Discussion of Stage Legality in Smash Bros. Ultimate

[Fell God]

So How do you guys feel about utilizing stage merging as a means to solve the "game 1" problem for a lot of our alternative stage selection methods.
so instead of relying on random, RPG, or super long strike/ban phase we instead just allow both players to pick the preferred "neutral stage", whichever stage they are most comfortable with and simply have the stage merge form one another throughout game 1.

while unorthodox, it's fair, not random, completely predictable and gives both players the opportunity to create the most advantageous position they want for game one.

consider this scenario: Yoshi vs villager, its game one and were both picking our neutral stages. Villager picks final destination since it allows him to use his projectiles more efficiantly, Yoshi picks Battlefield since the platforms would help him get around Villagers projectiles along with his combo game.

Now more imagine an 8 min competitive game whereas Battlefield and Final destination are swapped between each other every say 2 min.

The game no longer becomes who can thrive on the best "neutral stage" or who wins the most at RPS or wins the game of pick/ban

Now the game is purely a struggle between advantage and adaptation, the best players being the ones capable of utilizing their short window of advantage to the fullest while also adapting to their opponent's advantage once the stage merger takes place.

I'm really interested to see how a serious competitive game would be approached with stage merger activated.

I think it can work, but I'm interested to see how it can work for the...zanier legal stages. Pokemon Stadium 1 and Frigate Orpheon, for example, would certainly be an interesting duo, if potentially a bit too unpredictable.

 

[Lhautlow]

Hey guys, one of my mates on a french discord had this idea :
Let's classify each and every maps in families, then you'll ban a family of map.
RPS -> Winner ban's 1 family, loser bans 2 families, winner choses.
Dreamland, BF, Yoshi island melee, and FoD would be in one single family for example.

Delfino, prism tower halberd in one other

Yoshi story brawl and smashville would be in there own.

Frigate, willy's castle, FD in an other one.
I think it's a great idea, and in some specific cases, if you can't put them in a family then they'll become CP (such as stadium 1 morph on)

 

[Frihetsanka]

Seems it's been confirmed that the stage hazards toggle is in Rule Settings (although perhaps there will be other ways to access it later on, such as with a button press). This, I believe, means that we should probably stick to either always stage hazards on or always stage hazards off. A combination of the two would be bothersome in tournaments.

 

[dav3yb]

Hey guys, one of my mates on a french discord had this idea :
Let's classify each and every maps in families, then you'll ban a family of map.
RPS -> Winner ban's 1 family, loser bans 2 families, winner choses.
Dreamland, BF, Yoshi island melee, and FoD would be in one single family for example.

Delfino, prism tower halberd in one other

Yoshi story brawl and smashville would be in there own.

Frigate, willy's castle, FD in an other one.
I think it's a great idea, and in some specific cases, if you can't put them in a family then they'll become CP (such as stadium 1 morph on)

This is very similar to the "grouping" idea that has been thrown around in the past. although I don't much see a point in sticking all of the flat stages together, and all of the tri-platform stages together. At that point you just seem to be banning BF or FD, or any stage that travels. Here's where I originally put out the idea of grouping and how I imaged it would work when smash 4 had a larger stage list (https://smashboards.com/threads/stage-legality-discussion-thread.401784/page-19#post-19893651)

 

[DtJ Glyphmoney]

That said however, we're obviously not going to get anywhere by pushing rulesets down people's throats, especially ones which conflict with the way Smash has been played in recent years. But at that point, should we have a stake in trying to suggest concepts to sway community mentality at all? Perhaps the best course of action then would be to do nothing and let the community stabilize itself by simply sticking to what it's comfortable to. It's a lazy mentality, sure, but if this is what the majority of the Smash community adheres to, doesn't that technically make it a good thing?

We Smashboards theorizers can prattle on and on about how much potential Ultimate has in switching up its ruleset to something brand new while still being competitively viable, but it's likely the opposite of what the community at large would end up preferring. What then, is the solution? Should we attempt to convince the public that playing the way they're used to isn't the best for the meta? Should we separate ourselves and form a splinter community? Is the Smash community in its current state even worth "saving" at this point? Because considering how different these two mentalities are, I'm not sure if compromise is even an option anymore.

This is a super relevant point, but thankfully one I have an answer for. And that is a resounding 'maybe'.

Seriously though, it comes down to why we're doing this in the first place. If we don't have these conversations, we cannot assume someone else will have them for us. I've been pretty clear that while I like the ideas, I find many of them unlikely to get off the ground as is. That's not because I'm some nasty internet troll, it's because that's how ideas improve. Instead of pitching something that almost certainly gets brushed off as too extreme, we can find something that has the best qualities of these new ideas while still appealing to the tastes of the old watch. And we're getting there! I love the talk about stage switching, and I can see from the replies that I'm not the only one. Just a matter of hitting the right balance on everything else too lol.

Starry eyed idealist would be arguing to have hazards on as often as possible and play on every last stage that is not 100% provably broken (like we wouldn't play on Temple but we would play on Bridge of Eldin). That would be the absolute maximum of diversity in terms of stage selection, it would have probably around 80 legal stages, and it would probably not be the best game.

I'm afraid not man. Pushing for those stages would make you a lunatic, not an idealist. Hyperbole aside, remember that you're pushing for these stages in the face of, by your own admission, decades of progress going in the other direction. Not just one time, but in every major Smash game we've got. You put these ideas out there with very powerful language behind them, using rhetoric like how it is a failure to have come to this or how it is stupid to let these stages go to waste, and yet time and time again the community at large has rejected that notion. If that doesn't qualify you as an idealist, I don't know what else would.

