle Siege, too?) to help broadening the character archetypes favored in this list.

Hm. Maybe it should just stay as a starter. I dunno.

 

[JmacAttack]

Doesn't matter much right now -- Evo did away with Starter/Counterpick in their Sm4sh rules altogether, and now the whole stagelist is available at the start. Striking is done 1-2-2-2-1

 

[Pazx]

Evo adopting FLSS is cool and all but it doesn't mean this isn't worth discussing.

I've seen people argue for Halberd and Skyloft to be in a 5 stage starter list, both seem valid alternatives.

 

[JmacAttack]

Evo adopting FLSS is cool and all but it doesn't mean this isn't worth discussing.

I've seen people argue for Halberd and Skyloft to be in a 5 stage starter list, both seem valid alternatives.

I agree. I like both Halberd and Skyloft way more than Lylat. Halberd especially because Ganondorf gets unique Wizard Dropkick shenanigans on Halberd's main platform. Specifically, when he lands on either of the two slopes on the main platform, the move automatically ledge-cancels and he continues to slide forward, removing the attack's ending lag and giving him a limited wavedash.

Lylat is annoying even in its Omega form.

 

[Timbers]

In rulesets with 5 starters (BF, SV, FD, T&C, Lylat), I think there's an obvious problem with it being a starter when absolutely every player strikes it immediately. I think trying to substitute Delfino in its place will have very similar results unless there's a RosaLuma ditto about to happen. I like the idea of Duck Hunt and Halberd much more. I have no experience with Skyloft so I'll reserve my opinions. I think if anything were to bother me about the stage it would be the constant changing of blastzones based on transformations, much like Delfino.

 

[Rynhardt]

I don't mind Lylat being legal, but whatever criteria is being used to determine stage legality that decided Lylat was fine while Wii Fit Studio was not is what needs to be reconsidered. I'd rather both stages be legal, over both stages being banned, over just Lylat being legal.

 

[Raijinken]

My friends and I started treating Lylat Screws as banned about two months ago. No regrets, the stage just sucks. Even when it's legal, no one likes it.

Not a fan of the starter/counterpick distinction either way, but it's certainly not starter material.

 

[Sinister Slush]

I actually got into discussion about this a few weeks ago.
http://smashboards.com/threads/san-antonio-smash-4-thread.371315/page-70#post-18723993

I stopped reading when you talked about the 5th starter as if it was a standard thing.

5 starters is usually standard now because near the end of Brawl APEX/NJ tournaments (thus most regions copying their ruleset over URC or other better stage lists) tried to push for their rules only while places like TX and such had 7 starters.
Japan only playing on 3 stages (even carrying over in Smash 4) is still bizzare to me and probably why their tier lists are vastly different than ours.

I agree. I like both Halberd and Skyloft way more than Lylat.

Dunno what else to add, but I'm against the idea of banning Lylat completely over the tilting and engines, but I'd much rather Duck Hunt over Lylat in a starter environment. I wouldn't remove Lylat and then add skyloft or halberd in replacement cause then everyone will just strike those first anyways.

Halberd has incredibly low ceiling and Skyloft, while I do like this stage, has some stage hazards in the form of terrain you can get hit by. If you want a moving stage, then just have delfino or wuhu. Both are the same with different things to them.

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

Am I the only one who legitimately likes Lylat?

Anyone claiming the stage is "random" misses the point. It's not. Are the effects essentially random, relative to the way the players play? Sure! But that's the variable we're trying to test. How the players fight, and how they react to their environment. Players are random. If that's the only randomizing factor on a stage, the stage is not random.

As for the effects... Deal with it. Learn when and how it tilts, or stop complaining when something gets interrupted. Use it to your advantage, if you're good, avoid it either way.

I love how the OP compares Rumble Falls (a vertical scrolling stage with several hazards that are incredibly dangerous and where many characters simply cannot play at all) to Lylat (a stage where in some places, in a predictable manner, the stage will cause your character to be airborne).

