CRITERIA for legal stages...

[dav3yb]

First of all, this is not another stage listing thread, so please don't comment on specific stages unless it is for the purposes of examples.

With that out of the way, I thought I'd broaden the topic of stages for Ultimate. With there being a potentially large list of stages that could fall under "tournament viable," I figured I'd shift the discussion off of individual stages, and onto the characteristics of the stages that make them viable. I think this early in the games life, since all we have is the E3 demo, I feel like a broad topic would be more helpful in the long run, since most, if not all, of what is discussed here should be applicable to any stage, whether we've seen it or not.

To start off, I'll just state some of the obvious criteria that prevent a stage from being legal:

1. Permanent Walk-offs; Stages that retain a walk-off during the entire match should not be legal. These lead to camping near the edge in an attempt to get VERY early kills by throwing someone into the blast zone. This would include stages like Colosseum, Shusaku's Castle, or Wii Fit stage.
2. Permanent Hazardous Surfaces; Stages that have moving ground or area's of Lava-type hazards should not be legal. Stages such as Spirit Tracks or Big Blue.
3. Permanent Caves of Life; These would be stages that have a permanent area where a player can attempt to center the fighting around aid in saying alive longer. Hyrule Temple, and the cavern section of Spear Pillar. We might need to discuss non-permanent caves of life later. Stages with destructible caves of life will probably need to be discussed separately and in more detail.
4. Stages with deadly hazards; Stages that contain a hazard that is particularly deadly to a player without needing any input from the opponent, or can greatly sway the outcome of a match, should not be legal. Various Mario Kart stages/Onett/Mute City, Jungles Japes or Kongo Falls' Klaptrap, Or the Bullet Bill on Peaches Castle.
5. Stages that are needlessly large in size; Stages that are far too big for 1v1 setting should not be legal. These stages can lead to faster characters playing a game of keep away with slower characters, leading to situations where the slower character simply cannot get close enough to the faster to properly engage them. Stages like Hyrule Temple, New Pork City, and Big Battlefield.
6. Stages that do not have a consistent layout from game-to-game; There is really only 1 stage that I know of that falls under this, and it's Mario Maker. Every time the stage is chosen, it has a layout chosen from what I assume is a randomized list of layouts.
7. Stages with AI/Boss Characters; Stages that contain additional fighters/characters not controlled by a player should not be legal. Stages like Pyrosphere with Ridley, Magicant with Flying Men, or Willy's Castles Yellow Devil.
8. Stages with Alternate Win Conditions; Stages that have players kill their opponent in a way different from knocking them into blast zones should not be legal. This is mainly on a stage like Great Cave Offensive, where it's hazardous surfaces will kill a player > or = to 100%.
9. ????????????? Any other's worth adding in? I'm sure i've missed some, so please chime in with some reasoning and examples, and I'll add them in here.

Some Criteria that might need more discussion or testing:

1. Stages with mid-stage pits/holes; These would be stages like Saffron City, where there are tall buildings, and gaps between that characters can fall through. These might be too oppressive to characters such as Ness/Lucas due to their recoveries, or too advantageous to characters that can wall jump up the sides. A stage like Green Greens would probably not fall under this, due to it just having holes through a floating platform, so it would not interfere much with recoveries.
2. Temporary or Destructible Caves of Life; As stated above, Caves of Life are generally going to get a stage banned, even if they are temporary. But some people have voiced some interest in testing out stages, such as Great Plateau, to see how much they will actually effect gameplay.
3. Stages with "Campable" areas; Stages that in the past that have not been legal due to certain area's of the stage being deemed "too power" for camping/stalling might need additional testing this time around. Stages like Kongo Falls has a small rock protruding on one side, which might make it too hard to approach. Also stages like Hyrule Castle with it's high narrow platforms have been used in the past to hold position when at an advantage. The mechanical changes in ultimate might reduce the effectiveness of area's like this.

Again, please don't discuss specific stages unless it is in the context of a characteristic that would make them illegal for tournament play. Also please consider if any examples you might give that could be interpreted differently by other players (this would include using obscure terms like "jank" to describe certain aspects of a stage).

My goal for this thread is to come up with a list that we can apply to the game when it comes out and we know all of the stages, and be able to at least quickly come up with a list of stages that, on paper, should be "viable" for tournaments. Again, discussing specific stages should be kept to a minimum if at all.