And again, and I feel like I'm a broken record at this point, I agree with you. But I'm can't throw my support behind a system that I don't believe properly considers the target audience.

I'm saying we should play on all of the stages that are generally:

Not permanent walk-offs
Not hard loops
Not true camping stages
Not insanely large
Not hazardous even with hazards off
Not possessing obviously stupid/degenerate geography

Singling this out because it's about as quality criteria for stages as I've seen thus far and we should prob adhere to this exactly. I'm referring to using them for counterpicks of course, but the core idea remains sound regardless of our positions. It does raise some questions about the 'obviously stupid/degenerate geography' however, as that's pretty subjective.

Take Norfair, for example. The massive increase in ledges and unconventional layout certainly would be enough for many people to classify it as degenerate, but it's hard to say if that's the position that most people will have. I'm starting to think maybe a poll, assuming we could get it into enough people's hands, would be a good way to tackle these problematic stages.

That's actually really tame. Depending on the exact dynamics of things we can't know without the game in our hands, it's probably between 30 and 40 stages in Ultimate. It's actually what my region has been inclined to do in the past for every smash game just with smaller total numbers because past smash games didn't have a hazard toggle or 103 stages so I'm not even just speaking for online warriors here. I know real tournament players want stuff like this because I know real tournament players who do want stuff like this, and I don't think it's just something in our midwestern water since if you get down to it people are the same no matter where you go. And like really. Just watch like any random stream and you'll see the flood of comments about playing on the same couple of stages just over and over. Just talk to people and they'll say the same; it gets really stale. By and large this status quo has been accepted before largely because of sympathies for various problems here and there with these various stages and an underlying dislike for the disruptiveness of hazards, but with hazards off that's not going to be an issue anymore.

This is a poor argument. You can't point at your local scene and say 'people are the same everywhere', that's literally never the case on almost any subject matter ever. Nor have I ever seen a flood of comments complaining about stages, but that could just be because my personal local scene of MDVA doesn't complain about the stages. They're much more on the side of the kind of people who complained about all the stages that are now gone, hell a lot of them still want Lylat axed.

I think you're letting your logic be clouded by your biases here man.

And like honestly, I don't see how a starting position of "we shouldn't automatically ban 90% or more of a game's stages regardless of the quality of the stages just to have a small number" is anything but a common sense position. The small number itself is the most hated aspect of our current rules; why would we gut the game's content to preserve that? The only reason it would happen is if the people running tournaments aren't given what they can understand as reasonable alternatives. I'm all about being practical. Accepting things being the worst possible way they can be isn't being practical. It's being cynical, and while sure there's plenty to be cynical about (we all saw those grand finals for 4 at EVO), it shouldn't be our starting point of just assuming the worst of everyone. I'm pushing for this not just because I think it makes the best game, though I do believe that. I'm pushing for this because I honestly believe the majority of the competitive community wants it, just that many of them aren't vocal and won't have their desires heard if not for someone like me being loud. It's harder with so much of the community being insular, but we're still a community, and ideas can spread.

Fair enough man, truly I can't say I know that the competitive community will go one way or the other. I would love love love to see the stagelist bloom, but what we DO know is exactly what the competitive community has done. Three times now. Could well be that it was just a vocal minority that has successfully pushed the stagelist down each time, but even then, what's to stop them from repeating that same process here?

Well, us.

Your head is the right spot at the end there, and your being loud is exactly what your argument needs. It's a voice that I think deserves to be heard. Just not the only voice I think that holds that merit. It needs to be presented with other ideas alongside it, and let the competitive community choose to follow one or the other. For now, this talk is great for Smashboards too as these concepts are still in their infancy. But pretty soon, we're going to have to really start pushing this on social media to have any real chance of catching on. I'd like to draft a reddit post with your help following the debate on Friday (which I really hope you'll be attending since you've got the best representation of these ideas), and we'll see where things go from there!

 

[blackghost]

if you havent heard complaints about the state of smash 4 stage list, you aren't looking fo rit or paying attention. we have had consecutive smash games where entire tournaments (no exaggeration) are played on one stage. even in smash 4 where the absolute dumbest stuff can happen on smashville/bayoville/shiekville.

im with Amazing Ampharos the counterpick system is broken. i can personally say i have never had to play a game with my main in tournament play on FD in over a year. I have not played on lylat in at least 2 months. This shouldn't be possible. If you want to be the best player in smash ultimate we should have a system in place where the best player can get by with no demonstrated stage knowledge or application of a CP stage. and we have reached that point every time in smash games.

I personally think the reason the counter pick system fell apart is the idea that players think they should be able to strike down to just one stage in games 2-5.. Your opponent is CP because you are winning, controlling the match while ahead is not what CP is to be used for.striking should just be one stage removed from the possible list IMO.

repeating the same thing over and over and expecting a different result is insanity. We are not doing this again. I'm hopeful on stage morphing two prominent voices in Nairo and ESAM will support it. I expect zero to oppose it. step one: is get morphing legal step 2: figure out what an appropriate timer for the switch is.

also please lets not use strawman fear-based arguments against stage morphing. "what if the stage morphing saves someone during recovery" if someone can take advantage of the stage shifting i want to see it. Its not a random shift, it is completely known in advance, adding mechanics raises skill ceiling and lowers skill floor, it elevates students of the game, it embraces the game, and it visually interesting to watch.
I dont want a smash 4 situation where a mechanic get sidleined because community comfort came first. People will learn.

