• Welcome to Smashboards, the world's largest Super Smash Brothers community! Over 250,000 Smash Bros. fans from around the world have come to discuss these great games in over 19 million posts!

    You are currently viewing our boards as a visitor. Click here to sign up right now and start on your path in the Smash community!

Discussion of Stage Legality in Smash Bros. Ultimate

Status
Not open for further replies.

ParanoidDrone

Smash Master
Joined
Jan 26, 2008
Messages
4,335
Location
Baton Rouge, LA
A single character matchup is the reason for many things. In brawl metaknight singlehandedly rendered many stages invaluable. Mute city was banned in melee after armada showed people how to abuse it with peach. If you listen to people complain, bayo killed smash 4.
Meta Knight may have been able to abuse the likes of Rainbow Cruise and Brinstar, but banning those stages led directly to the rise of the Ice Climbers as the undisputed #2 and the sidelining of...pretty much everyone else? Since those stages ended up being the only things keeping them in check.

Banning stages due to singular characters can have far reaching effects not immediately apparent at the time. And if we're seriously going to go down that route, then Final Destination might end up on the chopping block as well; the lack of platforms makes it pretty polarizing.

Completely changing the subject, I had a crazy thought: Walkoffs in doubles. I'm pretty sure this is complete nonsense and an awful idea in general, so don't hurt me, but it occurred to me that any discussion about those stages has always been in the context of singles. Would the extra bodies make it easier or harder to abuse them?
 
Last edited:

Pazzo.

「Livin' On A Prayer」
Joined
Oct 3, 2012
Messages
9,187
Correct me if I'm wrong, but do the same worries about camping in past games apply here?
 

Coffee™

I need it....
Joined
Aug 2, 2008
Messages
2,205
Location
SFL
Banning stages due to singular characters can have far reaching effects not immediately apparent at the time. And if we're seriously going to go down that route, then Final Destination might end up on the chopping block as well; the lack of platforms makes it pretty polarizing
Agreed, but keep in mind. Pretty much anything can be considered polarizing given supporting context, which in turn can likely carry varying degrees of subjectivity.

Completely changing the subject, I had a crazy thought: Walkoffs in doubles. I'm pretty sure this is complete nonsense and an awful idea in general, so don't hurt me, but it occurred to me that any discussion about those stages has always been in the context of singles. Would the extra bodies make it easier or harder to abuse them?
It would be just as bad, if not worse than singles. Walkoffs in general always tend to lean towards degenerate play.

With those things said, I really wish there was more discussion about the reasoning behind wanting to ban stages and possibly coming up with useable critera or guidelines to base discussion of their legality on.

Stage discussion has always been a topic with a lot of room for subjectivity. It would be nice to give discussion of it some structure as well as stop people from having to needlessly reinterate points that have already been brought up numerous times such as AAmpharos has done above.
 
Last edited:

Untouch

Smash Master
Joined
Aug 4, 2009
Messages
3,783
Correct me if I'm wrong, but do the same worries about camping in past games apply here?
Some do but some aren't as bad.
In brawl, metaknight could circle camp under stages because of his recovery, but it isn't nearly as bad now.

I do think stuff like Saffron being hell for Ness/Lucas and heaven for ZSS should be addressed though.
 
Last edited:

ParanoidDrone

Smash Master
Joined
Jan 26, 2008
Messages
4,335
Location
Baton Rouge, LA
Correct me if I'm wrong, but do the same worries about camping in past games apply here?
Walkoffs yes, that particular dynamic hasn't changed in any hugely significant way.

Walls and mid-stage gaps are questionable. Wall infinites haven't really been a thing since 4 and I think only pose a realistic issue when they're big enough to reliably intercept a launch trajectory for tech opportunities. Mid-stage gaps (as seen in hazardless Green Greens or Reset Bomb Forest) tend to be criticized because approaching over the gap is a disadvantageous position, but the new engine changes to short hop aerials and the global reduction in landing lag might change that particular dynamic.
With those things said, I really wish there was more discussion about the reasoning behind wanting to ban stages and possibly coming up with useable critera or guidelines to base discussion of their legality on.

