Meta SSBU Stagelist Discussion

[Vulgun]

So I've come to a sort of realization when it came to looking at the potential stagelists for Ultimate and I'll probably be the first to say it whilst arguing for this unpopular opinion: Town and City needs to be replaced with Yggdrasil's Altar. This would be a bold claim for me to make, but I've at least some things backing me up to support the legality of Yggdrasil and the subsequent banning or the possibility of placement into counterpick of Town and City.

Spoiler: Calculated Comparisons

First and foremost, I would like to point to a comparison of the sizes of the stages and how this could impact gameplay. We know by looking through sources, especially Ruben's Calculator, we have the following parameters for both the sizes and the blast zone sizes of each stage, from left to right (X) and top to bottom (Y), with sizes estimated to nearest 100th:

Battlefield (Comparison)
Main Platform Size: X: -79.99 to X: -79.99
Blast Zone Size: X: -240 to X: 240, Y: 192 to Y: -140

Town and City
Main Platform Size (approx.): X: -81.77 to X: 83.22
Blast Zone Size: X: -230 to X: 230, Y: 195 to Y: -118

Yggdrasil's Altar
Main Platform Size: X: -80 to X: 80
Blast Zone Size: X: -250 to X: 250, Y: 192 to Y: -140

So with this said, there are some clear problems with Town and City right off the bat that are not present in Yggdrasil's Altar. If we're taking into consideration that Battlefield is meant to be an average-sized stage, then Yggdrasil is almost exactly such a stage, while Town and City barely goes above the average. In addition, if we take Battlefield's blast zones as the baseline, then Yggdrasil's Altar is again the clear winner of the comparison in that it is a stage with relatively close blast zones to that of Battlefield; at least far closer to its likeness than Town and City would be.

This comparison is key in that this means Town and City ends with kills that start at percents far sooner than other stages, sans vertical KO moves. Of course, this isn't necessarily a bad thing, since earlier kills could be useful for certain characters. Of course, this puts Town and City in a predicament that all of the other contenders for Starter stages simply don't have: it blast zones are below average. Every other stage considered neutral has an X: -240, 240 or X: -250, 250 coordinate distance, with most stages typically being in the X: -80, 80 range in size (bar notable exceptions like Pokemon Stadium 2 and Smashville), with most of the stages going past X: -125 when going toward the bottom blast zone.

So the problem here is that due to the large stature of the stage itself, combined with the smaller blast zones, is that it would kill well below average in any test you throw at it, whereas Yggdrasil's Altar itself would lead into typically average kill potential vertically with a marginally above-average kill potential on the sides. This alone would make Yggdrasil's Altar a better stage since it's both of a smaller size and has practically average blast zone size.

But that's not all I would like to bring up about the positioning of the stages. With X: 0 taken into account, I believe you've already noticed another problem in regards to Town and City that do not exist on either Battlefield or Yggdrasil's Altar: Town and City's positioning is asymmetrical. While it isn't a wide margin by any means and this trait is shared by other stages, it is the largest at an X: 1.45 difference, with Smashville being a close runner up with an X: 1.19 distance. This does lead into earlier kills that would be more preferrably made for the right side of the stage. This, however, is not present on Yggdrasil's Altar, which remains the same distance on the left and right of the stage regardless.

This means that Yggdrasil's Altar's main platform is, by all definitions, a superior platform.

Spoiler: Addressing Platform Size, Shape and Exploitation of the Former

While it is true that Yggdrasil's Altar is notorious for a thin main platform, especially at the ledges, it is not an uncommon trait for the stage to have, considering both Smashville and Town and City have notably exploitable edges at the end. This would initially cause issues in the short term with people having to be more careful in recovering, but in the long term this will be a non-issue as players would adapt to such a small change in proper.

As with all stages, there is at least some form of exploitability within Altar's main platform, but there is another slight issue that Town and City (and to greater extent, Smashville) has that Yggdrasil doesn't: its bottom is asymmetrical in shape, too, having a more slanted right side and thinner right edge than left. This may not mean much, as it too is marginal, but it is still something of note.