Any discussion about specific stages should be directed here: https://smashboards.com/threads/discussion-of-stage-legality-in-smash-bros-ultimate.455486/

Any discussion about stage hazards and how the toggle alter's the stage should be directed here: https://smashboards.com/threads/stage-changes-when-hazard-toggle-is-on.456624/

 

[DarthEnderX]

Just play everything on Battlefield mode...

 

[dav3yb]

Just play everything on Battlefield mode...

Well i probably won't be adding the "Is not battlefield" criteria to the list, but i do feel like some people would think like this. They give you omega and battlefield mode, so just use those!

 

[OhMyBanana54]

So how about “promotes offensive play?” It’s a bit general but it’s also the reason why we banned Kongo Jungle 64, Jungle Japes and Duck Hunt. Their layouts are lame and promote stalling. Halberd and Pilotwings were also banned because it allowed specific characters to shark without being punished. Walk-offs and Large Stages also fell into this category.

Now here’s a discussion topic: do damaging hazards necessitate a ban? Personally I think so but what do you guys say?

 

[Untouch]

Some stages in brawl were banned due to sharking, but I think that was mostly just metaknight, and that no smash 4 or ultimate character really had the ability to exploit it too much.

 

[OhMyBanana54]

Some stages in brawl were banned due to sharking, but I think that was mostly just metaknight, and that no smash 4 or ultimate character really had the ability to exploit it too much.

Oh yeah I personally don’t want halberd banned I was just using it as an example of a stage promoting lame playstyles.

 

[dav3yb]

So how about “promotes offensive play?” It’s a bit general but it’s also the reason why we banned Kongo Jungle 64, Jungle Japes and Duck Hunt. Their layouts are lame and promote stalling. Halberd and Pilotwings were also banned because it allowed specific characters to shark without being punished. Walk-offs and Large Stages also fell into this category.

Now here’s a discussion topic: do damaging hazards necessitate a ban? Personally I think so but what do you guys say?

I feel like "promotes offensive play" might be a bit too open ended for a criteria. Some characters play a really defensive/zoning style, like villager or duck hunt dog, so what specifically about a stage would make it inherently offensive or defense? We also don't know exactly how all of the balance changes will effect all of the characters, and how each will play on various stages. With the design of ultimate looking like it's trying to limit defensive options, i'd be hesitant to say a stage isn't viable right now due to what I would consider incomplete information.

As far as damaging hazards go, ideally you would not want them around, but in some cases I could see them not being too big an issue. Like the rock that would occasionally pass by on the top corner of Skyloft, which doesn't really come into play very often.

 

[Untouch]

Also, stages with pits that really hurt lucas/ness and give characters will wall jumps really good recovery options.

 

[dav3yb]

Also, stages with pits that really hurt lucas/ness and give characters will wall jumps really good recovery options.

I've added a 2nd section for criteria that might need to be tested some more, but in general will probably hurt a stages chance at viability.

 

[Fell God]

As long as Pokémon Stadium 1 is legal, I'm happy. In all honesty though I would like to see a slightly more liberal legal stages list in Ultimate, I would hate to see stages banned just for the sake of keeping the legal stage list small.

 

[dav3yb]

As long as Pokémon Stadium 1 is legal, I'm happy. In all honesty though I would like to see a slightly more liberal legal stages list in Ultimate, I would hate to see stages banned just for the sake of keeping the legal stage list small.

This is part of why I decided to shift stage discussion over to specific criteria instead of individual stages. I think most people can agree that the criteria listed above would kill a stages chances of being considered "legal." But by focusing on these elements of stages, it should be easier to look at the list, and say "this stage doesn't have any of these issues, who why would you ban it?" I'm hoping to keep a decent sized list as well.

One thing is for damn sure, Ultimate should have a larger legal stage list than ANY other smash game before it.

I'll keep my specific comments about Pokemon Stadium to myself since I'd be contradicting the guidelines for my own thread, but I'll just say it's viability in it's transforming state probably has more to do with how easily accessible the hazard toggle is.