Stage discussion has always been a topic with a lot of room for subjectivity. It would be nice to give discussion of it some structure as well as stop people from having to needlessly reinterate points that have already been brought up numerous times such as AAmpharos has done above.
Yes please.
 

dav3yb

Smash Journeyman
Joined
Dec 7, 2014
Messages
431
Definitely a step in the right direction there but posting it in "general" will probably detract from it getting the discussion it actually deserves. Maybe discussion can continue here? Quite a few good points are brought up in that thread you linked and it does serve as a good discussion starting point.
Well there aren't just a ton of Ultimate Subtopics right now. It would generally be under the "Competitive Discussion" topic. I'm a bit surprised we don't see at least some of those popping up at the moment, given the game is so close and how much more information we have about it now.
 

ParanoidDrone

Smash Master
Joined
Jan 26, 2008
Messages
4,335
Location
Baton Rouge, LA
Well there aren't just a ton of Ultimate Subtopics right now. It would generally be under the "Competitive Discussion" topic. I'm a bit surprised we don't see at least some of those popping up at the moment, given the game is so close and how much more information we have about it now.
You asked for an example of a stage with a randomized layout that isn't Mario Maker in that thread and I don't think anyone answered. I have one for you though: Gamer. The stage has its own issues regardless (5-Volt aka Mom, the occasional solid platforms) but it's currently unknown if hazardless Gamer will have a single consistent layout or not. If it does not, and if all possible layouts are acceptable on a basic level, then in theory it should be a fine stage.

Also, depending on how you define randomized layouts, possibly Big Blue. (The cars on the track.)
 
Last edited:

dav3yb

Smash Journeyman
Joined
Dec 7, 2014
Messages
431
You asked for an example of a stage with a randomized layout that isn't Mario Maker in that thread and I don't think anyone answered. I have one for you though: Gamer. The stage has its own issues regardless (5-Volt aka Mom, the occasional solid platforms) but it's currently unknown if hazardless Gamer will have a single consistent layout or not. If it does not, and if all possible layouts are acceptable on a basic level, then in theory it should be a fine stage.

Also, depending on how you define randomized layouts, possibly Big Blue. (The cars on the track.)
I had remembered gamer sometime after, but forgot to add it. Mario maker was just the one that stood out a lot, since it's changes are pretty dramatic compared to gamer. It'll be interesting to see how the hazard toggle will effect gamer.
 

ParanoidDrone

Smash Master
Joined
Jan 26, 2008
Messages
4,335
Location
Baton Rouge, LA
Part 2 of Zero and M2K's "Is this legal?" video pair is online. (Here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gRgK2rxrrSM) And their opinions are...

Neutral: Battlefield, Final Destination, Yoshi's Story Melee, Fountain of Dreams, Smashville, Town & City, Yoshi's Island Brawl

Neutral (Doubles): Big Battlefield

Counterpick: Brinstar, Castle Siege

Counterpick (Doubles): Arena Ferox

Needs Labbing: Kongo Jungle 64, Warioware Inc., Unova Pokemon League, Prism Tower, Pictochat, Mario Circuit, Skyloft, Duck Hunt, Dream Land 64, Rainbow Cruise, Pokemon Stadium, Frigate Orpheon, Lylat Cruise, Pokemon Stadium 2, Magicant, Kalos Pokemon League, Midgar

Banned: Everything else

M2K noted at one point that he's in favor of interchangeable Omega forms for FD.