Spoiler: Addressing Yggdrasil's Altar's Starting Platform

Understandably, one would be skeptical of my bold claim and state that there is a small wall underneath the main platform of Yggdrasil's Altar that can cause some potential issues. However, much like the issue of the thin size of the stage, this would only be a short term issue and thus become a long-term non-problem as players adapt to the platform. The stage itself also temporarily starts on the platform, but once it has taken off, that will be the last anyone will see of the main platform for the entire match, which I believe would justify even having the stage in the first place, let alone having it replace Town and City.

Spoiler: Addressing Yggdrasil's Altar's Background

We have Final Destination. It gives me a headache using it, but I deal with it. Moving on.

Spoiler: The Soft Platforms and Camping

One of the prominent issues larger and flatter stages have in Ultimate is the potential for some characters to easily camp against others, case in point being Town and City. This is an issue that is seen on all stages, most notably flatter ones, and has seen some things circumvent this potential by either introducing platforms or being small enough to get around it quick enough. Town and City, in my opinion, may have one of the bigger issues that results in giving more power to camping rather than less. While the platforms are indeed nice to have, these do little to truly compensate for the stage's large and otherwise campy stature overall, and there's not enough variety to introduce ways to circumvent camping from opponents.

This such issue is either lessened or does not exist on Yggdrasil's Altar. There are a significantly larger amount of both platforms and platform layouts at the disposal of the players that can actually aid better in circumventing the campy potential of the stage. You are basically being given more options at your disposal on that stage than you are on Town and City where it is likelier you will be camped or hit right back onto the middle platform, especially as a character who can't necessarily handle it.

Meanwhile, there are multiple combinations of layouts to use on Yggdrasil's Altar that can allow you to think out of ways to get past the opponent without necessarily needing to feed into them, far more than what Town and City currently provide. Higher platforms, platforms on one side, multiple platforms to jump onto, even a slanted platform, all of these simply provide more opportunities to come up with ways around your opponent. Granted, this is a double-edged sword, but it is subjectively better in most, if not all regards, than what we currently do have.

Granted, there is a slanted soft platform, but this can be of use as a tool against overzealous opponents who simply try to hit you with an up air or a long reaching attack, only to be out of range due to you being at a higher or lowered elevation. There is a lot more nuance to tactics in Altar that you won't see in Town and City.

Spoiler: Closing Statements

Now given that we have been utilizing Town and City ever since its introduction in Super Smash Bros. for Wii U and 3DS, it would be an incredible task to switch from one stage to a different stage given that we have had more experience on it than we do on Yggdrasil's Altar. However, I do think that it is highly recommended we do actually switch off of Town and City in favor of what would possibly be a superior stage in all regards. If we were to keep a stage, I would rather it be the stage with a more symmetrical layout and far better ways to circumvent camping and generate better strategies than the stage that is all but.

And if we were to at least consider these two stages for a moment, I would like to at least state that we could either ban Town and City in favor of Yggdrasil's Altar, or we could make one of these two stages (preferrably Town and City) a counterpick stage if it really came down to it. And if it really did come down to it, we could put one of the two stages in as a replacement to one of the more contentious stages, such as Yoshi's Island (Brawl). It would be a much finer option than simply keeping Yggdrasil's Altar banned without figuring out the key nuances behind it.

If anyone has questions or anything to argue against, I'll be happy to respond.

 

[Sean²]

The background of FD is universally avoidable with Omega forms. Not possible to avoid Yggdrasil's background. Which is arguably as distracting as Umbra Clock Tower, FD, or hazards-on Lylat. Possibly worse than the latter two - choose the right color on your character and you'll blend right in.
__________________________________________________________________________________________________

If you look at any of my old posts in this thread, you'll see how liberal I was at one point with my stage choices. I'm still in the camp of "all of it is legal, or none of it is". I don't mean every stage being legal, but every stage that appears to have some competitive viability should be considered - or the stage list should be whittled down so far that no comparisons can be made beyond the fact that the stage has a solid main platform, and may contain soft platforms in some capacity above the main platform. The current trend of picking and choosing legal stages just because they're static, flat, and symmetrical doesn't eliminate similarities. Expressing this opinion elsewhere has really been controversial, and usually either gets ridiculed or insulted upon posting it. But, we've proven time and time again, that any stage where center stage is primarily flat and has no platforms for a decent portion of the time, essentially caters to any character that also does well on FD. Kalos, Town & City, Yggdrasil's Altar, etc all fit this bill.