 

[PoptartLord]

Some of those "obvious criteria" aren't so cut and dry. Allow me to expand on a few:

Permanent Walk-offs: For the most part yes, I'm right there with you on this one. There is one case that should go in the "needs more testing" section - ramps leading up to the blastzone. This is mostly due to how the incline affects grab threat range. Grab hitboxes are in front and either towards the middle or top of the character, but approaching characters are below you. This is especially problematic for tether grabs, since those go straight out (and over opponents heads). Not only is it harder to sit in shield + grab, but it's easier to be attacked and harder to counterattack. An approaching enemy could use a retreating aerial to poke said camper and not be in grab range during endlag. Even better, characters with reach could jab/f-tilt/up-tilt from outside of grab range. One last hardship for grab fishers is that, depending on the characters and launch angles, it's possible to tech the throw. [All observations were made while playing lots of matches on Yoshi's Island]

Permanent Caves of Life: I'm not arguing that caves are bad. I'm concerned with things I've seen be called caves that really aren't. Specifically, a floor + a hard ceiling != a cave. I've even heard a stick in Garden of Hope be called a cave... If an opponent tries to hide under a hard ceiling to live longer the solution is to launch them horizontally (after racking up vertically-enduced damage on them). Something cannot be a cave unless the vertical and horizontal have hard/techable surfaces.

Stages with Deadly Hazards: This is a huge umbrella term that definitely needs to be considered on a stage-by-stage basis. First, there's levels of deadly. There's quite the difference between 10% with the knockback of a tilt and a kills-at-50% explosion. Then there's how much time you're given to react. Anything unreactably fast or without warning, such as the horizontally traveling cars in Port Town Aero Dive is a no-go, but something you can see coming 5-10 seconds away packs much less of a punch. Finally, there's how well you can use the hazard to pressure the opponent. This has led to some rather bold gameplay in my experience.

Stages that do not have a consistent layout from game-to-game: I see this as more of a test of adaptability and how well you know your and your opponents characters. On the fly you will have to recognize distinct stage elements and how best to use or avoid them.


To add to the discussion of pits, why is it so bad that it's too advantageous to characters with wall jumps (or "too" to begin with)? The only way to repeatedly wall jump, assuming you get more than one (I honestly can't recall), is if the sides are very close together. The only way to get all the way down there is if you were spiked right over the hole. That is a really niche advantage.

There was also talk of excessive sharking. Has that been a thing since Smash 4 where ledge re-grabs do not give invincibility, thus making the attempt extremely punishable?

 

[dav3yb]

Permanent Walk-offs: For the most part yes, I'm right there with you on this one. There is one case that should go in the "needs more testing" section - ramps leading up to the blastzone. This is mostly due to how the incline affects grab threat range. Grab hitboxes are in front and either towards the middle or top of the character, but approaching characters are below you. This is especially problematic for tether grabs, since those go straight out (and over opponents heads). Not only is it harder to sit in shield + grab, but it's easier to be attacked and harder to counterattack. An approaching enemy could use a retreating aerial to poke said camper and not be in grab range during endlag. Even better, characters with reach could jab/f-tilt/up-tilt from outside of grab range. One last hardship for grab fishers is that, depending on the characters and launch angles, it's possible to tech the throw. [All observations were made while playing lots of matches on Yoshi's Island]

In this case i'd ask for an example of a walk-off stage that has these potential qualities that might lend itself to being legal. I just don't see any case for walk-offs.

Permanent Caves of Life: I'm not arguing that caves are bad. I'm concerned with things I've seen be called caves that really aren't. Specifically, a floor + a hard ceiling != a cave. I've even heard a stick in Garden of Hope be called a cave... If an opponent tries to hide under a hard ceiling to live longer the solution is to launch them horizontally (after racking up vertically-enduced damage on them). Something cannot be a cave unless the vertical and horizontal have hard/techable surfaces.

In this case, a cave is a large cavern, not some short piece of ceiling or a branch of a tree. Perhaps an area that a weaker player would try and draw and focus the fighting around in an attempt to save alive longer than normal.

Stages with Deadly Hazards: This is a huge umbrella term that definitely needs to be considered on a stage-by-stage basis. First, there's levels of deadly. There's quite the difference between 10% with the knockback of a tilt and a kills-at-50% explosion. Then there's how much time you're given to react. Anything unreactably fast or without warning, such as the horizontally traveling cars in Port Town Aero Dive is a no-go, but something you can see coming 5-10 seconds away packs much less of a punch. Finally, there's how well you can use the hazard to pressure the opponent. This has led to some rather bold gameplay in my experience.

Although there are a lot of stage hazards that are well telegraphed, overall, they just don't lend themselves well to competitive play. And I feel like i narrowed it down pretty well by the examples i gave.

Stages that do not have a consistent layout from game-to-game: I see this as more of a test of adaptability and how well you know your and your opponents characters. On the fly you will have to recognize distinct stage elements and how best to use or avoid them.

