Meta SSBU Stagelist Discussion

[spinalwolf]

From a spectator perspective, having 4+ Final Smashes going off every match would get tiresome real quick.

That's a fair point actually. After awhile I'm sure it would get tiresome seeing final smashes go off over and over. I don't think alot of people realize this and didn't bother to think about it.

 

[Fenrir VII]

If the same person strikes all 4 of those stages, then that's their choice. Isn't that the point of striking in the first place, to play game 1 on a stage that's agreeable to both players?

But if gaming 1 we strike down to 1 stage you still eliminate all other stage to the 2 most agreeable stages. I don’t think that’s something we need to regulate. Not to mention, using terms like jank / neutral just don’t hold weight because they are so overused and vague. Saying we need to make sure there is no jank on game 1 makes is blending into putting other people’s opinions into another player’s match. There’s no universal definition of jank and neutral.

The main point here is the one you both skipped over.. a larger stage list increases the chance of unbalance in the striking system and is the actual reason it would not be preferred. The "perfect" stage list in terms of balance, imo, is a 3-stage list for example. (I'd prefer 5-7 for variety, but yeah)

the second point refers to "jank" because that is how it affects the players at hand. Many people just want to play on a stage that is free from asymmetry, sloped main stage, odd spacing, whatever, and it's frustrating to them to be forced to like...Lylat as the starter because the generally agreed "best" stages get struck by a more burn the world-type player. Not necessarily saying I agree with it, but we've had this conversation and attempted it many times before, and FLSS always gets killed by that kind of thing.

 

[ParanoidDrone]

The main point here is the one you both skipped over.. a larger stage list increases the chance of unbalance in the striking system and is the actual reason it would not be preferred. The "perfect" stage list in terms of balance, imo, is a 3-stage list for example. (I'd prefer 5-7 for variety, but yeah)

I just...fundamentally disagree that smaller stage lists are inherently better for anything other than time/logistical reasons. If we assume that all legal stages are at least somewhat balanced (a fair assumption IMO) then it follows (EDIT: it follows to me, at least) that letting players strike from as many of these (legal, balanced) stages as possible is best for the long term health of the game. Otherwise they get choked out of what could otherwise be viable, useful options.

From a different perspective: Why does it make sense to allow a stage for game 5 of a grand finals bracket reset but not for game 1 of a pools match?

 

[VGFan95]

< Deleted>

 

[Epok]

The main point here is the one you both skipped over.. a larger stage list increases the chance of unbalance in the striking system and is the actual reason it would not be preferred. The "perfect" stage list in terms of balance, imo, is a 3-stage list for example. (I'd prefer 5-7 for variety, but yeah)

the second point refers to "jank" because that is how it affects the players at hand. Many people just want to play on a stage that is free from asymmetry, sloped main stage, odd spacing, whatever, and it's frustrating to them to be forced to like...Lylat as the starter because the generally agreed "best" stages get struck by a more burn the world-type player. Not necessarily saying I agree with it, but we've had this conversation and attempted it many times before, and FLSS always gets killed by that kind of thing.

I understand what you’re trying to say about finding the most blanced stage, but I don’t think that is an accurate analysis. I think the players are trying to find a stage they agree on. Again this is something that fluctutes match to match and player to player. If we were always trying to find the most balanced stage we would could arguably try to decide which stages is the fairest and ALWAYS play that stage game 1. Stage striking is part if the strategy of the match it’s not just a way of making a fair process of stage selection.

Again, we cant quantify jank. You didn’t give me examples on how slopes and asymmetric stages are inherently jank. They just are...Maybe to some, a flat stage with no platforms is jank? That’s why we can’t rely on those terms to decide a sensible stage list.

If everything is jank, then nothing is jank.

Saying something is jank is a cop out answer. Call it for what it is. If players can’t deal with a angled terrain or asymmetrical platforms on a couple stages while having the ability to strike stages, we got bigger issues in our community.

 

[MarioManTAW]

Again, we cant quantify jank. You didn’t give me examples on how slopes and asymmetric stages are inherently jank. They just are...Maybe to some, a flat stage with no platforms is jank? That’s why we can’t rely on those terms to decide a sensible stage list.

Why slopes are jank:
-Depending on the direction of the slope and the positions of the characters, some moves might hit that would otherwise miss or vice versa due to the vertical positioning. I believe this now also affects grabs, more so than in Smash 4. (I think certain tether grabs used to align with the stage but now go straight.)
-Projectiles. This may be the bigger issue. Projectiles that go straight forward will get absorbed by the slope. This was especially prominent in Smash 4 with PK Fire on Lylat, for instance, where half the time, the move would not even come out.
I believe those are the main issues, there may be others, but I think these are the most important. Whether this makes them banworthy is for you to decide.