But then you have another issue. What is the fifth starter to accompany the four universally-legal stages? Lylat as a starter has proven controversial due to slopes and a main platform that some hitboxes very easily pass-through. Kalos and Town are FD-esque. Yoshi's Story, Unova, and Yoshi's Island Brawl both have their controversies and also have comparable stages that are universal starters. So - if you're going to make the FD-like stages legal, you should also make the other monoplat, biplat, and triplat stages viable for play as well. But then, you also open the can of worms that is slopes - both Yoshi's stages have them. So you're almost required to have Lylat, as it's a unique triplat layout that is almost inexcusable to be illegal if all the other stages I have listed are available. But wait - now the stagelist is imbalanced again! Small stages are now once again outweighed by medium and large stages. What do you do? Arbitrarily ban an existing stage or two, or add another controversial pick...Castle Siege? WarioWare? ...figure out a way to intermingle Hazards On stages?

See what I'm getting at here?

So my stagelist would look kind of like this:

Starter:
Pokemon Stadium 2
Smashville
Battlefield

Counterpick:
Final Destination

FD could probably be replaced with Kalos at the discretion of the TO (and vice versa), but both should not be loaded into a legal stage list concurrently. With this list, most controversies are eliminated. You have three universal starters of different platform layouts. You have coverage on stage size, one large, one medium, and one small stage choice. Slopes are eliminated, as they have proven controversial. Comparable stages have been eliminated. With no DSR, you get maybe one ban in the counterpick phase. With modified DSR, you get no bans. Your only counterpick is a medium-size, classic stage that has been semi-polarizing and matchup-oriented in every iteration of the game - e.g. a prime choice for a counterpick stage.

If this means that most sets will still just be played out on PS2 entirely, then so be it - that part is up to the players. If they want to gentleman to a non-legal stage, then that's up to them as well - if both players agree. If your goal is to eliminate the need for this thread and any future stage discussion (outside of DLC stages), then this list would be the way to go. I almost feel as if stage discussion is nearing a thing of the past. It's still fun to theorycraft possibilities of larger stage lists that include former legal stages, and ones that may have never been legal - but you're hard pressed to convince anyone to try it now that we're a year into the metagame.

 

[Vulgun]

The background of FD is universally avoidable with Omega forms. Not possible to avoid Yggdrasil's background. Which is arguably as distracting as Umbra Clock Tower, FD, or hazards-on Lylat. Possibly worse than the latter two - choose the right color on your character and you'll blend right in.

Yggdrasil's Altar does not have that distracting of a background, especially not as distracting as Umbra Clock Tower or hazards-on Lylat. Unlike both stages, it does not have constant action in the background, unless you'd count a still model of the entire landscape and a couple of cycled set pieces as constant action. And most notably unlike them, if you take the time to see the stage after it starts up, it cycles through a couple of backgrounds at a slow enough speed and a slow enough window of transition to where it isn't even a problem. This is being blown way out of proportion to what the stage actually is.

Most of the time, you'll just be looking down at the entire map below and not exactly in any other position.

And as for the costume issues regarding characters, trust me, you're not going to blend into it. The stage provided is slow enough and bright enough to distinguish what character is where even in the transitions to other areas.

 

[Sean²]

I've played on that stage countless times since its release, and it messes with my eyes every single time it appears. I would rather play on FD any day. It has more contrasting colors at some points, and still has some movement, but remains relatively static in others - and has the backdrop of "spikes" that emerge from the stage that can help hold your focus when the background changes. Yggdrasil's whips around faster than any of FD's moving sections, and really has no backdrop similar to it. Maybe Umbra Clock Tower wasn't the best comparison - I'd probably put it more along the likes of Skyloft. And while the characters don't necessarily blend in just by existing on the stage (like Sheik or Lucario on Fountain of Dreams or G&W on most dark stages), it can be hard to tell what attack they're currently performing on the faster moving parts. I don't have any type of ocular handicap either, I can only imagine how it'd be if you had poorer eyesight. I just believe the quality of play suffers on stages with noticeably active backgrounds.