If you can give an example of a stage that doesn't have a consistent layout from game-to-game that isn't mario maker, im all ears. This would be like if you picked battlefield expecting the standard triple platform layout, but instead got 2 platforms off the side and one under the level, and then one where BF was cut in half and there was a 3 platforms stacked on the right side of the stage all in a line. No one in their right mind would go to it if they couldn't accurately predict how the stage would act.

To add to the discussion of pits, why is it so bad that it's too advantageous to characters with wall jumps (or "too" to begin with)? The only way to repeatedly wall jump, assuming you get more than one (I honestly can't recall), is if the sides are very close together. The only way to get all the way down there is if you were spiked right over the hole. That is a really niche advantage.

A lot of this depends on how the wall jumps act in this game, which hasn't been fully explored yet, which is why it's under needs more testing.

There was also talk of excessive sharking. Has that been a thing since Smash 4 where ledge re-grabs do not give invincibility, thus making the attempt extremely punishable?

This was mainly an issue with Metanight in brawl, and i have yet to see it being a real issue in smash 4.

 

[PoptartLord]

But... but you said no specific stage discussion! I'll do it since you insist, but I'm throwing it in a spoiler tag so nobody accidentally reads it.

Spoiler: Nobody else click this, I guess

Off the top of my head I know Yoshi's Island and Distant Planet have a permanent walk-off ramp. Both are steep enough to interfere with backthrow fishing as described, which is the main reason why permanent walk-offs are bad.

We both know what a cave is and why they're bad, and since they were brought up I saw an opportunity to clear something up. I have repeatedly heard any single hard surface been called a cave of life, and from several sources (at tournaments and on forums). As in one hard surface -> cave of life -> automatically not legal regardless of the rest of the stage. That's who my rant was aimed at. Examples include Gamer (overhead blocks), Garden of Hope (sticks), Peach's Castle Melee (protruding rooftop), and some transformations / stops on transforming/moving stages (Skyloft).

You put out your stance on hazards (as "obvious criteria") and there's an extent to which I disagree (yes, even at least one from your list). I see competitive value in being able to pressure your opponent using the environment, especially if they're infrequent and telegraphed elements. Delving any further is way out of scope for this thread; there's better places for that.

The main point of my pits + wall jump statement was challenging using "it's too advantageous for characters with wall jumps" as a potential reason for a stage not being legal. Let's say it's true and you can repeatedly wall jump out of a pit, then it's a point for characters with said movement option to prefer that stage a little more. I don't know about you, but if I saw an opponent doing that I'd get down there and spike them. Why would anyone even entertain the idea of finally having a use case for wall jumps, regardless how niche, against a stage?
On a related note, I'm also against using a weakness of Ness+Lucas's recoveries as reasons against stage legality. The only ways to get them down narrow pits are to either hit them out of their second jump with incredible launch trajectory aim + opportunity or to spike them while over the pit. In any case you forcibly put them into a very specific bad position but somehow that's the stage's fault.

 

[dav3yb]

But... but you said no specific stage discussion! I'll do it since you insist, but I'm throwing it in a spoiler tag so nobody accidentally reads it.

I also said examples are fine to give. But those you gave have other issues as well.

So are you saying if a stage with walk-offs has a steep enough angel on them, they should be at least tested?

 

[Fell God]

Yoshi's Island seems too cramped, but Distant Planet could work, at least with hazards off. Really depends on just how liberal the community wants to be.

 

[PoptartLord]

Basically, yes. As long as its an incline. If for some reason a stage has a ramp going down to a blastzone that's even worse than normal. Not that such a stage exists yet.

Here's potentially one more for the list: NPCs (or Boss Monsters, if you prefer). They essentially add another combatant to the field. Some even join a player's team when defeated leading to 2v1 situations. While this could fall under Deadly Hazards none of these were listed as examples. Also, there should probably be a severity condition in there somewhere. The guy in Mushroom Kingdom U is really forgettable. I guess that makes this fall under "Needs more testing"? Eh, up to you.

 

[aarchak]

With the temporary/destructible cave thing, it could turn out that the hazardless version may get banned while the normal one stays counterpick (for example, Great Plateau). Unlikely, but still possible under this ruleset if we say destuctible caves are good. Just found that interesting.

 

[Nintendotard]

Jungles Japes or Kongo Falls' Klaptrap

We can turn of stage hazards now though, so would Japes at least be legal?