 

[ParanoidDrone]

im with Amazing Ampharos the counterpick system is broken. i can personally say i have never had to play a game with my main in tournament play on FD in over a year. I have not played on lylat in at least 2 months. This shouldn't be possible. If you want to be the best player in smash ultimate we should have a system in place where the best player can get by with no demonstrated stage knowledge or application of a CP stage. and we have reached that point every time in smash games.

I think you accidentally a word at the end there or something, it sounds like you're saying top level players winning with no CP stage knowledge is a good (or at least acceptable) thing which is pretty much the opposite of everything else you're saying.

At the risk of beating a dead horse, there's a lot of stages that are already legal in other titles, a lot more stages that have nothing objectionable about them with hazards turned off, and even more stages beyond that which may or may not work out but at least have their worst flaws fixed with hazards turned off. I might break down my thoughts on this per-stage later if I remember.

 

[Untouch]

We can't ban an entire mechanic because it may help people recover. Otherwise Yoshi's Island in brawl and melee would have to be banned too, the ghosts and randall are exactly that.

 

[DtJ Glyphmoney]

if you havent heard complaints about the state of smash 4 stage list, you aren't looking fo rit or paying attention. we have had consecutive smash games where entire tournaments (no exaggeration) are played on one stage. even in smash 4 where the absolute dumbest stuff can happen on smashville/bayoville/shiekville.

I did not mean to give you the impression that I did not think there was zero dissent about the stagelist. I myself believe that it's gotten insanely stale. I just don't see that conversation happening around me at all. True, I haven't gone looking for it either, but where do you even go to find something like that these days?

also please lets not use strawman fear-based arguments against stage morphing. "what if the stage morphing saves someone during recovery" if someone can take advantage of the stage shifting i want to see it. Its not a random shift, it is completely known in advance, adding mechanics raises skill ceiling and lowers skill floor, it elevates students of the game, it embraces the game, and it visually interesting to watch.
I dont want a smash 4 situation where a mechanic get sidleined because community comfort came first. People will learn.

Just had a conversation with someone on twitch who claimed that several prominent community figures were already coming out against it, citing something like it messing up ledges while it transforms or something along those lines. I 100% agree with you, but if we want to make that happen we're going to need to make a push for it sooner than later before public opinion sets up against it.

He also mentioned a smashboards blog where several community members like Kurogane talked about their stances on the issues, but I can't find that anywhere. That ring a bell for anyone? Would def be an important read to go over.

EDIT: Did see this, very relevant to us. Hopefully doesn't carry over to the final version, or stage morph might be dead before it ever got started

https://twitter.com/KuroganeHammer/status/1027388955518361601

I'm rewatching the direct and stage morph comes with notable frame drops stage morph is dead unless that's fixed

 

[blackghost]

I did not mean to give you the impression that I did not think there was zero dissent about the stagelist. I myself believe that it's gotten insanely stale. I just don't see that conversation happening around me at all. True, I haven't gone looking for it either, but where do you even go to find something like that these days?



Just had a conversation with someone on twitch who claimed that several prominent community figures were already coming out against it, citing something like it messing up ledges while it transforms or something along those lines. I 100% agree with you, but if we want to make that happen we're going to need to make a push for it sooner than later before public opinion sets up against it.

He also mentioned a smashboards blog where several community members like Kurogane talked about their stances on the issues, but I can't find that anywhere. That ring a bell for anyone? Would def be an important read to go over.

EDIT: Did see this, very relevant to us. Hopefully doesn't carry over to the final version, or stage morph might be dead before it ever got started

https://twitter.com/KuroganeHammer/status/1027388955518361601

it doesnt mess up the ledges:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yiCF539rZCo
if you fail to get off a ledge as the stage shifts that's on you. its the exact same reasoning for a transition stage that is about to leave.
There was deliberate care put into the actual transitions. its not a sudden change, it slowly comes in and temporarily overlays each stage on top of the other, the color fo rthe leaving stage fades and the new stage comes into focus.
players that have clout or influence in the community put your name on opinion you have on either side.

regarding stage staleness i think people have assumed it couldnt be changed. most people in the community gentlemen to SV for different reasons but it is the same result either way. i just ask people and i listen to players on stream many people i KNOW are sick of SV like nairo, ESAM, i think void, and cosmo.

i wouldnt judge any frame drops just yet game isnt done and smash games post melee have never had frame rate issues.

 

[Untouch]

Speaking of smashville, in the stage morph video it looks like the platform is totally static. Does it just freeze while transforming (likely) or is that the hazardless option? It doesn't look like luigi's mansion was breakable there either.

Also I was wrong, it looks like the middle orbs in brinstar are breakable but I don't know if that's hazardless. There's a lot that needs to be looked into honestly.

 

[ParanoidDrone]

Writing this over my lunch break so this may or may not end up being somewhat disjointed. I wanted to weigh in a bit on the potential number of legal stages. To that end, I've grouped them into several different categories. Note that this ended up being more of a prediction than an opinion. For the sake of getting back to work on time I won't be going into additional detail for each stage here, but I can elaborate on any of them if needed.

Assumptions:

• Stage hazards turned off.
• Stage morphing not taken into account.
• Stages considered strictly on their own merits.