Also, on a side note, Lylat favors aerial play. Yeah, how many stages do that? Like, 2? Maybe 3 if we want to legalize Kongo?

 

[Sinister Slush]

I think when he said Rumble falls he meant this.

 

[cot(θ)]

As for whether Lylat should be legal:
Yes? The only 'problems' with it are the ledge being hard to sweetspot (not banworthy) and the glitch that you were discussing (which you can learn when and where it happens, and watch out for... or use to your advantage).

Are you saying you know exactly when it will happen, and can use it in a match?

Tutorial vid plz?

Edit: Just got a bad case of the hiccups. It reminds me of getting interrupted by Lylat's tilting.

 

[Amazing Ampharos]

In rulesets with 5 starters (BF, SV, FD, T&C, Lylat), I think there's an obvious problem with it being a starter when absolutely every player strikes it immediately. I think trying to substitute Delfino in its place will have very similar results unless there's a RosaLuma ditto about to happen. I like the idea of Duck Hunt and Halberd much more. I have no experience with Skyloft so I'll reserve my opinions. I think if anything were to bother me about the stage it would be the constant changing of blastzones based on transformations, much like Delfino.

I usually don't strike Lylat, and I would also usually not strike Delfino. I would always strike Duck Hunt; it really matters if on the "platforms versus no platforms" spectrum you add stages way over on the "no platforms" side when your arbitrary starter list is already really biased in that direction. Of all possible stages to be the 5th, Duck Hunt is almost literally the worst possible choice. I also know we generally don't make rules to protect the bad character, but DH also is the worst outcome for Little Mac. He already has two stages he's really, really bad on in the list (Smashville and Battlefield) while he can reasonably fight on Town & City and Final Destination. He can also reasonably fight on Lylat, Delfino, Skyloft, or even Halberd, but he cannot reasonably fight on Duck Hunt. Using Duck Hunt as a starter reverts to the same problem of 3 starters wherein this character cannot be reasonably played in game one.

I pretty well support FLSS anyway, and I don't think "it's always struck first" is a good justification for a stage not being a starter. You'll notice it's almost always the same side who "always" strikes something, and it affects the final outcome. In practice as the ruleset becomes familiar to all of the players you begin to see a lot more diversity in what stages get struck too. All too many people just agree to Smashville despite their own best interests, but when striking actually occurs which is by my estimate about half of the time, almost any stage can result.

 

[Timbers]

I would always strike Duck Hunt

why though? for you personally, isn't Duck Hunt considered to be a pretty good stage for RosaLuma? The stage also works well for most characters, and most characters aren't given a huge advantage or disadvantage. Most. I'm sure there are others (Mac) that struggle on this stage, but not nearly as much as the portion of the cast that suffers from Lylat.

I also know we generally don't make rules to protect the bad character, but DH also is the worst outcome for Little Mac. He already has two stages he's really, really bad on in the list (Smashville and Battlefield) while he can reasonably fight on Town & City and Final Destination. He can also reasonably fight on Lylat, Delfino, Skyloft, or even Halberd, but he cannot reasonably fight on Duck Hunt. Using Duck Hunt as a starter reverts to the same problem of 3 starters wherein this character cannot be reasonably played in game one.

This does bring up a good point. I'm not sure if I'm totally on board with "saving Mac" so much so to keep a stage off of starter for the sake of a character, but I have no good reasons as to why. I think BF is alright for Mac though? I've heard Macs talk about the stage not being so bad. Gives him better landing options and none of the platforms are incredibly out of reach, unlike Smashville or Kongo Jungle, or Duck Hunt..

and I don't think "it's always struck first" is a good justification for a stage not being a starter.

It wasn't so much justification as it was to point out that a gross percentage of players find the stage problematic for their own personal reasons. I'm not sure why it remains a starter when a huge portion of the community dislikes the stage enough for it to be struck permanently throughout a set.