Asymmetrical stages may not be inherently jank, but may have more direct reason to be banned. The legal stages are chosen because they are deemed to be fair and balanced, i.e. either player should have equal opportunity to win and the stage should not interfere unless it does so equally to both players. Asymmetrical stages in theory always give an immediate advantage to one particular player's spawn point. Sometimes, it may be difficult to determine how significant the advantage is, or even which player has the advantage. Nevertheless, with asymmetrical stages, there is always a possibility that one player has an advantage based on their spawn position, which means that the stage is technically not 100% fair because it favors one particular spawn point.
Again, though, the relative advantage and stage fairness is hard to quantify and it is up to you to decide what qualifies as "fair enough".

 

[Terotrous]

I really hope we someday get the ability to toggle hazards from stage select, because IMO, this is the clear optimal 5-stage starter list:

Smashville (hazards on)
Smashville (hazards off)
Pokemon Stadium (hazards off)
Kalos Pokemon League (hazards off)
Battlefield

Look at how beautiful it is. The two best monoplats, the two best diplats, and the best triplat. Such balance.

 

[Luigifan18]

Why slopes are jank:
-Depending on the direction of the slope and the positions of the characters, some moves might hit that would otherwise miss or vice versa due to the vertical positioning. I believe this now also affects grabs, more so than in Smash 4. (I think certain tether grabs used to align with the stage but now go straight.)
-Projectiles. This may be the bigger issue. Projectiles that go straight forward will get absorbed by the slope. This was especially prominent in Smash 4 with PK Fire on Lylat, for instance, where half the time, the move would not even come out.
I believe those are the main issues, there may be others, but I think these are the most important. Whether this makes them banworthy is for you to decide.

Asymmetrical stages may not be inherently jank, but may have more direct reason to be banned. The legal stages are chosen because they are deemed to be fair and balanced, i.e. either player should have equal opportunity to win and the stage should not interfere unless it does so equally to both players. Asymmetrical stages in theory always give an immediate advantage to one particular player's spawn point. Sometimes, it may be difficult to determine how significant the advantage is, or even which player has the advantage. Nevertheless, with asymmetrical stages, there is always a possibility that one player has an advantage based on their spawn position, which means that the stage is technically not 100% fair because it favors one particular spawn point.
Again, though, the relative advantage and stage fairness is hard to quantify and it is up to you to decide what qualifies as "fair enough".

You forgot that if you hit someone into a slope, the slope eats some of the knockback and provides a chance to tech, potentially allowing characters to survive otherwise-lethal attacks.

 

[dav3yb]

The very shallow sloping in stages like Lylat and Castle Siege are fine. There's a thing in fighting games (this IS a fighting game right?) called positioning. On these particular stages positioning comes into play more than in others, but just like it can be advantageous in a 2d fighter to get your opponent into a corner, or closer to a wall/edge in 3d, it can be to your advantage to maintain positive positioning against your opponents. Being able to maintain and control that space is also part of the skill set needed to play fighting games. So again, stop trying to adapt the game to you, and start adapting to the game, trust me, you'll become a better player because of it.

 

[Krysco]

Gonna start rooting through the 90 replays now so I'll hopefully have the noteworthy ones uploaded later today or tomorrow. I'll just post my thoughts with each link that way you can see my thoughts individually from the matches or in case you don't yet have time to watch them (or just don't care to). I also forgot to mention before but we played on hazardless Fountain of Dreams too and we did suffer framedrops, including ones bad enough to mess with some of our inputs so unfortunately, it'll likely be banned.

 

[Scarlet Spyder]

I've liked 2GG's stagelist so far. I think there's enough diversity while still retaining balance.

Starters:
Battlefield
Final Destination
Smashville
Pokemon Stadium 2 (Hazards off)
Kalos Pokemon League (Hazards off)

Counterpicks:
Yoshi's Story
Town and City

 

[Arturito_Burrito]

Why slopes are jank:
-Depending on the direction of the slope and the positions of the characters, some moves might hit that would otherwise miss or vice versa due to the vertical positioning. I believe this now also affects grabs, more so than in Smash 4. (I think certain tether grabs used to align with the stage but now go straight.)
-Projectiles. This may be the bigger issue. Projectiles that go straight forward will get absorbed by the slope. This was especially prominent in Smash 4 with PK Fire on Lylat, for instance, where half the time, the move would not even come out.
I believe those are the main issues, there may be others, but I think these are the most important. Whether this makes them banworthy is for you to decide.

Asymmetrical stages may not be inherently jank, but may have more direct reason to be banned. The legal stages are chosen because they are deemed to be fair and balanced, i.e. either player should have equal opportunity to win and the stage should not interfere unless it does so equally to both players. Asymmetrical stages in theory always give an immediate advantage to one particular player's spawn point. Sometimes, it may be difficult to determine how significant the advantage is, or even which player has the advantage. Nevertheless, with asymmetrical stages, there is always a possibility that one player has an advantage based on their spawn position, which means that the stage is technically not 100% fair because it favors one particular spawn point.
Again, though, the relative advantage and stage fairness is hard to quantify and it is up to you to decide what qualifies as "fair enough".

So now snake throwing grenades downward at a slope so he can get an angle is called jank? That is an amazing scrub mentality, how can your level of adaption be so low to completely disregard the previously developed competitive techniques that became established meta and dictated adaptions between players. You are not capable of sustaining the complexity required for understanding smash mix up so you are trying to ban it by calling it jank. Despite being called out on such a stance by epok you just double down.