Obviously Legal: These are the stages that I don't think have any grounds for even token opposition. All were legal in previous titles.

Spoiler: 9 Stages

Battlefield
Final Destination
Dream Land 64
Yoshi's Story
Fountain of Dreams
Yoshi's Island Brawl
Lylat Cruise
Smashville
Town & City

Probably Legal: These are the stages that the hazard toggle is likely to completely fix, based on what we know and can reasonably assume about how it works. Some of them were legal in past titles even with their hazards.

Spoiler: 11 Stages

Pokemon Stadium 1
WarioWare, Inc.
Frigate Orpheon
Pokemon Stadium 2
Unova Pokemon League
Prism Tower
Pictochat 2
Kalos Pokemon League
Wily Castle
Midgar
New Donk City Hall

Maybe: These are the stages that are hard to call without actual playtime. For some, it's unclear how the hazard toggle will affect them. Others might simply have an unusual layout. And a few hold a stigma from previous titles that is likely to carry over.

Spoiler: 29 Stages

Peach's Castle 64
Kongo Jungle
Super Happy Tree
Jungle Japes
Brinstar
Green Greens
Corneria
Delfino Plaza
Norfair
Halberd
Castle Siege
Pirate Ship
Spirit Train
Mute City SNES
Arena Ferox
Reset Bomb Forest
Tortimer Island
Find Mii
Tomodachi Life
Mushroom Kingdom U
Mario Circuit
Skyloft
Gamer
Garden of Hope
Duck Hunt
Wuhu Island
Windy Hill Zone
Umbra Clock Tower
Dracula's Castle

Probably Banned: These are the stages that could theoretically become legal but I think are unlikely to actually make the cut.

Spoiler: 15 Stages

Hyrule Castle
Saffron City
Princess Peach's Castle
Rainbow Cruise
Brinstar Depths
Big Blue
Fourside
Mushroomy Kingdom
Port Town Aero Dive
Summit
3D Land
Golden Plains
Dream Land GB
PAC-LAND
Super Mario Maker

Obviously Banned: These are the stages that can't be salvaged. Excessive size, permanent and static walkoffs, caves of life, camping potential, etc.

Spoiler: 39 Stages

Big Battlefield
Mushroom Kingdom 64
Kongo Falls
Great Bay
Temple
Yoshi's Island Melee
Venom
Onett
Mushroom Kingdom II
Figure 8 Circuit
Bridge of Eldin
Distant Planet
New Pork City
Skyworld
Shadow Moses Island
Luigi's Mansion
Spear Pillar
75M
Mario Bros.
Hanenbow
Green Hill Zone
Paper Mario
Gerudo Valley
Magicant
Balloon Fight
Living Room
Mario Galaxy
Great Cave Offensive
Coliseum
Flat Zone X
Palutena's Temple
Wii Fit Studio
Boxing Ring
Gaur Plain
Wrecking Crew
Pilotwings
Suzaku Castle
Great Plateau Tower
Moray Towers

 

[Amazing Ampharos]

This is more a life philosophy than a smash philosophy but I was actually saying something that went down to one of the main ways I look at the world. When I say that people are the same everywhere I don't mean as a smash thing. Humans are humans. Cultures are different region to region, but the people, the human beings, are basically the same type of animal everywhere in the world independent of culture. Different humans have been exposed to different ideas, but humans as a group all think the same and thus when presented with the same facts if given the same opportunity to consider them are reasonably likely to end up at about the same place. That means that if you are fighting for an idea with truth on your side that your challenge isn't to defeat people from elsewhere but merely to make them actually consider your view; if you're actually right and you can successfully make them merely consider honestly your position, they will agree with you because they're not really different from you (as a group; individual humans are often impossible). Here in the midwest sure the culture is usually pro-stage, but there are definitely anti-stage people around who I honestly think find it annoying that we ever play on not Smashville. That kind of person exists regardless, but I don't think it's anything but the actual minority anywhere regardless of whatever local success that guy has in making the rules resemble his dream. In regions that are more heavy on the banning I can't personally speak for the scene I suppose, but I do know that these long smashboards stage policy threads have often had loudly pro-stage people with regions like NY listed so I have at least some evidence that diverse viewpoints do exist in all regions here.

As per what has happened in the past, yes, stage liberals have lost every time. That's a fact I can't deny. It's even near the top of the list of reasons I quit competitive Brawl back in the day; I got tired of my main, Mr. Game & Watch, being nerfed every few months by more stage bans. He was actually a good character on the liberal stage list; he pretty much sucked if we just play on Smashville all the time. Either way, history is not an argument to surrender before starting or to concede almost everything and wait for the rest to be taken away. Smash Ultimate has some extremely relevant changes to how stages work relative to the other smash games, and the balance effort on those sorts of dynamics seems far more deliberate than before. We also have a serious pendulum effect here insofar as people are legitimately unhappy with the status quo which represents an opportunity for improvement. This is the best chance we've ever had to have better stage rules.

As per the 80 legal stages being a lunatic position, well, you have to have some historical perspective here. I'm talking about that as a position that purely adheres to classic sirlin-esque "if you can't prove it's broken, you don't ban it" mindset which is what the historical liberal stage position has been. A lot of the community is young and never experienced a broader stage list or the kind of culture wherein that was a major policy position held by a faction of the community (it was always a battle but it was a substantial side that thought this way). Yes when I put it that way it sounds silly; it's the farthest liberal position that I think could be coherent. I would just say I don't think it's more silly than having 5 legal stages and only playing on 3 of them. Both are extremes, both are really silly if you just think about them, and the best policy in terms of both making the actual game the best and making maximum happiness in the community is in the middle which is I think actually pretty close to what I'm pushing for in this game.