 

[Linq]

Are you saying you know exactly when it will happen, and can use it in a match?

Tutorial vid plz?

Seconding this, if someone can provide a reliable way if determining if a move will be interrupted or when teleport moves will misfire, this would be a good stage.

 

[Amazing Ampharos]

The thumb rule for Rosa and stages is that platforms are good; she excels in vertical gameplay. IMO Battlefield is her best stage since it just pays a constant and large reward to her excellent spatial control, and she has serious Halberd shenanigans with the low ceiling. Duck Hunt isn't awful (the tree is fun, the bush is the right height, and all around she can maneuver and control a long stage better than most), but I don't really see it as any better than Town and City or Smashville for her, honestly probably a bit worse (T&C has the slight low ceiling, and Smashville's moving platform is extremely stall friendly which lets me wait out Luma respawn timers). On the other hand the platform pollution of Lylat is pretty nice, and some of my biases as a player show but I'm extremely comfortable on all of the moving stages and Skyloft/Delfino are pretty platform heavy anyway (Wuhu really isn't, but I'm at least extremely familiar with the stage). If PS2 and Kongo are legal, she can handle both of them in an above average way too I feel. I would generally avoid Siege since, while form 1 is super good for Rosa, form two is mediocre and form 3 is just about the worst possible Rosa stage you could imagine. Then again, so many players hate Siege even more than Lylat and I do know how to play on Siege so I'm more comfortable taking a risk on Siege than taking a risk on a more static stage. Other Rosalina players probably feel differently; I've seen claims that she's bad on Lylat (disagree) and I've seen Rosa players who actually like FD (also disagree). Of course, when I strike, I can only strike to the advantage of Rosalina as I understand and play her; how other Rosalinas feel doesn't really affect my needs when it's my turn to play. Duck Hunt is going to be near the bottom of my stage preferences for game one almost all of the time. I often spare it from a stage ban for various reasons, but I would really prefer not to play on Duck Hunt unless my opponent is willing to spend a counterpick to take me to it.

BF for Mac is a stage most actual Mac players seem to hate less than worst case but more than most other stages. Mac's options to approach the top platform really are very limited; I know when I'm fighting against a Mac player here and have the lead I just go to the top platform, watch for his uppercut, and punish any attempt he makes to otherwise challenge me up there. If the Mac player is just the plain better player he can muddle through this or use the old favorite tactic of "never be behind and never be forced to approach" with BF actually being pretty great for a Mac with the lead, but it's definitely an uphill battle for him overall. There's really no way for us to reasonably avoid Mac being gimmicked out on the opponent's counterpick, but the poor guy can easily be somewhat playable in game one if we don't make half of the starter list a list of stages with platforms that are just so high off the ground (FLSS, incidentally, works as well for Mac as any starter rules since Mac actually doesn't mind transforming stages in particular).

I honestly think how much most players really dislike Lylat is, if anything, a good justification for FLSS. Why have a popularity poll on stages with a clearly profound impact on balance when you can just make every legal stage a starter and let the chips fall where they may but be sure it will be in the most neutral possible way? The median preference of all legal stages is almost always pretty fair. We've locally run 13 stages for quite a while and had good results striking from that. If you run more restrictive rules and have only 9 legal stages, the striking is nearly instant anyway and I'm not sure why not. There seems to be no actual downside to striking from all of them.

 

[Johnknight1]

Fore-warning: I don't care if you, me, or anyone else likes or dislikes a stage or not when we are discuss a stages' legality.

Personal enjoyment of a stage does not matter when discussing stage legality.

//

With that said

My thoughts on Lylat Cruise as a neutral stage: It should never be even considered as a neutral stage so long as it tilts.

My thoughts on Lylat Cruise as a legal stage: It puts weaker characters (few top characters have weaker recoveries) at a disadvantage, and stronger characters (most if not all top characters have good to great recoveries) at an advantage. Lylat Cruise also has the anti-competitive impact of making players focus on something other than their opponents off the stage. It is the classic competitive Smash no-no of fighting the stage.