-----

My thoughts:

IMO, these notable omissions deserve to be labbed: Norfair, Mushroom Kingdom U, Wuhu Island, Halberd (esp. if Bayonetta's ladder is nerfed), Pirate Ship, Mute City SNES, Reset Bomb Forest, Tortimer Island, Gamer, Umbra Clock Tower, New Donk City Hall, Dracula's Castle

I'm still surprised at their lack of knowledge over certain stages. They thought Kalos Pokemon League was flat like FD when not transforming, for example. And they think the stairs on Dracula's Castle are a walkoff, which I'm pretty sure video footage has shown it isn't.

They also seemed inconsistent with remembering that hazards off is a thing now, like when discounting Umbra Clock Tower entirely despite no one knowing if the platforms would even come through with hazards off.
 
Last edited:

Skitrel

Smash Journeyman
Joined
Feb 26, 2015
Messages
423
Location
UK
The main thing I'd like to hear opinions on at this point are stages that have outer platforms not connected to the main body of the stage. Now that we have a pretty good idea that Green Greens will not drop blocks, kill it's wind, and not throw fruit, I really don't see much of an issue with it. The video w/ M2K and Zero they just brushed it off with "Have you seen Bayonetta on this stage?," which I also think has been a confirmed change (her ability to kill vertically). Although I don't think a single character's match up potential should be enough reason to completely discount a stage.

I can certainly understand a bit more about stages with a more enclosed mid pit, like Saffron City, but without the hazards on Green Greens, and if Jungle Japes looses the rushing water along with the Klaptrap, I certainly don't see why they shouldn't at least be given a chance.
The issue with Green Greens is the size of the outer platforms. It promotes camping.

Bayo in particular can stand on the platform and do nothing but shoot. When an opponent approaches she does upB which covers the entire platform.

Rinse repeat.

This kind of issue is not good competitive gameplay. It centers the entire fight around one single thing. It's exactly the same reason that Kongo Falls got banned, the rock provided the same kind of camping but to many more characters.

This isn't a bad stage for most of the cast as most can't play this way, but it in particular benefits Bayo.
 

ParanoidDrone

Smash Master
Joined
Jan 26, 2008
Messages
4,335
Location
Baton Rouge, LA
I still think it would behoove us as a group to actually try these abuses to see how well they actually work. I'm a firm believer in the idea that theory does not necessarily equate to practice, and documented empirical evidence is never a bad thing. That way, in the future, if someone asks why Green Greens is banned we can just link them to a video of Bayonetta (or whoever) abusing it for an easy-bake win.
 

dav3yb

Smash Journeyman
Joined
Dec 7, 2014
Messages
431
I still think it would behoove us as a group to actually try these abuses to see how well they actually work. I'm a firm believer in the idea that theory does not necessarily equate to practice, and documented empirical evidence is never a bad thing. That way, in the future, if someone asks why Green Greens is banned we can just link them to a video of Bayonetta (or whoever) abusing it for an easy-bake win.
Yeah. That's my current position. We're not 100% sure how the various offensive/defensive changes to the game will effect the game play of these stage elements.
 

Untouch

Smash Master
Joined
Aug 4, 2009
Messages
3,783
The issue with Green Greens is the size of the outer platforms. It promotes camping.

Bayo in particular can stand on the platform and do nothing but shoot. When an opponent approaches she does upB which covers the entire platform.

Rinse repeat.

This kind of issue is not good competitive gameplay. It centers the entire fight around one single thing. It's exactly the same reason that Kongo Falls got banned, the rock provided the same kind of camping but to many more characters.

This isn't a bad stage for most of the cast as most can't play this way, but it in particular benefits Bayo.
The platforms aren't really an issue since they're at a position where you can't really projectile camp.
The real problem is how low the blastzones are, that's why it was banned in Melee, and it seems as if it wasn't fixed there either unfortunately.
 

Skitrel

Smash Journeyman
Joined
Feb 26, 2015
Messages
423
Location
UK
The platforms aren't really an issue since they're at a position where you can't really projectile camp.
The real problem is how low the blastzones are, that's why it was banned in Melee, and it seems as if it wasn't fixed there either unfortunately.
Nair has a diagonally downward bullet hitbox.
 