I will be in that debate Friday. I'll do my best!

To continue focusing on moving forward, I do think some really substantial polling of the community would be really helpful. It's really hard to organize with so much decentralization, but I think it should still be possible if we made some sort of big polls here on Smashboards and pushed them on social media including having people go even further and actually talk IRL to other players from their regions and tell them to have their voices heard. It's probably too early to really do much in that regard because the details of what the best stage rules will be will depend on the details of how Smash Ultimate itself plays out which we will need the game in our hands to decide, but we will want to move quickly upon release to make sure the minimum thought solutions don't just get naturally selected and instead the best solutions get chosen instead.

 

[infomon]

From the exclusive VIP ruleset discussion thread: https://smashboards.com/threads/smash-ultimate-ruleset-philosophy.456499/

falln links this:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1nh0NkPu1uJcTHaaFVT62ngTC-iEYhBwHcz293FprBWc/edit

To give you guys an idea where the more influential discussions are heading.

 

[Lhautlow]

okay so, I thought about it, I am actually in favor of stage morph game one
the only thing is, you can't chose a stage hazard on and the other one hazards off (I think hazards should have been like choosing FD/BF in the main menu, but whatever). I don't want this game to be as restricted as other games. And it could unban some stages that we're banned because they allowed campy play styles (duck hunt )

btw I am now thinking, blast zones will be even more important in this game, cause stage morphing can basically make you die out of small combos.

anyway, when the game will come out I'll do a local tournament with stage morph on game 1 and many stages, just to see how playable some of those are.
I think banning just isn't right anymore. The winner of RPS just get to have his stage first.
It also means game 1 will always have hazards off, no matter which stage you play except if both players agree to turn on the hazards

Also, I think I'll include meter to check if final smashes can be played in a competitive environnement (which I don't think because some characters are definitly broken with Final Smash on, such as marth who's get an instant KO that has a 0 frame startup)

 

[blackghost]

From the exclusive VIP ruleset discussion thread: https://smashboards.com/threads/smash-ultimate-ruleset-philosophy.456499/

falln links this:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1nh0NkPu1uJcTHaaFVT62ngTC-iEYhBwHcz293FprBWc/edit

To give you guys an idea where the more influential discussions are heading.

if the starter list stays smal long term wont we see the same effect as before? why would it be different now?
also i can already see it happening : "stage morphing is a logistical nightmare" why? in what way? its no different than personalized controls or names.

 

[dav3yb]

From the exclusive VIP ruleset discussion thread: https://smashboards.com/threads/smash-ultimate-ruleset-philosophy.456499/

falln links this:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1nh0NkPu1uJcTHaaFVT62ngTC-iEYhBwHcz293FprBWc/edit

To give you guys an idea where the more influential discussions are heading.

These closed door/backroom discussions are going to neuter the meta before it has a real chance to develop.

 

[infomon]

These closed door/backroom discussions are going to neuter the meta before it has a real chance to develop.

That's how it's always been.

The only legitimate counter is to (a) get ranked, or (b) host tournaments (or help out with them). The latter is what we need anyway. Smash needs more locals and local-scene growth. Especially once Ultimate drops.

 

[Lhautlow]

I was also wondering, who's in charge for rulesets ? I Mean, there's always been a universal ruleset that is almost the same between each and every Major tournament, but who are the guys actually making those ruleset ? And How can we interact with them so they get every players opinion ?

 

[Amazing Ampharos]

I can let you know from experience that even if you get in the backroom there's closed doors there behind which other people talk and make the "real" decisions anyway, and I've always been under the impression that the more nested into isolated backdoor dealing you get the less organized it is so often the biggest decisions are made basically completely privately. That's not meant to be cynical; I'm actually saying that worrying about not being important enough is pointless because unless you're the TO for a supermajor you don't have direct power and otherwise you're more equal to everyone else than you realize. If you want to make an impact you just kinda gotta be loud and move people, ideally including local TOs, and that's true no matter which room you have access to. Our focus really does need to be on just connecting as many people as possible, making popular sentiment heard, and having a sharing of ideas. Let's not be defeatist about not mattering; in the end a TO's primary goal is always the success of the event which is largely measured in the satisfaction of the competitors so as long as you're arguing for things that are intended to make the game better and more satisfying to the players what you're offering has the potential to be valued.

 

[DtJ Glyphmoney]

I'm a member of the Back Room, and that only means I get temporary access to admin accounts on certain weekends and can read any private messages I want. It's really quite humdrum, the Shadow Council is the one really pulling the strings.

 

[**Gilgamesh**]

if you havent heard complaints about the state of smash 4 stage list, you aren't looking fo rit or paying attention. we have had consecutive smash games where entire tournaments (no exaggeration) are played on one stage. even in smash 4 where the absolute dumbest stuff can happen on smashville/bayoville/shiekville.

im with Amazing Ampharos the counterpick system is broken. i can personally say i have never had to play a game with my main in tournament play on FD in over a year. I have not played on lylat in at least 2 months. This shouldn't be possible. If you want to be the best player in smash ultimate we should have a system in place where the best player can get by with no demonstrated stage knowledge or application of a CP stage. and we have reached that point every time in smash games.