//

If people want competitive Smash 4 to be taken seriously and have good competitive balance, Lylat Cruise should not be legal at regionals or majors. It is as simple as that to me.

There's a reason the best regions in any Smash game have few legal stages: its' because they focus on their opponents more, and the environment is more competitive. That more competitive environment breeds an environment which allows players to go from bad to good, good to great, and great to a star easily. SoCal does that in every Smash game, and that's why they have stars in every Smash game.

//

 

[Amazing Ampharos]

There's a reason the best regions in any Smash game have few legal stages: its' because they focus on their opponents more, and the environment is more competitive. That more competitive environment breeds an environment which allows players to go from bad to good, good to great, and great to a star easily. SoCal does that in every Smash game, and that's why they have stars in every Smash game.

//

The regions with the best players simply have the highest population density. If restrictiveness of stage rules were a predictor of skill, the Japanese players would be expected to be superior to California and Atlantic North's best. History has shown that while Japan has some good players the strongest Americans tend to come out on top. As a Midwest player, I get a good chance to see a variety of tournament rules in a variety of smaller areas. The local rules by my observation have no effect whatsoever on the average skill of the local scene. What does matter, the only thing that matters, is the player density. Areas with many active and already good players are always growing stronger as their players get the best practice. Areas with only a few guys who care always fall behind regardless of local rules because those few guys have no real way to improve in a bubble.

If there's any good example that runs contrary to this, some case where population density actually poorly predicts outcomes, I would be interested to hear it. My experience has always been that it's a perfect predictor, and as a Midwest player, I can't say I'm a fan of this fact but know that my efforts to be the best player I can be are definitely running contrary to what is a legitimately large geographic disadvantage. If we could just ban most of the stages and be the strongest region, we'd probably do it, but if anything, I think our on average pretty liberal rules help us since, with it being impossible for us to play with the same frequency and intensity as the most populated areas, we need to have a deeper and more intellectual understanding of the game to compete as we can and playing in a more diverse environment helps us achieve that.

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

Lylat Cruise also has the anti-competitive impact of making players focus on something other than their opponents off the stage. It is the classic competitive Smash no-no of fighting the stage.

There is nothing inherently anti-competitive in making players focus on something other than their opponent. There is nothing inherently anti-competitive about stage movement, hazards, or the like. "Fighting the stage" is a buzzword that makes absolutely no sense unless you're talking about Pyrosphere or Wiley's.

If people want competitive Smash 4 to be taken seriously and have good competitive balance, Lylat Cruise should not be legal at regionals or majors. It is as simple as that to me.

Dude, you know what stage is super good for top tiers? Smashville. Just sayin'.

 

[Takezo]

In my opinion, the stage moved around far too much! The stage I believe can even provide damage and KO a fighter! It be very cool to see top player to face on this stage, but i feel it takes control too much of the fight. I wish to see players or fighters in majority fight eachother not the stage. o - o

 

[ParanoidDrone]

In my opinion, the stage moved around far too much! The stage I believe can even provide damage and KO a fighter! It be very cool to see top player to face on this stage, but i feel it takes control too much of the fight. I wish to see players or fighters in majority fight eachother not the stage. o - o

Are you even talking about Lylat anymore? Lylat can't damage a fighter at all, never mind kill them unless you count the ledge moving away at exactly the wrong time.

 

[Ulevo]

"Neutral" is a buzzword. It doesn't mean anything. There's no such thing as a "neutral" stage. We just decide that a stage deserves to be a starter because it's bland and doesn't make stage conservative regions start crying about "muh jank". The more boring the stage is, the more likely it is to be a starter.

There are MUCH jankier stages than Lylat that have been legal. There is no reason not to have it legal at least as a counterpick.