The problem is, that this isn't just a person, it's an ideology by a large group of people. When someone calls the 2gg stagelist diverse then they don't understand the meaning of the word, which makes the conversation about teaching them diversity instead of debating it's value in smash. OR they are purposely hijacking the middle ground so as to push people who understand and want stage variability into some fringe casual group.

 

[TCT~Phantom]

Not a fan of the 2GG list so far, I feel that it is too conservative for early in the run. Furthermore, I feel that even if we are being conservative, we are undervaluing some stages that potentially do deserve testing in this game. By testing I mean vigorous testing of a greater period of time than two weeks.

First things first Im the realest we should consider Midgar alongside Yoshi's Story if we want variance in our stage selection. The bottom of the stage being slightly asymmetrical is relatively minor and inconsequential. Having the option for a larger or smaller version of a Triplat is something that should be accessible for players. The fact this is not happening in my opinion is kind of dumb. Much as stages being small can be a blessing, so can a stage being large. The slight size differences between the three in my opinion is more than enough reason to consider Midgar for legality, even under an echo stage idea.

Similarly Yoshi's Brawl is another stage that with arbitrary reasons is thrown out. The differences from Smashville are there. We should not be banning a stage if it has significant differences. Echo stages solves this too, yet they decide not to do those.

Take pretty much everything I said on the previous two, and add in Unova Pokemon League. Just now it is smaller.

Also

So now snake throwing grenades downward at a slope so he can get an angle is called jank? That is an amazing scrub mentality, how can your level of adaption be so low to completely disregard the previously developed competitive techniques that became established meta and dictated adaptions between players. You are not capable of sustaining the complexity required for understanding smash mix up so you are trying to ban it by calling it jank. Despite being called out on such a stance by epok you just double down.

The problem is, that this isn't just a person, it's an ideology by a large group of people. When someone calls the 2gg stagelist diverse then they don't understand the meaning of the word, which makes the conversation about teaching them diversity instead of debating it's value in smash. OR they are purposely hijacking the middle ground so as to push people who understand and want stage variability into some fringe casual group.

Couldn't have said it better myself. We have a great many options for our stagelist, yet scrub mentality can get in the way of this. If one thinks a stage is noncompetitive, actual results would be needed. Scrub mentality is a danger if people think 2GGs actually bad stagelist is a good stagelist.

Let me use two contrasting examples: Duck Hunt and Umbra in Smash 4.

Full disclosure, I think ultimately both were unhealthy for the metagame. But the thing is Duck Hunt went through years of testing. People knew the problems with Duck Hunt. As such, the community decided to remove it. Umbra got a minimal period of testing, which in my opinion was in poor form. We should have tested Umbra for a few months given that I can still argue that the stage is mostly fine even if I feel its ban was reasonable. Testing a stage makes the arguement for banning it stronger. Vigorous Testing.

Look at Smogon (outside example but logic still stands). They start off by removing every obvious broken or noncompetitive element. Then they test what is broken if there is a suspect case. Testing something because slopes may or may not be a problem is better than just being a scrub and assuming any slope or asymmetrical part is jank. A large part of the game is player adaption. If a player can not adapt to edgeguarding on Randall in Melee, does that make the stage "jank"? No, it means the burden is on the player. Understanding the nuances of each stage is important, more important than simply labeling something jank.

Notice how no one puts a "jank" stage as a starter. Notice how WarioWare has drifted out of starter lineups. Complaining about soft platforms or slopes or asymmetrical stages is a load of bullock when we do not have the data to support that. In 6 months to a year with a good number of majors under our belt, then we can look towards these issues. Test now, Ban later.

Also here is my current list.

Starter
Triplat (Battlefield, CP Yoshi's Story, Brinstar, or Midgar)
No platforms (Final Destination, CP Wily's Castle)
Stadiums (Pokemon Stadium 2, CP PS1, Unova Pokemon League)
Monoplat (Smashville/Yoshi's, CP Whichever is not starter)
Kalos Pokemon League

Counterpicks
Counterpick versions of Starters open up
Town and City
Lylat
Prism
Halberd
Castle Siege
WarioWare

5 starter categories, 6 counterpicks. Eleven stages essentially. Easy for striking, can strike a category of stages, only one is open for round 1.

 

[Nidtendofreak]

I think Midgar may run into the same song issues that the Earthbound stages run into? Which would nix it from being legal due to not being playable on stream.

If Umbra was the Bayonetta stage (I can't remember its name well), it was banned due to causing motion sickness for some people (hi, I'm one of those people). That trumps any viability of a stage in terms of its layout if it physically makes some players and viewers sick and that was figured out within its first week. No need to test beyond that point in that case.

 

[ParanoidDrone]

I think Midgar may run into the same song issues that the Earthbound stages run into? Which would nix it from being legal due to not being playable on stream.