I personally think the reason the counter pick system fell apart is the idea that players think they should be able to strike down to just one stage in games 2-5.. Your opponent is CP because you are winning, controlling the match while ahead is not what CP is to be used for.striking should just be one stage removed from the possible list IMO.

repeating the same thing over and over and expecting a different result is insanity. We are not doing this again. I'm hopeful on stage morphing two prominent voices in Nairo and ESAM will support it. I expect zero to oppose it. step one: is get morphing legal step 2: figure out what an appropriate timer for the switch is.

also please lets not use strawman fear-based arguments against stage morphing. "what if the stage morphing saves someone during recovery" if someone can take advantage of the stage shifting i want to see it. Its not a random shift, it is completely known in advance, adding mechanics raises skill ceiling and lowers skill floor, it elevates students of the game, it embraces the game, and it visually interesting to watch.
I dont want a smash 4 situation where a mechanic get sidleined because community comfort came first. People will learn.

If stage morphing becomes legal; A Is would prefer if it just morphs one time; so like 3 minutes.

 

[ぱみゅ]

I was also wondering, who's in charge for rulesets ? I Mean, there's always been a universal ruleset that is almost the same between each and every Major tournament, but who are the guys actually making those ruleset ? And How can we interact with them so they get every players opinion ?

I can let you know from experience that even if you get in the backroom there's closed doors there behind which other people talk and make the "real" decisions anyway, and I've always been under the impression that the more nested into isolated backdoor dealing you get the less organized it is so often the biggest decisions are made basically completely privately. That's not meant to be cynical; I'm actually saying that worrying about not being important enough is pointless because unless you're the TO for a supermajor you don't have direct power and otherwise you're more equal to everyone else than you realize. If you want to make an impact you just kinda gotta be loud and move people, ideally including local TOs, and that's true no matter which room you have access to. Our focus really does need to be on just connecting as many people as possible, making popular sentiment heard, and having a sharing of ideas. Let's not be defeatist about not mattering; in the end a TO's primary goal is always the success of the event which is largely measured in the satisfaction of the competitors so as long as you're arguing for things that are intended to make the game better and more satisfying to the players what you're offering has the potential to be valued.

Right at this moment, there is a "backdoor discussion" in the PGR Discord, and while everyone there agrees that we need a closed environment to keep the discussion flowing without backtracking, it is also true that its "secretive" nature is not healthy to make the end result believable.
We are looking for alternatives.

Also the fact that currently there is no institution who steps up front and transmits this kind of important messages to the community, so even if we do get to a result, who would really take the task to implement it, and where?
As of right now it points out to be "The PGR recommends to use this ruleset and Genesis will be its first major milestone" but its reality is a matter of time.

 

[Funen1]

Right at this moment, there is a "backdoor discussion" in the PGR Discord, and while everyone there agrees that we need a closed environment to keep the discussion flowing without backtracking, it is also true that its "secretive" nature is not healthy to make the end result believable.
We are looking for alternatives.

Also the fact that currently there is no institution who steps up front and transmits this kind of important messages to the community, so even if we do get to a result, who would really take the task to implement it, and where?
As of right now it points out to be "The PGR recommends to use this ruleset and Genesis will be its first major milestone" but its reality is a matter of time.

One thought I had was to hold a kind of town hall or AMA-style thing where the people who are most connected to making a ruleset answer questions from others, so they can get more of a feel for how different groups within the community might be viewing things. There are admittedly a bunch of details that'd need to be ironed out with actually organizing something like this, like who gets to ask the questions and such, but it's something that came from the idea of pushing for more transparency with this whole process.

 

[blackghost]

i dont need interaction or the ability to ask a question at a basic level I just want written statements from the participants in the secret discussion about their thoughts and opinions regarding the pros and cons of new stage rulesets. At the very least lay out what the arguments are.

Do you want to run a community? fine. Answer to it.

 

[ぱみゅ]

i dont need interaction or the ability to ask a question at a basic level I just want written statements from the participants in the secret discussion about their thoughts and opinions regarding the pros and cons of new stage rulesets. At the very least lay out what the arguments are.

Do you want to run a community? fine. Answer to it.

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1nh0NkPu1uJcTHaaFVT62ngTC-iEYhBwHcz293FprBWc/edit

 

[Untouch]

Has there been any discussion regarding Squad Strike? I don't think it'll replace the standard but I haven't seen much discussion at all. We don't know much about it so far so it makes sense but all these rules being decided before the game is even out would be a grave mistake.

 

[ParanoidDrone]

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1nh0NkPu1uJcTHaaFVT62ngTC-iEYhBwHcz293FprBWc/edit

That's a "here's where the consensus is currently leaning" sort of summary but I think what he's asking for is an individual, per-person breakdown of their various stances and why they believe in said stances. (Personally, I think that "why" question is rather important, since it could help foster the brainstorming of palatable alternatives.)

 

[NewGuy79]

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1nh0NkPu1uJcTHaaFVT62ngTC-iEYhBwHcz293FprBWc/edit

I post a quick comment while you're still online.

What does the backroom think of creating a new method for selecting stages, it seems concerning to me that such a contentious topic on this forum is seemingly overlooked within the backroom.

whatever rule set we decide upon, it should facilitate the game and not the other way around, if ultimate is a game which allows for a large assortment of stages our rule set should help players to utilize said list. the very suggestion that we might ban or limit perfectly legal stages simply so that we can have a shorter stage list so the pick/ban rule set works seems rather reductive to me.