Neutral is not a buzzword just because people apply it to context without understanding its meaning. I said the most neutral (I even italicized it previously) because the characteristics provided by these stages, again, provide the least advantages out of all the available ones that are legal. This is not the same as saying Final Destination is neutral, and muddying that distinction isn't going to push this debate forward.

I don't think elaborating will make much of a difference, it's an arbitrary line. If I elaborate a lot most people might still not agree with my view, and that's okay because it's an opinion afterall.
But if you want a hint of it, I'd play on Yoshi's Island, Mario Circuit and Kalos (specially Kalos).
Anyway, I'll say it again, I'm not entirely convinced of Lylat being banworthy terrible, though I'm not closed to change my opinion either.

Now, Starters are not the more neutral stages. There is no evidence that the 3-5 stages commonly listed as "starters" are more fair than the others commonly listed as "legal". The only thing they all have in common is that they are simple. I like the idea of pushing for a more dynamic starter stage though (maybe Castle Siege, too?) to help broadening the character archetypes favored in this list.

It was a rhetorical question. I knew you were unlikely to elaborate because its arbitrary. The point I made by asking that question was that if you can't give a definitive argument then I do not think arbitrary rhetoric is doing anyone any favors.

I'd also heavily argue that the starters are more neutral, but I'll agree to disagree because it'd lead to an irrelevant tangent.

Doesn't matter much right now -- Evo did away with Starter/Counterpick in their Sm4sh rules altogether, and now the whole stagelist is available at the start. Striking is done 1-2-2-2-1

Yeah, I'm not doing this for EVO obviously. I'm doing it just to invoke discussion for the future.

I love how the OP compares Rumble Falls (a vertical scrolling stage with several hazards that are incredibly dangerous and where many characters simply cannot play at all) to Lylat (a stage where in some places, in a predictable manner, the stage will cause your character to be airborne).

Also, on a side note, Lylat favors aerial play. Yeah, how many stages do that? Like, 2? Maybe 3 if we want to legalize Kongo?

I have had matches where my opponent went to forward smash me as Captain Falcon, the stage tilted, it interrupted his forward smash, and I continued with my forward smash for the set. The issue here was not that we were oblivious to the stage tilt, the issue here is that I won the match when I otherwise should not have due to a stage mechanic that will whimsically decide when to interrupt a player. Just because you understand the conditions of when it will happen does not mean that it is fair, or that you will be able to control those circumstances. My opponent forward smashed me plenty of other times that game during the tilts and not once was interrupted.

Again, the comparison between Rumble Falls and Lylat was not to say they were the same, but that they share something in common; you have to fight against the stage in addition to the opponent. Sometimes even more than the opponent.

I think @ Johnknight1 emphasized a lot of the points I share. Also, @ Amazing Ampharos brings up a valid point regarding the topic of Lylat Cruise being undesirable promoting FLSS. It does not solve the discussion of whether or not Lylat should be legal for counterpick, but it would provide a solution to the starter problem with additional benefits.

The regions with the best players simply have the highest population density. If restrictiveness of stage rules were a predictor of skill, the Japanese players would be expected to be superior to California and Atlantic North's best. History has shown that while Japan has some good players the strongest Americans tend to come out on top. As a Midwest player, I get a good chance to see a variety of tournament rules in a variety of smaller areas. The local rules by my observation have no effect whatsoever on the average skill of the local scene. What does matter, the only thing that matters, is the player density. Areas with many active and already good players are always growing stronger as their players get the best practice. Areas with only a few guys who care always fall behind regardless of local rules because those few guys have no real way to improve in a bubble.

If there's any good example that runs contrary to this, some case where population density actually poorly predicts outcomes, I would be interested to hear it. My experience has always been that it's a perfect predictor, and as a Midwest player, I can't say I'm a fan of this fact but know that my efforts to be the best player I can be are definitely running contrary to what is a legitimately large geographic disadvantage. If we could just ban most of the stages and be the strongest region, we'd probably do it, but if anything, I think our on average pretty liberal rules help us since, with it being impossible for us to play with the same frequency and intensity as the most populated areas, we need to have a deeper and more intellectual understanding of the game to compete as we can and playing in a more diverse environment helps us achieve that.