ParanoidDrone

Smash Master
Joined
Jan 26, 2008
Messages
4,335
Location
Baton Rouge, LA
Just had a thought occur to me. You know how the game liberally replaces the background of a stage with a special flat texture effect for final smashes and certain items or assist trophies? (Like Dr. Kawashima.)

Well, consider what would happen if this were to occur on, say, Skyloft when the stage passed through an area where you could touch the island and take damage. That would be a pretty cheap, unavoidable hit if you couldn't even see it due to the aforementioned background effect. I find it hard to imagine this sort of thing would fail to be noticed by Sakurai.

For that reason, I think it will be worth specifically investigating if these sort of "background collision" hitboxes still exist.

-----

Edit to avoid double posting:

After today's Direct we got some Treehouse footage and saw a fair number of Battlefield forms. A cursory watch suggests that the stage shape is indeed identical -- Tortimer Island in particular floats over a void despite being solid all the way down on the 3DS. This bodes well.

There were also several matches with stage morphing active. One in particular that stood out to me was Temple/Corneria, and the stage morph did not scale the two stages for the transition. An interesting tidbit. I didn't notice any particular performance issues, but I wasn't watching too closely for that in particular.
 
Last edited:

blackghost

Smash Champion
Joined
Jul 9, 2015
Messages
2,249
Just had a thought occur to me. You know how the game liberally replaces the background of a stage with a special flat texture effect for final smashes and certain items or assist trophies? (Like Dr. Kawashima.)

Well, consider what would happen if this were to occur on, say, Skyloft when the stage passed through an area where you could touch the island and take damage. That would be a pretty cheap, unavoidable hit if you couldn't even see it due to the aforementioned background effect. I find it hard to imagine this sort of thing would fail to be noticed by Sakurai.

For that reason, I think it will be worth specifically investigating if these sort of "background collision" hitboxes still exist.

-----

Edit to avoid double posting:

After today's Direct we got some Treehouse footage and saw a fair number of Battlefield forms. A cursory watch suggests that the stage shape is indeed identical -- Tortimer Island in particular floats over a void despite being solid all the way down on the 3DS. This bodes well.

There were also several matches with stage morphing active. One in particular that stood out to me was Temple/Corneria, and the stage morph did not scale the two stages for the transition. An interesting tidbit. I didn't notice any particular performance issues, but I wasn't watching too closely for that in particular.
stage morphing is smoother in this new build than the one before as I and others said it would be. this should be tested. it opens up gameplay and ups the skill ceiling of the game and lowers the floor. unlike customs, there is no logical argument to counter only player fearmongering. if you want to open up the game for more characters to be viable you should support stage morph.
 

Beatrice

Smash Cadet
Joined
Aug 5, 2018
Messages
62
Location
TN
stage morphing is smoother in this new build than the one before as I and others said it would be. this should be tested. it opens up gameplay and ups the skill ceiling of the game and lowers the floor. unlike customs, there is no logical argument to counter only player fearmongering. if you want to open up the game for more characters to be viable you should support stage morph.
I wouldn't be so quick to assume that stage morph would open up more character viability. It would really depend on what stages ultimately end up being legal and the process that ends up being used to decide what stage/stages to use.

There are a lot of people who want more legal stages as opposed to stages that fit the current criteria for "neutral." I'm totally fine with this and support it, but the result would be that some stages would clearly benefit/hurt certain characters (think brawl metaknight on delfino). If we do implement stage morph, I can imagine a scenario where characters whose recoveries are exploitable would be consistently worse than if only one stage is allowed at a time.

Example: We have a stage selection process where each person has X number of stage bans and then each person picks a stage. Depending on the number of stage bans (do we ban until there are only two stages? do we set an arbitrary number of bans that gives players a way to mitigate some stages they don't want while still allowing some degree of flexibility in players' stage choice?) some characters may just get shafted and be unable to avoid playing on a stage that sucks for them in every game.