If Umbra was the Bayonetta stage (I can't remember its name well), it was banned due to causing motion sickness for some people (hi, I'm one of those people). That trumps any viability of a stage in terms of its layout if it physically makes some players and viewers sick and that was figured out within its first week. No need to test beyond that point in that case.

Umbra Clock Tower is indeed the Bayonetta stage.

FWIW, while I don't suffer from motion sickness myself, Fortitudo's roar does come with a much stronger visual effect this time around, which obviously doesn't help matters at all.

 

[Nidtendofreak]

Umbra Clock Tower is indeed the Bayonetta stage.

FWIW, while I don't suffer from motion sickness myself, Fortitudo's roar does come with a much stronger visual effect this time around, which obviously doesn't help matters at all.

Yeaaaaaah I noticed that when the stage popped up in classic mode. Nothing like getting a headache within minutes followed by nausea. That stage is more banned than 75m.

 

[TCT~Phantom]

Keep in mind I said I was in favor of its banning, I just feel that the testing period did not go on long enough. Furthermore at the time, the main arguments against the stage were "jank" rather than motion sickness.

I agree Umbra is a dumb stage with a dumb background. I'm using it as an example where we did not test enough.

 

[Munomario777]

Midgar is on shaky ground due to music copyright. Additionally, it's kinda hard to tell whether your'e playing on Midgar or BF Form Midgar.

Umbra is just worse PictoChat imo. Both stages have narrower side blast zones and a taller ceiling than FD, but PictoChat's width difference is more pronounced. Umbra has the visual stuff going against it, and the lowered clock face screws with autocancel timings without providing the kind of strategy found on Castle Siege etc.



Unrelated note: I tested it, and Dream Land still breaks jab locks. Just like in Smash 4, the imperceptible slope on the main stage's collision causes jab locks to fail if directed toward the center of the stage. When going away from the center, jab locks work.

With that in mind, I've replaced it with PictoChat 2 (FD Echo) in my list:

 

[TCT~Phantom]

Midgar is on shaky ground due to music copyright. Additionally, it's kinda hard to tell whether your'e playing on Midgar or BF Form Midgar.

Umbra is just worse PictoChat imo. Both stages have narrower side blast zones and a taller ceiling than FD, but PictoChat's width difference is more pronounced. Umbra has the visual stuff going against it, and the lowered clock face screws with autocancel timings without providing the kind of strategy found on Castle Siege etc.



Unrelated note: I tested it, and Dream Land still breaks jab locks. Just like in Smash 4, the imperceptible slope on the main stage's collision causes jab locks to fail if directed toward the center of the stage. When going away from the center, jab locks work.

With that in mind, I've replaced it with PictoChat 2 (FD Echo) in my list:

View attachment 183726

Really nice stage list, might I ask why Yoshi's is a CP and Smashville is a starter? And why Unova instead of Kalos as a starter?

 

[Munomario777]

Thanks! Do you mean YIB or YS?

YIB: Smashville is the more "normal" monoplat

YS: Triplats probably still kinda polarizing (ladder combos etc)

UPL: Could go either way, chose UPL because biplats are probably less polarizing than FD-style layout (which KPL basically is b/c of the big open space)

 

[TCT~Phantom]

Thanks! Do you mean YIB or YS?

YIB: Smashville is the more "normal" monoplat

YS: Triplats probably still kinda polarizing (ladder combos etc)

UPL: Could go either way, chose UPL because biplats are probably less polarizing than FD-style layout (which KPL basically is b/c of the big open space)

YIB. Explain the "more normal" part.

 

[ParanoidDrone]

YIB. Explain the "more normal" part.

Not him, but I'd wager that Smashville's even ground is the deciding factor.

 

[Munomario777]

mainly even ground, yeah. both should be legal imo, obviously

 

[MarioManTAW]

So now snake throwing grenades downward at a slope so he can get an angle is called jank? That is an amazing scrub mentality, how can your level of adaption be so low to completely disregard the previously developed competitive techniques that became established meta and dictated adaptions between players. You are not capable of sustaining the complexity required for understanding smash mix up so you are trying to ban it by calling it jank. Despite being called out on such a stance by epok you just double down.

The problem is, that this isn't just a person, it's an ideology by a large group of people. When someone calls the 2gg stagelist diverse then they don't understand the meaning of the word, which makes the conversation about teaching them diversity instead of debating it's value in smash. OR they are purposely hijacking the middle ground so as to push people who understand and want stage variability into some fringe casual group.

Perhaps jank is not an accurate term, but it is the term used in the question I was trying to address. Honestly, I'm not sure I have any issues with slopes. I was stating the reasons some might consider them "jank". Personally, I do think these unique properties make them a bit jank but I don't think slopes alone make a stage banworthy (I personally favor both Yoshi's Island and Yoshi's Story as echoes). The possible stages that have slopes (aside from these two) have other potential issues as well. Castle Siege has asymmetry (I would honestly still be fine with having it legal, but could also understand possible reasons to ban it) and Lylat is glitchy and unpopular (doesn't need to be a reason to ban, but when we have plenty of options, it could be understandable).