I only think he was implying that the populations with the highest player skill are usually associated with the most conservative stage lists. I don't think he was insinuating that more conservative stage lists = better players, even if it sounded that way.

 

[Takezo]

?

One of us is mistaken >_o Lylat is the stage with Cornerea at its start? The Space ship? or star ship?

 

[The_Altrox]

I like Lylat well enough, but the tilt-canceling is why I keep it as a counterpick. Not enough to ban it or anything imo.

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

I have had matches where my opponent went to forward smash me as Captain Falcon, the stage tilted, it interrupted his forward smash, and I continued with my forward smash for the set.

And if he'd have known better, would it have happened? If he had adapted, would it have happened? If he had anticipated it, seen the possibility, and mashed jump to ensure that if it did mess him up, he didn't get screwed over, would it have happened? I've had Lylat rob me of Bthrows. As Pikachu, that's kind of a big deal, because offstage is where almost all my kills happen. But if I had been a better player, I would have known, and done a different throw instead. I have very little interest in "I could have adapted, but didn't" stories.

The issue here was not that we were oblivious to the stage tilt, the issue here is that I won the match when I otherwise should not have due to a stage mechanic that will whimsically decide when to interrupt a player.

To draw the most blatant parallel, when someone is saved by the smashville platform on their last stock and then comes back, nobody even considers saying, "they won the match when they otherwise should not have". It's not random - we can figure it out.

Again, the comparison between Rumble Falls and Lylat was not to say they were the same, but that they share something in common; you have to fight against the stage in addition to the opponent. Sometimes even more than the opponent.

If you're ever fighting Lylat more than your opponent, your opponent is probably playing 1122 Villager. Nah, but seriously, it's a flawed comparison. Rumble Falls had a ton of really serious problems - the chokepoint which invalidated certain characters, the speed-ups which instantly moved the gameplay from "I am fighting my opponent" to "oh god jump and try not to die", how insanely overpowered Metaknight became on the stage, et cetera. Lylat has entirely predictable tilting which simply should not be that big of a deal.

 

[ParanoidDrone]

?

One of us is mistaken >_o Lylat is the stage with Cornerea at its start? The Space ship? or star ship?

Lylat Cruise is this stage:

Spoiler: Image

Thread for further reading.

 

[Takezo]

Lylat Cruise is this stage:

Spoiler: Image

Thread for further reading.

My mistake. XD Sorry

 

[Sinister Slush]

I just wanna mention if Lylat forces people to play an aerial game like BPC stated earlier.
And then AA bringing up LM bad on Duck Hunt but good on Lylat.... It's actually the opposite cause Lylat will **** Mac over too since again, the stage conditions you to an aerial game and lol LM aerials, lol LM in the air.

 

[ParanoidDrone]

I just wanna mention if Lylat forces people to play an aerial game like BPC stated earlier.
And then AA bringing up LM bad on Duck Hunt but good on Lylat.... It's actually the opposite cause Lylat will **** Mac over too since again, the stage conditions you to an aerial game and lol LM aerials, lol LM in the air.

I think Lylat's platforms are low enough for Mac to shark with usmash though. (Not certain.)

 

[Rynhardt]

Slightly off the main topic but since it's been mentioned a few times, BF is actually a decent stage for Mac. His up smash can reach through the platforms and his up-b can reach the top platform and have him land immediately with little to no helpless falling. From experience, I find that Macs struggle on stages that can leave them behind like Delfino and Duck Hunt for obvious reasons.