At least without stage morph, characters that can be exploited can at least limit how often they have to play on an unfavorable stage. I'm not totally opposed to the idea of implementing stage morph, but I'm skeptical that we'll arrive at an implementation that seems more fair than only playing on one stage per game.
 

Munomario777

Smash Master
Joined
Nov 18, 2014
Messages
3,253
Location
Charleston, South Carolina
3DS FC
0387-9596-4480
Switch FC
SW-8229-3157-8114
So happy to see stage morph running smoothly in this build! I definitely think we should try it out as a solution for game one. (Maybe even subsequent games?)

Bans might not even be super necessary, since you can choose your character to adapt to the stage, and you’re guaranteed to play on a favorable stage half of the time. (But adding bans, of course, isn’t out of the question.)

The only potential downside is that players might be incentivized to camp until their stage comes up, but it should definitely be given a shot at least.
 
Last edited:

Untouch

Smash Master
Joined
Aug 4, 2009
Messages
3,783
Stage morph still has the inevitable problem of players camping until their character's choice of stage appears.
I think the only reason to use it would be for game 1, morphing between battlefield and final destination.
 
Last edited:

Munomario777

Smash Master
Joined
Nov 18, 2014
Messages
3,253
Location
Charleston, South Carolina
3DS FC
0387-9596-4480
Switch FC
SW-8229-3157-8114
Do we know how frequently the stage can be set to morph?

Depending on that, I wonder if a solution to the whole camping problem might be to set the morph to a very short interval, like 30 seconds or something.

Benefits:
- Camping isn’t as strong. Why camp when your reward is only a mere 30 seconds in the stage of your choice? Even if camping is beneficial in some scenarios, the short duration of each morph means that camping won’t drag out the game nearly as long.
- The benefit of having the first morph isn’t as large. Since each morph lasts only 30 seconds, it’s rare to win because the opponent never got a chance to play on their stage.
- Each player has more opportunities to use their stage. Since it swaps back and forth frequently, neither player has to wait long to get their stage of choice and pull off a ladder combo or other trick.
- Simultaneously, neither player can abuse stages for a long time. If a Little Mac’s opponent picks Duck Hunt, they can’t camp on the tree for more than 30 seconds. Similarly, a ZSS can’t constantly use ladder combos on Battlefield.
- For this reason, this system may be viable with zero stage bans, which is good for a large stage list even if the number of bans is small. Bans punish players for forgetting one of the legal stages; if you’re a Mac player and forget to strike Duck Hunt in the heat of the moment and from a pool of 20 stages, good luck. With morphing, the need to prevent certain stages from being used is mitigated, because each stage is essentially favorable for your character half of the time. (Additionally, you pick your character after the stages are picked!)
- The issue of “echo stages” is sidestepped completely, due to the potential obsolescence of bans. If a match ends up morphing between Battlefield and Dream Land, there are no issues! The only exception is if DSR is implemented, which might make less sense to begin with in a morphing system.
- This is more of a fun side effect than a selling point, but rapid transitions would mean more opportunities for hype tricks using the morph system, such as recovering from a spike by riding the stage as it comes up. This would hardly break the game, and like Randall, it’s on a predictable timer.

Drawbacks:
- The rapid transitions may be disorienting or distracting. The camera zooming out is the main concern, but stages like Duck Hunt have been legal without a zoomed-out camera being an issue. The music and visuals also change.
- Similarly, some players might not be a huge fan of adapting to different layouts so often. Then again, PS1 in melee and T&C in 4 are legal, and Smashville is incredibly popular.
- If having such a short delay between morphs lags out the game, then this isn’t a good route to take.
- And of course, we don’t know if it’s even possible to set the stage to morph in 30-second intervals.