 

[ぱみゅ]

I post a quick comment while you're still online.

What does the backroom think of creating a new method for selecting stages, it seems concerning to me that such a contentious topic on this forum is seemingly overlooked within the backroom.

whatever rule set we decide upon, it should facilitate the game and not the other way around, if ultimate is a game which allows for a large assortment of stages our rule set should help players to utilize said list. the very suggestion that we might ban or limit perfectly legal stages simply so that we can have a shorter stage list so the pick/ban rule set works seems rather reductive to me.

Honestly, if we end up having many, many stages, we should consider a different method.
Right now most people are considering 5-7 starters because they are thinking on the traditional Game 1 process, but a different one, easier to remind and not mentally-straining might be superior in the future (I would personally prefer this hypothetical method).

Thank you for the input guys, I will take it to the group and see what we can do about the suggestions.

 

[PK_Wonder]

I absolutely support eliminating counterpicks all-together in my rulesets at my events if a good plan is formed. The simplest possible solution that legalizes the most stages and is most fair to both players in a given set is ideal to me.

 

[ぱみゅ]

One of the ideas I had in mind was a plan where, every legal stage is available for game 1, and regardless of the number of stages, both players can strike down (blind from the opponent's choices) a number where the minimum possible stages at the end of that step is 1 or 2, and play the first game in a random one among those.
If a player doesn't mind many stages they'll leave them unbanned, if strikes overlap neither player would play on those stages and play in one neither minded, and if you end up being counterpicked Game 1 is because your character has way too many bad stages anyway.
It would be a far easier method to use and remember, specially if we use paper to perform it.

 

[Lhautlow]

I think starters and CP have to go away. This format is outdated, and doesn't fit big stage lists. In my opinion, players don't want to play on some set of maps that are restricted just for the sick of it. They usually don't want to play on 1 or 2 particular stage depending their opinions. For exemple : I am a Fox Main in smash 4. I don't like playing on smashville at all, and I dont like lylat in general, my favorite map is Dreamland 64, and I don't really care playing on other maps. This is one mindset tho, it's not like everyone thinks like me, some people just want to ban what's the best option for your opponent etc.

Striking always been complicated, each player have to remember which stage are available, which stage they need not to go on (for exemple, I play fox vs sheik, sheik's good on FD and smashville, I lose RPS so I ban both of them. It means I have to know every MU like that, but on some cases, like Fox vs Duck hunt duo, I don't know which stage the guy is going to pick, making it harder in smash ultimate since there are so many characters)

We are still not sure of good stage morphing is, I believe the stages must be changed at least twice or 3 times in a single game so it could allow some comeback and still be fair.

I was also thinking that Random for the first stage could be another solution, since there are so many stages. Just look at tekken 7, they don't get to pick the stage, they just play with whatever they randomly got. Even if some stages are better for some characters (like King can easily break floors, and there's a stage with 4 floors, making him able to extend each and every one of his combos) it would still be fair, since both player didn't chose.
And then we could do something even better, both players ban 3 stages, and then the stage is randomly choosen. Both players can't complain because they basically banned stages they don't like/ stages good for their opponent(s) and then get to play on a stage neither of them could chose.


Edit: Okay here's a Poll so everyone can give his feelings on stage morphing :
https://strawpoll.com/37rrac95

 

[StormofThunder]

Just want to give people a heads up that the doc posted with the summary of discussion in the PGStats discord comes from a channel where people who have TO, notable Commentator/Community Leader and PGR Player roles have been talking. These are already several dozen people, it honestly isn't that exclusive. The general Ultimate discussion channel has been incredibly hectic, and it's extremely difficult to make any newcomer to the discord catch up on the current discussion, and a lot of same questions, same answers keep happening since they're not up to date to what's been happening. The doc is a way to make things more transparent without compromising on more organized discussion. Ideally, docs will be made more or less daily if enough discussion happens. I'll also try and bring up points people have made here to there and see how it goes. However, it would be great if people dropped a bit of the vitriol, assuming that things won't change.

There is already a lot of work being done (initiated by Bear, Suar and TKbreezy's tweets) towards organized discussion/leadership + transparency without being just anyone with any or lack of credentials muddling the conversation and the process. I also highly suspect things like suggested/draft rulesets will be highly experimental at the beginning of the game, and community feedback will be taken in consideration more than ever. We have time to do this, and right now most of the steps are speculatory/theorethical in nature, in which the core philosophy of how to make the ruleset is being addressed, more than specific aspects of it. A lot will be experimented. Regardless, I recommend that the Ruleset Philosophy thread be the one a lot of people keep up to date with, and I'll try and share this one as well since a lot of people don't even have a clue this is happening and what is being said here, and the group of people discussing here is still rather small.

 

[Frihetsanka]

From the exclusive VIP ruleset discussion thread: https://smashboards.com/threads/smash-ultimate-ruleset-philosophy.456499/

falln links this:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1nh0NkPu1uJcTHaaFVT62ngTC-iEYhBwHcz293FprBWc/edit

To give you guys an idea where the more influential discussions are heading.

Some things worth noting:

"Most so far agree that hazards should be toggled to OFF universally."

"With the sizes of the stage lists being considered at this point, there has been universal agreement that DSR is the most appropriate rule." (DSR = Dave's Stupid Rule)

"This question [seasons] came up multiple times and to this point only one individual, LassiePhotog, was in favour of it." (Seems seasonal stage lists are pretty unlikely, good)

"Most agree that 3 stock will be the starting point for events (though there are certain exceptions; see the next question). There is little consensus on time limit, however. Suggestions range from 5 minutes to 8 minutes."