 

[dav3yb]

Perhaps jank is not an accurate term, but it is the term used in the question I was trying to address. Honestly, I'm not sure I have any issues with slopes. I was stating the reasons some might consider them "jank". Personally, I do think these unique properties make them a bit jank but I don't think slopes alone make a stage banworthy (I personally favor both Yoshi's Island and Yoshi's Story as echoes). The possible stages that have slopes (aside from these two) have other potential issues as well. Castle Siege has asymmetry (I would honestly still be fine with having it legal, but could also understand possible reasons to ban it) and Lylat is glitchy and unpopular (doesn't need to be a reason to ban, but when we have plenty of options, it could be understandable).

There's nothing poor or unreliable about these stages. Maybe with regard to some recoveries on Lylat, but I'd say that's more them than the stage.

jan·ky
/ˈjaNGkē/
adjective
INFORMAL•NORTH AMERICAN
adjective: jank

1. of extremely poor or unreliable quality.

 

[Epok]

I think another issue we have is that we rinse and repeat the same thing over and over when it doesn’t apply. The concept of starters and counterpicks was a decision made to allow for more stages despite the fact they were suboptimal for competitive play.

For a time poke floats and rainbow cruise were counterpicks because stages were that limited. I think it’s fair to say we don’t have that problem anymore.

We have an abundance of clean and fair stages and we’re sitting here trying to split hairs on whether FD is a counterpick or not. Starters and counters with all of these good stages is like putting plates and screws on a sprained ankle.

 

[Munomario777]

starter/CP exists because game 1 works best with a small pool of stages (eg 1-2-1 striking requires 5 starters)

 

[TCT~Phantom]

Munomario777 I am looking up a source for music streaming stuff for Smash but I am at an inpass. Where do you see issues of music copyright? The most I can see is some posts on reddit of that TOs would get this as part of an NDA.

I think another issue we have is that we rinse and repeat the same thing over and over when it doesn’t apply. The concept of starters and counterpicks was a decision made to allow for more stages despite the fact they were suboptimal for competitive play.

For a time poke floats and rainbow cruise were counterpicks because stages were that limited. I think it’s fair to say we don’t have that problem anymore.

We have an abundance of clean and fair stages and we’re sitting here trying to split hairs on whether FD is a counterpick or not. Starters and counters with all of these good stages is like putting plates and screws on a sprained ankle.

I feel that right now although I feel stage striking is obsolete given the fact we actually have decent stages, we are kind of tethered to it. I feel that the community likes the system, which is why it exists. It works best for starters but I feel that the system overall works.

Also low key we need to talk about how Kalos is a better starter than T&C for any listing. I feel that won't be too controversial around here, but just saying.

 

[Epok]

Munomario777
I think you could argue that a 9 stage list isn’t going to hurt anything. Having more options for game 1 is not inherently bad.

I think striking is fine just the concept of starters / counters is unnecessary. Striking allows players to agree on a stage without a severe disadvantage to either player.

 

[Munomario777]

TCT~Phantom i don't know the specifics of it, just that it's a thing that's meant we can't use certain omegas on stream in smash 4 and etc (iirc)

Epok there are also systems that work with 9, indeed! but the larger your starter list becomes, the more time-consuming striking becomes. if there are 13 stages we want to put to use in tournaments, not all of them can be starters; otherwise striking would be really drawn-out. even if there are only 9 stages, 5-stage striking is significantly better than 9-stage striking in terms of time / etc.

there's also the issue of stuff like even-numbered stage lists. melee has 6 stages legal, but striking doesn't work with even numbers – so one of 'em has to be a CP.

 

[Squint]

These are that stages I’ve been playing on with hazards off, so far I like them all.

Spoiler: Stage List

• Battlefield
• FInal Destination
• Kongo Jungle 64 (likley to be removed)
• Dream Land
• Brinstar
• Yoshi’s Story
• Fountain Of Dreams (removed to due frame drops)
• Pokémon Stadium 1 & 2
• WarioWare
• Yoshi’s Brawl
• Lylat (likley to be removed)
• Castle Siege
• Smashville
• Town And City
• Unova Pokémon League
• Pictochat (removed due to the tiny edge slants)
• Skyloft
• Mushroom Kingdom U
• Kalos Pokémon League
• Wuhu Island
• Midgar
• Umbra Clock Tower

I’m still new to the nitty gritty of the competitive scene so I tried to give every stage that seemed cool a shot.

 

[Epok]

TCT~Phantom i don't know the specifics of it, just that it's a thing that's meant we can't use certain omegas on stream in smash 4 and etc (iirc)

Epok there are also systems that work with 9, indeed! but the larger your starter list becomes, the more time-consuming striking becomes. if there are 13 stages we want to put to use in tournaments, not all of them can be starters; otherwise striking would be really drawn-out. even if there are only 9 stages, 5-stage striking is significantly better than 9-stage striking in terms of time / etc.

there's also the issue of stuff like even-numbered stage lists. melee has 6 stages legal, but striking doesn't work with even numbers – so one of 'em has to be a CP.