If 30-second (or so) morphs are an option and don’t lag out the game, they should really be considered, in my opinion! The other con, where the morphs end up feeling disorienting / distracting, is a valid concern. To alleviate this, morphing could be limited to game one, and subsequent games in a set could use asymmetrical stage selection systems.

This isn’t entirely relevant, but for those subsequent games, I’m a fan of “loser nominates 3 stages, winner picks 1.” Unlike striking, it doesn’t punish players for forgetting one of the legal stages, which helps with a large stage list. (Under this system, “echo stages” would be accounted for by only allowing the loser to nominate one from each group.)

As a final note, here’s a good idea for a morphing-selection procedure, imo:
- Players play RPS, just like current game one methods.
- The winner of RPS gets to pick whether to reveal his stage pick first or second.
- Afterward, the loser of RPS gets to pick whether he wants his morph to appear first or second in the battle.
- After that, both players reveal their stages, select them in-game, select their characters, and play the match.
- If both players choose the same stage, it’s just selected without morphing... though this is unlikely in this system since it’s not double-blind or anything.

A simpler system would be “double-blind, RPS to choose morph order,” but that might give the winner of RPS too much power.
 
Last edited:

blackghost

Smash Champion
Joined
Jul 9, 2015
Messages
2,249
Do we know how frequently the stage can be set to morph?

Depending on that, I wonder if a solution to the whole camping problem might be to set the morph to a very short interval, like 30 seconds or something.

Benefits:
- Camping isn’t as strong. Why camp when your reward is only a mere 30 seconds in the stage of your choice? Even if camping is beneficial in some scenarios, the short duration of each morph means that camping won’t drag out the game nearly as long.
- The benefit of having the first morph isn’t as large. Since each morph lasts only 30 seconds, it’s rare to win because the opponent never got a chance to play on their stage.
- Each player has more opportunities to use their stage. Since it swaps back and forth frequently, neither player has to wait long to get their stage of choice and pull off a ladder combo or other trick.
- Simultaneously, neither player can abuse stages for a long time. If a Little Mac’s opponent picks Duck Hunt, they can’t camp on the tree for more than 30 seconds. Similarly, a ZSS can’t constantly use ladder combos on Battlefield.
- For this reason, this system may be viable with zero stage bans, which is good for a large stage list even if the number of bans is small. Bans punish players for forgetting one of the legal stages; if you’re a Mac player and forget to strike Duck Hunt in the heat of the moment and from a pool of 20 stages, good luck. With morphing, the need to prevent certain stages from being used is mitigated, because each stage is essentially favorable for your character half of the time. (Additionally, you pick your character after the stages are picked!)
- The issue of “echo stages” is sidestepped completely, due to the potential obsolescence of bans. If a match ends up morphing between Battlefield and Dream Land, there are no issues! The only exception is if DSR is implemented, which might make less sense to begin with in a morphing system.
- This is more of a fun side effect than a selling point, but rapid transitions would mean more opportunities for hype tricks using the morph system, such as recovering from a spike by riding the stage as it comes up. This would hardly break the game, and like Randall, it’s on a predictable timer.

Drawbacks:
- The rapid transitions may be disorienting or distracting. The camera zooming out is the main concern, but stages like Duck Hunt have been legal without a zoomed-out camera being an issue. The music and visuals also change.
- Similarly, some players might not be a huge fan of adapting to different layouts so often. Then again, PS1 in melee and T&C in 4 are legal, and Smashville is incredibly popular.
- If having such a short delay between morphs lags out the game, then this isn’t a good route to take.
- And of course, we don’t know if it’s even possible to set the stage to morph in 30-second intervals.

If 30-second (or so) morphs are an option and don’t lag out the game, they should really be considered, in my opinion! The other con, where the morphs end up feeling disorienting / distracting, is a valid concern. To alleviate this, morphing could be limited to game one, and subsequent games in a set could use asymmetrical stage selection systems.