"While many are firmly opposed to it [final smashes] there remain a few champions of it, in particular Spammalanche and Fanttum, who want to experiment with it for a time." (Seems pretty unlikely unless they nerf some of them)

"“I'm gonna lay out, not what I think the ruleset should be, but what everyone's gonna eventually settle on:
* 3 stock, 6 minute
* 5 starters, 4-6 counterpicks (one triplat total)
* new counterpicking: loser picks 3 stages, winner bans 1, loser picks from remaining 2
* can't pick a stage you won on previously
* no items/hazards/final smashes/etc
And that'll be that” - PracticalTAS"

 

[ParanoidDrone]

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1nh0NkPu1uJcTHaaFVT62ngTC-iEYhBwHcz293FprBWc/edit

Quoting you again because I have not the slightest idea how to tag your name with an American keyboard.

First paragraph in the doc makes a passing mention of stage morphing being a terrible idea but doesn't elaborate any further. This confuses me slightly, if only because my own view on it is basically "an interesting idea that may or may not work in practice but I'd like to see how it actually works before committing hard one way or another." So why is it apparently so horrible that it's being dismissed out of hand? Is it because it's buried in the menu and they're worried about having to set it on/off on a per-match basis? (Because I would actually agree with that, it's the same reason I'm in favor of permanent hazards-off.) Or is it some other reason? (Please don't let that reason be "jank.")

 

[Galgatha]

Some things worth noting:

"Most so far agree that hazards should be toggled to OFF universally."

"With the sizes of the stage lists being considered at this point, there has been universal agreement that DSR is the most appropriate rule." (DSR = Dave's Stupid Rule)

"This question [seasons] came up multiple times and to this point only one individual, LassiePhotog, was in favour of it." (Seems seasonal stage lists are pretty unlikely, good)

"Most agree that 3 stock will be the starting point for events (though there are certain exceptions; see the next question). There is little consensus on time limit, however. Suggestions range from 5 minutes to 8 minutes."

"While many are firmly opposed to it [final smashes] there remain a few champions of it, in particular Spammalanche and Fanttum, who want to experiment with it for a time." (Seems pretty unlikely unless they nerf some of them)

"“I'm gonna lay out, not what I think the ruleset should be, but what everyone's gonna eventually settle on:
* 3 stock, 6 minute
* 5 starters, 4-6 counterpicks (one triplat total)
* new counterpicking: loser picks 3 stages, winner bans 1, loser picks from remaining 2
* can't pick a stage you won on previously
* no items/hazards/final smashes/etc
And that'll be that” - PracticalTAS"

So....out of 103 stages, toggle off ability, we still fall about to the start/counterpick crap? Great~~

Why can't these people ever think outside of their boxes?

 

[Frihetsanka]

So....out of 103 stages, toggle off ability, we still fall about to the start/counterpick crap? Great~~

Why can't these people ever think outside of their boxes?

I think they have, and, like several people in the thread, they've come to the conclusion that all the alternative systems made to fit a larger stage list ultimately makes for a worse competitive environment. There could be 200 stages and it still wouldn't change much.

I'm not really sure if I like only having one bad in a stage list with 9+ stages, though. What if: Loser picks 4 stages, winner bans 2, loser picks from remaining 2. Thoughts on that?

 

[Galgatha]

I think the first stage of the match should be randomly selected from the set list of legal stages using random stage select. Then maybe. I just want the community to move away from starter/counterpick stage idea as a whole. It's confusing and ultimately just a bad idea in general that was made out of necessity.

I think, possibly the best option would be this following formula:

Each player permanently bans 2 stages from list of playavle stages
Random select stage for round 1
Insert DSR to permanently ban stage from round 1
Insert your idea, Loser selects 4 stages from the available list of playable stages
Winner permenantly bans 2
Loser selects 1 of the remaining 2 for round 2
DSR to permenantly ban stage from round 2
Loser selects 4 stages
Winner bans 2
Loser picks stage for round 3
OR! (In the event of a tie and both parties agree)
Winner and loser agree to Stage Morph battle, Loser picks stage 1 from remaining avaialble legal stages after DSR from round 2
Winner picks stage 2
Timer is set to 45seconds-1min for morphing.

What do you think Frihetsanka ?

 

[Frihetsanka]

Random select is not good, and we've discussed that point several times. So far, I haven't seen any good alternative for game 1 aside from striking from a list (probably either 5 stages or 9 stages, 7 is an option but it's a little messy). There are some alternatives for stages after that.

I'm not a fan of permanent bans. I suppose, if you're a fan of mind games, it would add some mind games to the stage selection process (you could, for instance, try to bait your opponent into banning stages that you yourself dislike). Another issue with permanent bans is that it would hurt players who play multiple characters: A Donkey Kong main might want to ban Battlefield when playing Donkey Kong, but not when playing Mario.

The whole "When counter-picking, offer 3-4 stages, winner bans 1-2, loser picks one" could open up for more stages being legal, I suppose. There would still have to be safeguards against "Okay, I'm offering 4 similar stages, so whatever you're banning doesn't really matter". This suggests that we either have to have some complicated rules (like "If you pick Battlefield you can't also pick Dream Land 64 or Yoshi's Story") or avoid (many) duplicates in the stage list.