 

[Sinister Slush]

Not too sure about Usmash either, but again if it conditions people to an aerial game and jump platform to platform to deliberately avoid fighting mac (ala AA using BF as an example showing he would be one of those people to force mac to fight in the air) then he still needs to guess when and where we're gonna be landing and if he should punish with UpB or smash (if he can) or be impatient and jump into the air risking his stock.

Also this is so controversial, it screws up one character mostly but he loses on almost any stage if you just manage to get him in the air or a bthrow anyways. He can be bad on literally any stage that isn't FD or omegas in theory so we can't be using him as an excuse for a stages legality in the starter or CP area. Even ganon can at least get to people on Duck Hunt's tree and Lylat his aerials are decent when thinking of Uair or bair.

 

[cot(θ)]

And if he'd have known better, would it have happened? If he had adapted, would it have happened? If he had anticipated it, seen the possibility, and mashed jump to ensure that if it did mess him up, he didn't get screwed over, would it have happened? I've had Lylat rob me of Bthrows. As Pikachu, that's kind of a big deal, because offstage is where almost all my kills happen. But if I had been a better player, I would have known, and done a different throw instead. I have very little interest in "I could have adapted, but didn't" stories.

Lylat also sometimes sends you into a tumble instead of just canceling your move. There's no way any player can tech that (it's actually probably un-techable anyway, similar to tumbling off a platform). Mashing jump isn't going to help in this case.

You can sit there and say "it's not random" for days, but unless you can actually predict when it's going to happen, it doesn't matter if it's technically deterministic.
If nobody knows when it's going to happen, it's effectively random.

I've given Lylat it's fair shake, and it's proven a failure as a legal stage. I await the tutorial video on how to predict a tilt-cancel. Until then, I will continue to play on reasonable stages like Gamer, and Orbital Gate Assault.

 

[JmacAttack]

Am I the only one who legitimately likes Lylat?

Anyone claiming the stage is "random" misses the point. It's not. Are the effects essentially random, relative to the way the players play? Sure! But that's the variable we're trying to test. How the players fight, and how they react to their environment. Players are random. If that's the only randomizing factor on a stage, the stage is not random.

As for the effects... Deal with it. Learn when and how it tilts, or stop complaining when something gets interrupted. Use it to your advantage, if you're good, avoid it either way.

I love how the OP compares Rumble Falls (a vertical scrolling stage with several hazards that are incredibly dangerous and where many characters simply cannot play at all) to Lylat (a stage where in some places, in a predictable manner, the stage will cause your character to be airborne).

Also, on a side note, Lylat favors aerial play. Yeah, how many stages do that? Like, 2? Maybe 3 if we want to legalize Kongo?

It's not that it's random, because it isn't. It's that the underside of Lylat is so easy to get stuck under that it makes offstage play very risky, as you can very easily die just trying to get back to the stage after an edgeguard attempt. The leaning and slopes on the ledges can also cause attacks like Wizard Dropkick, Flame Choke, and Raptor Boost to act very strangely. The person on the high ground actually has the disadvantage, because their sideways attacks will still move sideways, potentially over the person below them, and if those attacks cause them to fall helpless in midair, they will, and will have no chance to get back to the stage. This might not be random, but it can make people hesitate to press an advantage they might have otherwise had because there's no way to adequately prepare for it all the time.

Also, no, it does not favor aerial play. Town and City favors aerial play. Lylat really doesn't -- it has so many platforms that aerial approaches are impossible, and the platforms are only useful for extending combos that were started on the stage below it. Its platforms are so close together, and all at the exact same height, all very close to the ground, that they end up doing the opposite of what platforms do on most other stages. Lylat feels more like everyone's permanently on the red airplane on Pilotwings, except without the barrier in the middle.

In short, Lylat Cruise is a stage you counterpick because you're betting its shenanigans might cause your opponent to SD while trying to press an advantage they might have had anywhere else, not because your character does well on it. It's a stressful stage for everyone involved and dissuades aggression. Its only redeeming quality is the music.