This isn’t entirely relevant, but for those subsequent games, I’m a fan of “loser nominates 3 stages, winner picks 1.” Unlike striking, it doesn’t punish players for forgetting one of the legal stages, which helps with a large stage list. (Under this system, “echo stages” would be accounted for by only allowing the loser to nominate one from each group.)

As a final note, here’s a good idea for a morphing-selection procedure, imo:
- Players play RPS, just like current game one methods.
- The winner of RPS gets to pick whether to reveal his stage pick first or second.
- Afterward, the loser of RPS gets to pick whether he wants his morph to appear first or second in the battle.
- After that, both players reveal their stages, select them in-game, select their characters, and play the match.
- If both players choose the same stage, it’s just selected without morphing... though this is unlikely in this system since it’s not double-blind or anything.

A simpler system would be “double-blind, RPS to choose morph order,” but that might give the winner of RPS too much power.
i agree except i'd like the timer to be 1:30 to 2:00 on each stage. the timer will be a point of contention but i think 30 seconds is too short.
 

Munomario777

Smash Master
Joined
Nov 18, 2014
Messages
3,253
Location
Charleston, South Carolina
3DS FC
0387-9596-4480
Switch FC
SW-8229-3157-8114
The main thing with 1:30 or 2:00, or even with 1:00, is that you're kinda incentivized to camp until your stage comes up. Why deal with your opponent's stage for a whole minute when you could camp for a bit and then enjoy a long period of time on your stage of choice?

With 30-second morphs, the reward for camping is weaker. Instead of spending 1:30 on your stage as a reward for camping, you're spending only 30 seconds, so there's less of an incentive to actively camp.
 

ParanoidDrone

Smash Master
Joined
Jan 26, 2008
Messages
4,335
Location
Baton Rouge, LA
https://youtu.be/zAvaOVLotCQ?t=439

It looks like the statues in Castle Siege's second form no longer block projectiles. (EDIT: This might be the hazards-off form. Next match is Luigi's Mansion with similarly non-solid pillars.) (EDIT 2: No, it just took a while before anyone hit the top pillars on Mansion. Castle Siege statues being intangible is on the table again.)

The Wuhu Island clip is novel to me, I never knew the ship had a hitbox.
 
Last edited:

dav3yb

Smash Journeyman
Joined
Dec 7, 2014
Messages
431
The main thing with 1:30 or 2:00, or even with 1:00, is that you're kinda incentivized to camp until your stage comes up. Why deal with your opponent's stage for a whole minute when you could camp for a bit and then enjoy a long period of time on your stage of choice?

With 30-second morphs, the reward for camping is weaker. Instead of spending 1:30 on your stage as a reward for camping, you're spending only 30 seconds, so there's less of an incentive to actively camp.
Stage morph could be a nice solution to first stage. The only thing players would need to sort out is who's stage will start the match.

I'm still leaning towards either random, or stage morph for the first pick. Even if a smaller set of stages is used for game 1. I think there are about 9 stages, give or take a couple depending on how the hazard toggles effects them, that should be pretty well uncontested as good starter stages. Random those or use stage morph with just this stages, then game 2+ winner gets some vetoes and loser just picks a stage from the rest that are good.
 

viewtifulduck82

Smash Ace
Joined
Jul 19, 2013
Messages
608
NNID
Viewtifulduck82
3DS FC
4957-3557-2255
Have we figured out if either of the pokemon stadium stages transform with hazards off?
 

PeridotGX

Smash Hero
Joined
Jun 8, 2017
Messages
9,019
Location
That Distant Shore
NNID
Denoma5280
I've been think about things. Would ths be a good setup for competitive play?

Game 1: Both players strike two stages. They both then select one stage from the remaining selection, which are stage morphed.

Game 2+: The winner of game one strike two stages. Loser selects from there, no stage morph.