I think people severely over estimate time it would take and there are simple ways to making that easier for players. I ran a 7 stage Full list rule set for smash 4 and it was never a time issue. I supplied each setup with a picture list and the rules of how many stages to strike. It does work.

 

[Munomario777]

i mean yeah, but that's just 7 stages

if you wanna use a large-ish stage list, full list becomes less practical

 

[Epok]

I would use a 9-11 stage list with hazards off. If I had to guess, I think at most an extra 30 seconds to ban a few more stages. This is not cumbersome at all.

 

[Cahalan]

I just want to ask a couple things:

1. What are the major things that distinguish Hazardless Pokemon Stadium 1 from Hazardless Pokemon Stadium?
2. Why are some rulesets making Final Destination at Legal Stage? Having no platforms polarizes a lot of characters, especially lower tiers who need them to have a chance against our prospective top tier picks atm.

 

[MarioManTAW]

I just want to ask a couple things:

1. What are the major things that distinguish Hazardless Pokemon Stadium 1 from Hazardless Pokemon Stadium?
2. Why are some rulesets making Final Destination at Legal Stage? Having no platforms polarizes a lot of characters, especially lower tiers who need them to have a chance against our prospective top tier picks atm.

1. Pokemon Stadium 2 has a wider base platform, making stage traversal slightly slower and allowing slightly earlier kills from the ledge. I've also heard that there are differences in the undersides of the stages, but I'm not sure exactly what these differences are.
2. First of all, I don't see anything remotely wrong with FD so I would say the better question IMO is why would any rulesets not make FD a legal stage. I think the reason is two-fold: one, tradition (it's been unanimously legal forever), and two, most people think it's actually balanced. I believe you are in the minority in claiming that FD should be banned, although some seem to think it should not be a starter (which I also don't understand).

 

[Akiak]

Buddy just left a few minutes ago and him and I had played since midnight. Ended up with 90 replays in total and the only stages I picked the whole night were Green Greens, Frigate Orpheon, Halberd, Norfair, Reset Bomb Forest, Wuhu Island, Skyloft, Brinstar, Warioware, Lylat Cruise, Prism Tower, Rainbow Cruise, Castle Siege, Kalos Pokemon League, Mushroom Kingdom U and Dracula's Castle. I'll see about looking through all the replays and upload the ones of interest once I wake up and then I'll post links in a spoiler for potential discussion~

For a quick rundown while the stages are still fresh in my mind:

Green Greens allows for easy camping, even with the ability to run off any platform and grab a ledge. Makes actually approaching with an attack of some sort difficult.

Frigate's right platform makes for a very powerful defensive spot. When it's down, there's a wall for combos (I'll get into more detail on these when I talk about Dracula's Castle) and walling the opponent out with short hop aerials is easy and effective. When it's up, you can sit at the edge, making it uncomfortable for a lot of characters to approach. When it's level, it's fine but that's only a third of the time.

All of the semi solid stages (Halberd, Skyloft, Brinstar, Wuhu, Prism) do as I expected, make it needlessly difficult for some recoveries like Ganon and Ike while making ones like Pikachu's better. Halberd and Prism have ground that leave, requiring a jump to not get KO'd and Prism also has some poor platform layouts and a walkoff.

Reset Bomb Forest is really easy to camp on with mobile characters. I even have a replay where I was able to effectively camp with Ike around the pit.

Warioware seems fine but if a combo is ever found that allows 0 to death, I can see it being banned. Those borders are pretty crazy.

Lylat didn't cause us any issues.

Rainbow Cruise just has a bad left border and a wall that also forces a jump.

Castle Siege was mostly fine. There was maybe one match at most where the foreground greatly got in our way. The bigger issue might be the slant with how it interacts with hitboxes.

Kalos is basically FD but with some platforms at the edges. Adds options for getting off the ledge and some characters could have trouble with attacking people that camp the far edges of the platforms but it was mostly fine.

MKU seems too big for singles but could be good for doubles.

Dracula's Castle...oh boy. So there's walls that both force jumps to approach and the walls themselves allow for infinites or just really long combos. On Frigate, my buddy was able to pin my DK to the wall with constant dtilts with his Marth and on Dracula's Castle, I was able to pin his G&W to a wall for a long time with constant dtilts from my DK. The stairs also make approaching incredibly awkward since not many attacks have hitboxes that arc that low. Also grabs don't seem to work properly on them. Like, you get forced to grab release pretty soon, regardless of percent or mashing.

Oh and Norfair...**** that stage man. You can camp by just going from platform to platform, edgeguarding basically doesn't exist since there's 3 ledges on either side to grab and it's super easy to maintain center stage and just utilt or aerial anyone that comes near you. Worst stage we tried.

Overall, we tried to make a stage list with 9 and came up with Battlefield, Final Destination, Smashville, Yoshi's Island Brawl, Pokemon Stadium 1 or 2 or Unova, whichever, Town & City or Kalos but not both, Warioware, Lylat Cruise, Castle Siege. Anyway, y'all can expect the replays to be posted before Christmas.