 

[Fell God]

We can turn of stage hazards now though, so would Japes at least be legal?

As long as the current from the river is removed when hazardless, I think it should at least be given a chance.

 

[Nintendotard]

As long as the current from the river is removed when hazardless, I think it should at least be given a chance.

oh my bad, I'm thinking Kongo Jungle

 

[Fell God]

oh my bad, I'm thinking Kongo Jungle

In the case of that one, the only real determining factor in it being legal is the lone rock platform. It can be a powerful camping spot, but I'd like the stage to be legal regardless, unless it proves to be extremely problematic.

 

[dav3yb]

In the case of that one, the only real determining factor in it being legal is the lone rock platform. It can be a powerful camping spot, but I'd like the stage to be legal regardless, unless it proves to be extremely problematic.

The idea of a "powerful camping spot" will need to be tested more. We don't know fully how the overall mechanical changes of the games will effect stages with elements like this.

Here's potentially one more for the list: NPCs (or Boss Monsters, if you prefer).

Added it to the list, as they can be a bit more swingy than just a single damaging hazard at times.

 

[PoptartLord]

I've thought up one more for your list:

Stages with Alternate Win Conditions: The standard win condition for Smash is for the opponent to hit a blastzone. I can't avoid using an example here, but Great Cave Offensive is designed so that you win by knocking a damaged opponent into a hazard. Yes, GCO also has a size issue, but even if it were more traditionally sized this design philosophy would disqualify it.

Spoiler: Stage specific stuff

Don't get me wrong, Great Cave Offensive is a really fun stage when everybody actually interacts with each other instead of running away constantly, but as a competitive tournament stage it's a no-go.

 

[dav3yb]

I've thought up one more for your list:

Stages with Alternate Win Conditions: The standard win condition for Smash is for the opponent to hit a blastzone. I can't avoid using an example here, but Great Cave Offensive is designed so that you win by knocking a damaged opponent into a hazard. Yes, GCO also has a size issue, but even if it were more traditionally sized this design philosophy would disqualify it.

Spoiler: Stage specific stuff

Don't get me wrong, Great Cave Offensive is a really fun stage when everybody actually interacts with each other instead of running away constantly, but as a competitive tournament stage it's a no-go.

I feel like this might be pretty well covered both by hazardous surfaces, and deadly hazards. Much like you said, GCO seems to really be the only stage with it's particular properties, so I'm not sure if listing a specific criteria just for it would be needed much. Although it might be warranted. The main reason I included non-consistent layout criteria was for mario maker, which i could easily see returning in ultimate. I'll probably stick it somewhere though.

 

[smashingDoug]

I think stages with caves of life should be up to the players to agree om if they want to play on it,

 

[infomon]

Smash loves to challenge any "hard rule" you could set up like this. But I think this is a great start, thanks for setting it up!

Permanent Hazardous Surfaces; Stages that have moving ground or area's of Lava-type hazards should not be legal. Stages such as Spirit Tracks or Big Blue.

I don't like those elements, but I also don't see them as breaking competition. The better player will win, no? This is maybe just a simple type of "alternate win condition" where the gameplay is a bit different (eg. no bottom blast zone) but it's still fundamentally a valid smash competition.

Permanent Caves of Life; These would be stages that have a permanent area where a player can attempt to center the fighting around aid in saying alive longer.

Agreed, but let's all be careful to separate "cave of life" vs. "permanent hard ceiling which is not a cave". If a stage has a ceiling, we'll need to experiment to see if it's actually game-breaking or if it's easy enough to stop the opponent from teching repeatedly. A position of modest advantage is fine... but I'm worried we'll end up fighting about borderline cases.

Stages with deadly hazards; Stages that contain a hazard that is particularly deadly to a player without needing any input from the opponent, or can greatly sway the outcome of a match, should not be legal. Various Mario Kart stages/Onett/Mute City, Jungles Japes or Kongo Falls' Klaptrap, Or the Bullet Bill on Peaches Castle.

Agreed, but if the opponent can see it far enough in advance and avoid it easy enough, then it might be fine. I love outsmarting opponents by trapping them against planned, fair hazards.

Stages that do not have a consistent layout from game-to-game

IIRC, Pictochat (Brawl) had only a few pre-set hazard rotations; after the first one or two hazards, you know which sequence it is and can predict all the next transforms. People at my smashfests did that and used it to their advantage. It's not a mechanic I like, but if it's modest enough then it can be fine.