 

[Vulgun]

I've played on that stage countless times since its release, and it messes with my eyes every single time it appears. I would rather play on FD any day. It has more contrasting colors at some points, and still has some movement, but remains relatively static in others - and has the backdrop of "spikes" that emerge from the stage that can help hold your focus when the background changes. Yggdrasil's whips around faster than any of FD's moving sections, and really has no backdrop similar to it. Maybe Umbra Clock Tower wasn't the best comparison - I'd probably put it more along the likes of Skyloft. And while the characters don't necessarily blend in just by existing on the stage (like Sheik or Lucario on Fountain of Dreams or G&W on most dark stages), it can be hard to tell what attack they're currently performing on the faster moving parts. I don't have any type of ocular handicap either, I can only imagine how it'd be if you had poorer eyesight. I just believe the quality of play suffers on stages with noticeably active backgrounds.

Well I can see where you're coming from and agree that the quality of play does suffer from stages with active backgrounds, though I do argue that this still wouldn't be the case to keep the stage banned. Most of the stages on the current universal stagelist, at least, one comprised of most rulesets, have some sort of background that can be distracting at times. I find myself ending up seeing the background of FD or even PS2 simply because of their backgrounds, and then it's just simply jarring to pull my eyes right back onto the fight itself.

Altar may have its moments, but again, they won't happen all the time on the map. When they do happen, yes, it is noticeable, but just as fast as they occur, they're gone.

Still, is there any other real argument as to why this stage should be banned? Because if not, then I don't see why people should ban it.

 

[moowell2]

Why not target the ruleset itself? Instead of choosing and banning stages, you set your stagelist into a pre-built rotation. The players then strike the stages they don't want to start on, and once the final stage is selected for the first game, the remaining games are played in stage order. This allows for the use of more varied stages and characters, since the same two stages will never be played more than once in a given set, and the strength of characters somewhat depends on the stage. With a well-ordered stagelist, most characters will have a chance to shine on a stage that is suited for them at some point during the set. Here's an example of a hazardless stagelist using this format:

T&C>SV>BF>Kalos>PS2>Lylat>FD>YI(B)>Unova>YS>T&C

This forces players to think about the set as a whole. If I start on stage a, can I win on b and c? If I win at least once, can I reach stages x and y to close the set with my current character? What character should I switch to after a loss given the upcoming stages? This line of thinking raises the level of play and allows for characters which normally may not see much use to shine.

I know this idea will never make it big, but it's food for thought.

 

[ParanoidDrone]

Why not target the ruleset itself? Instead of choosing and banning stages, you set your stagelist into a pre-built rotation. The players then strike the stages they don't want to start on, and once the final stage is selected for the first game, the remaining games are played in stage order. This allows for the use of more varied stages and characters, since the same two stages will never be played more than once in a given set, and the strength of characters somewhat depends on the stage. With a well-ordered stagelist, most characters will have a chance to shine on a stage that is suited for them at some point during the set. Here's an example of a hazardless stagelist using this format:

T&C>SV>BF>Kalos>PS2>Lylat>FD>YI(B)>Unova>YS>T&C

This forces players to think about the set as a whole. If I start on stage a, can I win on b and c? If I win at least once, can I reach stages x and y to close the set with my current character? What character should I switch to after a loss given the upcoming stages? This line of thinking raises the level of play and allows for characters which normally may not see much use to shine.

I know this idea will never make it big, but it's food for thought.

IDK if this will ever catch on (probably not, let's be honest here) but major props for an idea I've literally never seen suggested before.

 

[ATH_]

IDK if this will ever catch on (probably not, let's be honest here) but major props for an idea I've literally never seen suggested before.

It's genuinely a really unique idea. You can add to it by only having certain stages for game 1, like starters, then it progresses through the full list.

Or an alternative, you have 5 starters, 1 list for each starter, and depending on w hich starter is chosen, that list of 3 is chosen. So you can have polarizing stages be starters, but then the next two will balance it out by having polarizing stages with the opposite effects.

 

[VietnameseHOTGIRL]

It's genuinely a really unique idea. You can add to it by only having certain stages for game 1, like starters, then it progresses through the full list.

Or an alternative, you have 5 starters, 1 list for each starter, and depending on w hich starter is chosen, that list of 3 is chosen. So you can have polarizing stages be starters, but then the next two will balance it out by having polarizing stages with the opposite effects.

There is actually a similar stage format that happens in Japan, that I've seen/ participated in.

All Stages Hazards Off
Fountain of Dreams Battlefield/Omega versions banned

Game 1 Stage list: Battlefield / FD/ PS2
[Each ban 1 or Agreement]
Game 2: Battlefield / FD / PS2 - The stage played on game 1 cannot be chosen again
[Loser choice]
Game 3: Smashville / Town & City / Kalos
[Each ban 1 or Agreement]


If best of 5 is necessary it's the remaining stages between Smashville / TC/ Kalos
Game 4: Smashville / Town & City / Kalos: - The stage played on game 3 cannot be chosen again
[Loser choice]
Game 5: Smashville / Town & City / Kalos
[Whatever Remains]

It can be tweaked to whatever preferences people think are good, I don't mind this myself, but I am personally pretty open to many things.

 

[Sean²]

Why not target the ruleset itself? Instead of choosing and banning stages, you set your stagelist into a pre-built rotation. The players then strike the stages they don't want to start on, and once the final stage is selected for the first game, the remaining games are played in stage order. This allows for the use of more varied stages and characters, since the same two stages will never be played more than once in a given set, and the strength of characters somewhat depends on the stage. With a well-ordered stagelist, most characters will have a chance to shine on a stage that is suited for them at some point during the set. Here's an example of a hazardless stagelist using this format:

T&C>SV>BF>Kalos>PS2>Lylat>FD>YI(B)>Unova>YS>T&C

This forces players to think about the set as a whole. If I start on stage a, can I win on b and c? If I win at least once, can I reach stages x and y to close the set with my current character? What character should I switch to after a loss given the upcoming stages? This line of thinking raises the level of play and allows for characters which normally may not see much use to shine.

I know this idea will never make it big, but it's food for thought.

Though I like this idea, most people would probably prefer not to feel pressured to switch from their main/whomever they're playing at that point in time to avoid a stage that their character does poorly on. Almost kind of like fighting the stage more than fighting your opponent. The results could be skewed toward the direction of who's the more diverse player, versus who is the better player.

I know saying the term "better player" can be dodgy ground, because some say the true better player would be able to be more successful with more characters, or the better player would win regardless of stage choice. But I think that gap would start to close a tiny bit.

 

[ATH_]

I see people all over twitter complaining about Lylat because of a specific Dabuz set but can't find it, does anyone know what's going on?

 

[NuzTheMonkey]

During Clash of the Carolinas, Dabuz was playing Kola, and his Rosa up b had a really strange interaction with the Lylat ledge that made it so Rosa didn’t grab the ledge and went right through it.

https://twitter.com/limaclarita/status/1233994182936727552?s=21

Clip is right here.

 

[SecretAsianMan]

To be fair tho
Rosa up b can do that to a lot of stages and not just lylat. Her up b is really wonky like that

 

[NuzTheMonkey]

Just gonna put this quote from the CCI that has some more data on Lylat ledge interactions.

This tweet here shows other characters having up special ledge snapping issues with Lylat, showing Roy, Marth and Sonic specifically (though the latter can directional airdodge to ledge after if he hasn't already used his airdodge)

There was a problem fetching the tweet

Plus there's the already known characters with this issue such as Peach, Kirby and Rosalina now.

And then this thread of tweets explains the issue

There was a problem fetching the tweet

specifically the third and fourth tweets explain and show Rosalina's issue. Far as I can make of it, part of it IS on Lylat for having such small ledges as there's a fine line between being at the ledge and being at a ceiling/wall which might also explain why Melee's Battlefield ledges are so ruthless too.

I don't personally find the showing of Marth and Roy to be too terribly noteworthy as from my own experience using Roy and playing against my training buddy's Marth and Roy, their up special already appears to have the issue of having an incredibly tiny ledge sweetspot behind them so if they go under any stage and try to up b back to ledge, it's way harder to snap to ledge for them and other characters might have this issue as well. Lylat just exacerbates it.

 

[Lacrimosa]

Seems like the French started doing an actual testrun on stages that may or may not be tournament viable.

There was a problem fetching the tweet

That should've been done from the beginning and stages should have been removed little by little....

 

[teluoborg]

This is an alternative to the recommended FR ruleset that is 9 starters 3 bans, with YI replacing UPL. It's been like this since the game came out and though there have been lots of complaints about YI it's stayed the same.

There are other alternatives like "7 stages 2 bans, no Yoshis" or "5 starters 4 CPs 3 bans"

 

[SJMistery]

I sleep. Wake me up when Delfino Plaza, Halberd, Arena Ferox and Prism Tower get tested.

 

[Sean²]

I sleep. Wake me up when Delfino Plaza, Halberd, Arena Ferox and Prism Tower get tested.

Brawl and Smash 4 will get you answers on Delfino and Halberd. Walkoffs, water, and sharking. Arena Ferox might be okay if you could choose the form you play on. Prism Tower could maybe be okay if it didn't return to the walkoff at the beginning whatsoever, but it does. The "destination" sections can be a bit chaotic/campy too.

If you want proven, TO testing then look at post history from Munomario777 .

 

[ChreeT]

What is the difference between sharking and stalling?

 

[Munomario777]

sharking is a type of stalling

 

[ATH_]

What is the difference between sharking and stalling?

Sharking is going under the stage and abusing a semi-soft piece of terrain to put out (usually disjointed) hitboxes through it, in theory becoming more difficult to hit. Basically, getting a stock lead then doing this the rest of the match would be widely considered a form of stalling.

Stalling on its own though is simply holding up the tournament by "playing for time". Stalling when there's only 30 seconds left on the clock is usually considered fine, but stalling for several minutes is generally frowned upon.

 

[ChreeT]

Then why is it not considered such under commonly used rulesets and if it is, what's all the fuss about.

 

[ATH_]

Then why is it not considered such under commonly used rulesets and if it is, what's all the fuss about.

This isn't a matter of rules. The word "stalling" in smash simply refers to a broad concept that sharking happens to fall in by its own definition, involving the player actively trying to stall.

 

[ChreeT]

This isn't a matter of rules. The word "stalling" in smash simply refers to a broad concept that sharking happens to fall in by its own definition, involving the player actively trying to stall.

Aren't there anti-stalling rules though? or are they just never enforced, cause i've seen them in multiple rulesets. Also this is probably something i should be discussing in another thread but i've already started here so i'm responding here.

 

[ATH_]

Aren't there anti-stalling rules though? or are they just never enforced, cause i've seen them in multiple rulesets. Also this is probably something i should be discussing in another thread but i've already started here so i'm responding here.

It depends on the TO. However, in most circumstances, stalling is usually not viable due to the stage selection or the other aspects of the ruleset. Sharking is currently not possible on any standardized stage since none of them have semi-soft terrain (platforms are not terrain).

Anti-stalling rules are extremely hard to enforce, and are very easy to exploit. Not a good match.

 

[ChreeT]

It depends on the TO. However, in most circumstances, stalling is usually not viable due to the stage selection or the other aspects of the ruleset. Sharking is currently not possible on any standardized stage since none of them have semi-soft terrain (platforms are not terrain).

Anti-stalling rules are extremely hard to enforce, and are very easy to exploit. Not a good match.

Ok, thank you for your time. The only real reason i jumped in here was because i was reading up on ultimate stages, since the local tournaments i host at my school have a very liberal stagelist. I was looking at smashwiki for the reasoning behind stages being banned in ultimate and when i got to halberd pretty much half the reasons given were complete bull. Also i was under the impression sharking was not as bad of a problem as in any of the other games.

 

[ATH_]

Ok, thank you for your time. The only real reason i jumped in here was because i was reading up on ultimate stages, since the local tournaments i host at my school have a very liberal stagelist. I was looking at smashwiki for the reasoning behind stages being banned in ultimate and when i got to halberd pretty much half the reasons given were complete bull. Also i was under the impression sharking was not as bad of a problem as in any of the other games.

Whether or not it's as much of a problem, most players agree that with so many viable stages, semi-soft terrain is an unnecessary risk that can only lead to stalling. Even though I and many others here may disagree with that, in the end, the purpose of a stage list is to bring both the most balanced experience to the players as well as the most satisfying experience.

We've had this debate plenty of times, I personally think stages like Castle Siege, Unova, and WarioWare have a lot of potential to be good but the common player stigma against those stages, while it is silly, is that those stages are not viable for varying different and inconsistent reasons.

But that's the TOs job, so. We're here to serve the players and try to make the best tournament possible. Not satisfy our own agendas.

 

[ChreeT]

Whether or not it's as much of a problem, most players agree that with so many viable stages, semi-soft terrain is an unnecessary risk that can only lead to stalling. Even though I and many others here may disagree with that, in the end, the purpose of a stage list is to bring both the most balanced experience to the players as well as the most satisfying experience.

We've had this debate plenty of times, I personally think stages like Castle Siege, Unova, and WarioWare have a lot of potential to be good but the common player stigma against those stages, while it is silly, is that those stages are not viable for varying different and inconsistent reasons.

But that's the TOs job, so. We're here to serve the players and try to make the best tournament possible. Not satisfy our own agendas.

I wholeheartedly agree on pretty much all points. I will say that i think the value of stage variety in Super Smash Bros Ultimate as a spectator sport should not be understated. I've seen plenty of people wanting 4-5 stage stagelists however not only would this take enjoyment out of both watching and competing in ultimate, but i think it misses the point on what kind of a game ultimate is.

Ultimate is a game built on the concept of variety, it shapes its very identity. Variety is what makes people buy, watch, play and to some extent compete in Ultimate, It's what Nintendo has marketed the entire game around. All other smash games have their own identity as well such as 64 with its devastating combo game that allowed for great personal expression or Melee with it's extremely technical gameplay and high skill ceiling. These are the reasons people enjoy those games and that goes for ultimate too. Let's all remember that playing to our strengths is the name of the game.

idk, i'm just really tired right now and got a little passionate. Also that smashwiki page probably needs to be changed cause right now it's just really vague and hints strongly towards misinformation.

 

[Lacrimosa]

It seems there are discussion regarding Unova's viability again and KunaiKazeKun, a German Tink/Yink player/Peach player brings up an argument that I haven't heard before:

There was a problem fetching the tweet

Tweet is in German but the gist is that the camera pans down and in this case it's unclear on which platform Snake dropped his C4. Sure, you can memorize it but it puts the Snake player and a major advantage.
There are more reasons he brings up but I think that's the most interesting. Rest he mentions isn't new to me but if you know German then it may be informative.

 

[SMAASH! Puppy]

Tweet is in German but the gist is that the camera pans down and in this case it's unclear on which platform Snake dropped his C4. Sure, you can memorize it but it puts the Snake player and a major advantage.

Does it though? Both players could forget about it if neither can see it. Also, shouldn't both players remember where he put it regardless of the stage?

 

[ATH_]

There's several stages where foreground objects can cover the mine at different angles.
The purpose of counterpicks is to grant an advantage. I'm glad to see Unova is being discussed again, as well as Maister wanting WarioWare.

 

[TCT~Phantom]

I am gonna make a hot take. WarioWare should 100% be legal. Small stage be damned, we need at least one truly small counterpick. I know some people get salty dying 20% earlier or when they do something dumb like walk into a F Smash, but here is the thing. Our stage list is huge, and having one small stage as a CP works. I personally feel WarioWare got shafted in testing due to people getting salty about early kills when people are fine with camping on PS2 or Kalos.

If I was to have complete control of the stagelist, here is what I would make the stagelist

Starter
FD (Omegas Allowed if no Z Axis Shenenigans)
Battlefield (Forms allowed if no Axis Shenanigans)
PS2
Smashville
Town and City

Counterpick
Ygdrassil's Alter
Kalos
Unova
WarioWare
Lylat
Yoshi's Story

 

[SMAASH! Puppy]

FD (Omegas Allowed if no Z Axis Shenenigans)
Battlefield (Forms allowed if no Axis Shenanigans)

It's also worth noting that there are a bunch of other Battlefield and Omega forms that are not the same as Battlefield or Final Destination that don't get rid of the Z-axis such as Gerreg Mach Monetary, and a bunch of other stages that do not allow star or screen KOs. I'd personally remove them from the stagelist as well.

 

[VodkaHaze]

It's also worth noting that there are a bunch of other Battlefield and Omega forms that are not the same as Battlefield or Final Destination that don't get rid of the Z-axis such as Gerreg Mach Monetary, and a bunch of other stages that do not allow star or screen KOs. I'd personally remove them from the stagelist as well.

Doesn't the Omega form of GMM allow for Star KOs but the normal version doesn't? Either way, I really don't see these as good reasons for removing them from a stagelist. Stuff like Windy Hill's Omega version giving an unfair advantage to Snake and Isabelle I see, yet removing 32 stages (though some are already banned) just from Battlefield and Omega versions just because they don't have Star or Screen KOs doesn't strike me as a good enough reason. Plus, even if they were banned, I don't think I would strictly enact that rule. I think stage diversity truly shines with the BF and Omega variants.

 

[SMAASH! Puppy]

Doesn't the Omega form of GMM allow for Star KOs but the normal version doesn't?

Yes. By "other stages" I meant stages that weren't that one.

 

[GolisoPower]

So came back from the Min Min presentation, guys.

And can I say, Spring Stadium seems pretty legal to me. The ceilings are too high for any form of cave of life without using the new spring launchers, and the spring launchers aren't active all the time. Not to mention, the layout is simple and the size doesn't seem too big or too small.

 

[SMAASH! Puppy]

So came back from the Min Min presentation, guys.

And can I say, Spring Stadium seems pretty legal to me. The ceilings are too high for any form of cave of life without using the new spring launchers, and the spring launchers aren't active all the time. Not to mention, the layout is simple and the size doesn't seem too big or too small.

I highly doubt it will be. It'll probably be banned due to the ceilings being there at all, and if the hazards off version doesn't turn off the springs, then it's definitely going to be insta-banned even if it turns off the springs off the side of the stage.

If it doesn't get banned for any of those factors, then it'll be banned for being Smashville.

 

[Gearkeeper-8a]

If it doesn't get banned for any of those factors, then it'll be banned for being Smashville.

Nah if its a smashvillle clone I would love for replacing it, too much boring music.

 

[StrangeKitten]

I wonder if Spring Stadium won't be small? I suppose it doesn't really look that small, but who knows. If it is small, maybe we'll finally have a good small stage. Would be nice to see it replace Smashville, since we get AC music on Town anyway, but people are probably too used to Smashville to ever make the change.

 

[NotLiquid]

I was under the impression that the pads underneath the stage were ostensibly meteor pads, but they're not. They're just solid objects that delineate what part of the arches are physical, and Sakurai does point out that you can tech if you make contact with them (you can even see that by the green impact). That makes it doubtful that the hazard toggle will remove them, which is a crying shame; this stage looks like it'd have made for a great Smashville replacement. There might be a glimmer of hope given that the addition of those arches seem to mainly be justified due to being able to combo into them via bounce pads which would be inactive at all times during regular play, but I'm not holding my breath since insofar there hasn't been a stage that has removed a ceiling in its hazardless form.