There's one thing I feel needs to be emphasized here regarding how people test stages (just using the post above to make a more general point).

For pretty much every stage, you have to consider what needs to happen in a set in order for that stage to be selected. If it's a starter, then both players have essentially agreed to going there. If it's a counterpick, then the winner also has a say in the matter, as long as they have access to at least 1 ban (under any system).

Of course, this isn't enough. If a stage is so polarizing that it essentially serves as an auto-ban, then that's obviously bad. But if the stage is not always bad but works out fine for at least some matchups then it's still worth keeping as it doesn't actually do any harm to have it legal in practice.

However, the degree to which this is true depends on the system you're using. Here's a post I made that explains why, if you're using PXP1, this is much more emphasized compared to regular bans. Essentially, with PXP1 the loser first has to nominate X stages (let's say 3), and then the winner only has those three to worry about, as opposed to the full list.

There's another side to this however, which is the order of stage selection vs. character selection in games 2+. Muno recently made a post going over this, but to put it briefly, if we do stage-before-char, then any stage that is overtly polarizing for even a single character (such as MK on Skyloft) can't be legal, as it would have to theoretically be banned 100% of the time (since the winner has no way of knowing if his opponent might go MK), and thus never played as a result.

If we do char-before-stage, then this is solved, as the winner can now ban stages in response to his opponent's character.

So to summarize, if we use PXP1 (which we absolutely should) and do character-selection before stage (which we absolutely should) then our banning philosophy should be as follows:

If a stage...

A) is not overtly polarizing

and

B) offers interesting gameplay (i.e. no excessive camping)

...for at least some matchups, then it should be legal.

The only problems that we need to avoid in a stagelist are as follows:

1) Legalizing stages that are good (as described above) for only a very small amount of matchups

2) Having multiple legal stages that overtly benefit certain characters

The problem with having multiple stages that benefit certain characters is that it would give those characters too much power. Regardless of the system used, being able to nominate multiple 'auto-bans' for your opponent is obviously unbalanced. In the worst case, you have 3 legal stages that are overtly polarizing for a certain character, and that character can simply nominate all 3 (P3P1), and the winner has no option but to select one of them. This is why, for example, having more than one sharkable stage is probably a bad idea (grouping them would also solve that).

TLDR: not every stage is a starter, and both players have agency in picking the stage for every match. In practice, keeping stages legal that have some problems with some characters is completely harmless (especially if we use PXP1 and char-before-stage for games 2+, which we absolutely should). The only other issue that needs to be kept in mind is having multiple stages that strongly benefit certain characters, as that would be unbalanced.

PS: I refrained from specifying percentages or attempting to describe what I mean by 'some' in this post, as I think that's out of my reach. But I do think that most current stages being discussed fall into that group (WW, CS, TnC, MKU, FO, LC). We might discover in the future that some of these are detrimental to keep legal, but there's definitely no hard proof at the moment.

 

[Skarfelt]

I'm under the impression that the final stagelist will end up being some combination of these six:
Final Destination, Battlefield, Pokemon Stadium 1/2, Smashville, Town and City, Kalos

I think this because 2GG's ruleset is already very close to this, and Smash naturally becomes more conservative over its lifetime. Even though Lylat is mostly fine, the community is so sick of it that they'll want to ban it anyway - that said, I think it can naturally be added in here, but this post is mainly campaigning for Yoshi's Story (and Stadium 1) as a balancing tool in this specific list. I've played a lot of games there, and it's fundamentally very different from Battlefield, but also serves a unique purpose.

Click this for blastzones/stage length/platform sizes/platform heights
Side blastzones are fairly normalised throughout the list. Of course, the size of the stage affects things too, but we can see that it's roughly (largest to smallest):
Kalos > PS1 > SV = BF = FD > T&C

For ceilings, it goes like this (largest to smallest):
T&C > BF > Kalos = SV > FD = PS1
I'd argue that Kalos is effectively bigger than BF; the 2 units of difference don't mean as much as the platforms, but yeah. Also worth noting that all of these are 190+ until FD.

Main stage sizes:
PS1 > T&C > FD = BF = Kalos > SV
PS1 is notably bigger than the rest - the "standard" size is FD/BF/Kalos with 160, and PS1 is only 16 units bigger. SV is 21 units smaller, but PS2 is a whopping 18 units bigger which is excessive imo. It would also make the side blastzones very close for a stage most people consider the most neutral. Overall PS1 is more well balanced, while still having what is effectively the lowest ceiling in the list.

However, that's the problem. Currently, if you want to go to a stage that's generally huge, you go Kalos - it has a tall ceiling with no platforms and larger than average side blastzones, making it the biggest overall stage. If you want smaller side blastzones but a higher ceiling, you can go to Town & City. If you want a smaller ceiling with bigger side blastzones, you can go to Stadium (and even then, it doesn't have a "small" ceiling, it's the same as FD's). If you want a generally small stage, you go to ... nowhere - Smashville has a alrge ceiling and standardised side blastzones now.

This is where Yoshi's Story comes in. Its ceiling is the same as FD/PS1 - which is also the same as S4 Dreamland - so it's not like people are going to die at unholy percentages off a tiny ceiling or something. The platforms make the ceiling effectively lower, but the smallness of the stage also makes the side blastzones effectively smaller as well. Again, it's not so small that it's excessive - it's only 3 units smaller than SV, which is still only 24 units smaller than FD (a lesser gap than the one between FD and PS2, a stage commonly used worldwide with few problems). More to the point, this stage helps in the banning phase - characters that prefer blastzones like Kalos no longer have a strict advantage in banning, and will may be instead inclined to ban Yoshi's Story.

The main argument against it is that it's just another triplat, but I disagree with that. I recognise people may just ignore my point here cuz I main Fox, but this stage honestly doesn't play much like Battlefield, or even Smash 4 Dreamland. The platforms are significantly higher - BF's are 24, Yoshi's are 29. This makes it much harder to move between them and the ground, and it also means that Fox can't even autocancel his Up Air onto the platforms, for example. The slant also makes them functionally higher if you're cornered, making it harder to move onto them in general. It also makes moving off them harder, as you have a longer distance to fall, and are thus more vulnerable. Additionally, the platforms stretch all the way to the ledge, meaning you can't run backwards off them following pressure - you always have to move forward if you want to run off these platforms, which changes the implications of being on one a lot. Also, despite the side plats being higher, the top plat is actually the same as S4 Dreamland, so it's not like the top one is brushing the blastzone.

With this in mind, considering that Yoshi's and T&C are the "small" stages (Yoshi's ceiling, T&C sides), I think having them both as CP is a bit much, so it may be best to move Kalos to a CP and T&C to starter. I think this is an effective list to test:

STARTER
Battlefield
Final Destination
Stadium 1
Smashville
Town & City

COUNTERPICK
Kalos
Yoshi's Story

Lylat can be slotted in as a Counterpick handily, and may end up improving health - in this list, I think two bans might be a bit too much, but one ban isn't enough. Having Lylat there gives a great excuse to have two bans, and it also means you can simply ban the "jank" stages of Yoshi's/Lylat if you really don't like them for some reason.

There are a few problems I could foresee with Yoshi's. Some characters can't actually reach the platforms with their full hops (Ken, Incineroar etc.), ladders could end up broken there like they were in Dreamland, the slant could lead to dumb jank, and so on. However, I think it's being written off too early, and it fulfils a great purpose in the list.

Also Castle Siege is bad and is not a solution to this problem

 

[TCT~Phantom]

The only real knocks I can think of for Castle Siege is the awkward camera angle for edgeguards and the fact its layout is asymmetrical. Other than that I feel it has plenty of validity as a counterpick. I would state that out of all debated Couterpicks, I feel that it is easily the most valid of them up there with Lylat.

As much as I am an argent supporter of Frigate, I get that the temporary wall can be stupid. Not as dumb as RC or Dracs but it can lead to some dumb stuff. I would argue that letting yourself get pinned to the wall on this stage is kind of dumb since you can easily get away and your opponent has to approach from above to get you but whatever. I get the criticism of Frigate. It has strong defensive holdouts and people might think thats bad.

Soft platforms. I disagree on but I get it. I am probably the strongest supporter of Halberd and Prism Tower on here due to seeing them as highly interesting stages with lots of cool layouts in Prism's case while in halberds case I feel that it offers something unique. I feel that sharking makes these stages ideal as CPs since the shark has to come up at some point. If MK is sharking, punish him when he comes up. I know I am simplifying it a lot but sharking is really not optimal in a lot of scenarios.

Honestly I just feel that limiting ourselves super heavily to a 2GG style ruleset is a bad idea. When we have so many stages that would be interesting to fight on and people are so opposed to it it breaks my heart a bit. We can test some stages right away and find issues, but so many are being looked at and we are just going the path of least resistance.

If stuff is broken, we should test and test and test. If we have overwhelming data that suggests a stage is an issue, we should ban it. As of now we are rooting ourselves in two weeks worth of theory and data rather than months of data. I feel we should test stages or have a rotating stage list. Limiting ourselves just for the sake of limiting ourselves without enough testing of borderline elements is foolish. We only have this beginning period to test.

 

[Plague von Karma]

Some opinions;

• Hazardless Warioware as a counterpick is necessary in my opinion, but I have concerns about the blast zones. They're extremely tight and can lead to some ridiculously early kills from the likes of Chrom. However, it could benefit characters like Ganondorf because there is very little room to camp.
  • A somewhat interesting replacement could be Brinstar, but it may be TOO small.
• Hazardless Frigate Orpheon is stupid, and will give characters with poor recovery a really bad time while giving advantage to others. I really like the stage design but I really don't like it in a competitive capacity.
• Hazardless Wily Castle could be an alternative to FD, in my opinion. There's some viability as something to counter characters who go under, or possibly deter camping techniques a bit. Hazardless Umbra Clock Tower could be considered as well.
• Hazardless Unova Pokemon League deserves to be legal imo, it's been a pretty nice stage at least in my experience.