I think this works well. I especialy like it because it allows a larger stage-list. Let's say, hypothetically, 3D Land is a very good stage competitively, but :ultroy: has a really unfair advantage while on it. While fighting Roy, you could strike 3D Land to keep the match fair, but without Roy 3D Land remains a viable option. Plus, it solves the issue on how to strike with a huge stage list, by simply not striking all stages.

I could be wrong and this is atrocious though. Let me know (also sorry if this is the wrong place to post this).
 

dav3yb

Smash Journeyman
Joined
Dec 7, 2014
Messages
431
I could be wrong and this is atrocious though. Let me know (also sorry if this is the wrong place to post this)
I don't really see why striking should be involved at all, it's a really bad way to pick stages.
 

PeridotGX

Smash Hero
Joined
Jun 8, 2017
Messages
9,019
Location
That Distant Shore
NNID
Denoma5280
I don't really see why striking should be involved at all, it's a really bad way to pick stages.
I didn't include stricking as a way to completely determine the stage. I made it so that the players could remove a stage or two that would make the match unfair. For example, wasn't Duck Hunt banned in 4 because Bayonetta camped too much? In this system, it could be struck so the Bayonetta doesn't have an unfair advantage, but in Bayonetta-less matches it's still able to be played.
 

Munomario777

Smash Master
Joined
Nov 18, 2014
Messages
3,253
Location
Charleston, South Carolina
3DS FC
0387-9596-4480
Switch FC
SW-8229-3157-8114
IMO vetoes are pretty strictly superior to strikes when a large ruleset is involved.

For reference, vetoing is where Player A immediately picks a stage, and Player B has two or so chances per game to say, "I don't want to go there, pick a different stage." In other words, it's like striking a stage after it's already been chosen.

Let's say there's like 30 stages, and your opponent is using ZSS. Let's say she still has ladder combos, and for that reason still excels on Battlefield.

With bans:
- It's your turn to strike a stage!
- In the heat of the moment and with a 30 stage list, you forget to ban Battlefield.
- ZSS picks Battlefield and bodies you because you forgot to strike a stage.

With vetoes:
- It's ZSS's turn to pick a stage!
- ZSS picks Battlefield.
- You remember that ZSS is good on Battlefield and veto the stage.
- ZSS picks another stage instead, and the fight is less one-sided.

In addition to just forgetting about a stage, vetoes also sidestep the issue of choice paralysis (for the striking / vetoing player, anyway). It's hard to make decisions when there are lots of options, such as which stage to strike from the entire stage roster. With vetoes, there are only two choices: veto the stage or don't veto it.

Stage striking and vetoing pretty much lead to the same outcomes, except striking punishes players for being human and vulnerable to choice paralysis / forgetting about a stage in a large lineup. I think it's fair to say that this kind of punishment isn't very desirable in competitive play. The goal of striking / vetoing / etc is to find a fair stage for both players to play on, not to determine who has the strongest resolve before the match even starts.
 
Last edited:

ShneeOscar

Smash Cadet
Joined
Jan 19, 2015
Messages
43
Vetos work better than bans, but a slightly better way to handle it, especially with a large stage list, is to have one player pick 3 stages and then have the other player choose out of those, which resolves the problem of forgetting a stage is legal, and speeds things up a bit.
 

Untouch

Smash Master
Joined
Aug 4, 2009
Messages
3,783
Watching Nintendo Live, they had New Donk City, one of the sections (the third) looked like it may have some issues, not sure if it was a walkoff or not though, but the platforms were relatively far from the stage.
 

ParanoidDrone

Smash Master
Joined
Jan 26, 2008
Messages
4,335
Location
Baton Rouge, LA
Watching Nintendo Live, they had New Donk City, one of the sections (the third) looked like it may have some issues, not sure if it was a walkoff or not though, but the platforms were relatively far from the stage.
Link to a video? I'm not fully up to date with all that's been going on this weekend.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom