Stage Analysis & Discussion Thread

[ShadyWolfe]

After listening to the grievances of others, I kind of get where they come from. It can really degenerate a match when a losing player decides to camp the edge when they are in a pinch. Since they are at a high percent they probably have nothing to lose at that point and it makes the match predictable because one grab and throw could end it. If there was just a bit more of a disadvantage to doing it then perhaps it'd be more tolerated.

My suggestion would be for Sakurai to disable the grab command once you get too close too the screen edge. But hey, what do I know?

It does seem to be more a low risk high reward type thing but the biggest problems with walk off is the removal of the ledge game which in my opinion is one of the most dynamic and special aspects of smash

It was mostly for reference, I'm aware. Remove Skyloft from starters if needed then. I wouldn't say every counterpick favors characters over another, it's whether or not they intrude on the game slightly; a tournament player will not want to risk having them an open option for the first game if we're going purely by starter principles.

As for a bit more explanation:

Spoiler

• Mushroom Kingdom U - Some transformations could hinder some characters with bad recoveries, like Ness (who is still gimpable.) It's also a bit large. Swimming wasn't in the E3 demo but it seems like something they'd add to it now.
• Delfino Plaza - Sharking on the main platform (albeit not as exploitable) and swimming that could interfere with characters without an effective meteor.
• Mario Circuit 8 - Shy Guys, while slightly intrusive, are stage hazards nonetheless. The main deal about this stage are the unique walls that appear on transformations, causing one side of the stage to be ineffective for KOs somewhat (characters can still bounce off them and fly to the other blast zone.)
• Norfair - Although ledge invincibility is gone, a placebo effect still takes place in that the ledge can still seem safe for some characters as their hurtbox extends downwards, like Ganondorf. Above all, the stage hazards intrude on the fight a bit.
• Halberd - Doesn't effect characters per se. Sharking, low ceiling. Stage hazards are barely intrusive whatsoever, though.
• Orbital Gate - Favors characters with better jumping and recoveries on some transformations because the next transformation starts a bit too high, and unlike other transformation stages, nothing will support pushing you upwards; you are given some time to know before when you should though. There's a small camping possibility on the Great Fox part on the very small left side.
• Castle Siege - Somewhat small first transformation. Second has breakable parts, mostly intruding with characters' comboes or giving unintended freeze frames on some moves, but this is rare.
• Pilotwings - Walls on one plane may cause small camping on the lower platform and centralizing that area for a time until the other plane comes. Somewhat powerful stage hazard even if it's not seen a lot. I also think it has sharking, but I'm not going back to E3 2013 footage to check.
• Wuhu Island - Delfino Plaza.

In general, we do need to see more information by playing the game anyway.

It depends on your views. I, for one, would like a larger set of stages; the Wii U has many good stages. What is considered "gimmicky"? You can't just slap on that word and expect a stage to be banned in a snap. My list was mostly just for breakdown analysis from my own views, it's free to interpretation otherwise.

Gimmicky is not exactly a bad thing I am sorry for not elaborating enough. Gimmicks is not static game elements that effect the flow of the match like the Flying man or the moving platform Smashville though gimmicks is not exactly bad like the Smashville platform what is "too" gimmicky or bad gimmicky to me would be stages that interfere with the flow of the battle too much and hazards that specifically target individuals like the flying man

 

[Davis-Lightheart]

Smash is a very different beast than other fighting games with many different movement options, killing options, and ledge game using party gimmicks is not good for Smash competitively it would be the same as allowing items. Even though Halberd's hazard is very predictable and rarely affects a match a hazard that targets a specific individual is not good. Not sure what Randall is it and the transformations in Pokemon Stadium is not hazardous and the problem with that stage was the wall infinites which is of no issue in Smash 4 thankfully so Pokemon Stadium would be nice. Gimmicks is not necessarily a bad thing I am sorry if what I said can be interpreted as such the only gimmicks that are really bad are hazardous ones for obvious reasons. The stage list I provided is only a few ones I seen that are definitely good there are more this Smash has more viable stages than any previous smash game.

But the thing is you really don't describe what "competitively" is. You equate allowing certain stages as being the equivalent of adding items but you must be more specific here. Be a little more specific so that way this debate can go somewhere.

If you're the loosing player you shouldn't walk-off camp. You're supposed to be in an advantage when you walk-off camp, because if then entire match ends up being waited out you'll loose if you weren't winning previous to camping.

You know what. I forgot about the timer. Embarrass

That thing blends in so much I forget it even is a thing.

 

[ShadyWolfe]

But the thing is you really don't describe what "competitively" is. You equate allowing certain stages as being the equivalent of adding items but you must be more specific here. Be a little more specific so that way this debate can go somewhere.



You know what. I forgot about the timer. Embarrass

Competitive stages would be stages that do not affect the flow of the match too much(the players should fight each other not the stage) or attack individuals with hazards(those dang flying men) or reward individuals in a ridiculous and unfair way(Completing the challenge set in Wario Ware Inc. but not getting something in return while the opponent became invincible because well screw you, you get nothing) or too big of stages that promote stalling and camping resulting in the players not interacting with each other.

 

[Piford]

Gimmicky is not exactly a bad thing I am sorry for not elaborating enough. Gimmicks is not static game elements that effect the flow of the match like the Flying man or the moving platform Smashville though gimmicks is not exactly bad like the Smashville platform what is "too" gimmicky or bad gimmicky to me would be stages that interfere with the flow of the battle too much and hazards that specifically target individuals like the flying man

I think your definition of gimmick is a little subjective. While you might consider the hazards on Halberd a bad thing, I might say the add competitive depth since resourceful players will see them coming and use them to their advantage.

 

[LiteralGrill]

Walk off camping might not be broken, but it might be bad to watch and play against, super quick matches with two quick kills could be an issue.

 

[Davis-Lightheart]

Competitive stages would be stages that do not affect the flow of the match too much(the players should fight each other not the stage) or attack individuals with hazards(those dang flying men) or reward individuals in a ridiculous and unfair way(Completing the challenge set in Wario Ware Inc. but not getting something in return while the opponent became invincible because well screw you, you get nothing) or too big of stages that promote stalling and camping resulting in the players not interacting with each other.

I mean specific stages. Any stage can help affect the flow of the match, and a little can go a long way. You talk about hazard, but you don't seem to distinguish between any. You talk about too big stages, but what is even too big, etc. This broad stage discussion gets us nowhere.

 

[ShadyWolfe]

A smaller stage list just leads to a less balanced game, in theory. If you only have 5 stages than the characters that are good on those five stages will be used more and considered better. Lets say we have 15 contenders for legal stages. Now lets limit the game to three characters, lets say Mario, ROB, and Luigi. Mario is good on stages 1-5, ROB is good on stages 11-15, and Luigi is good on stages 6-10. Now the community wants to only have a stage list of what they believe is the best for competitive play from the list of 15 stages they previously considered competitively viable. They decide stages 1-5 are the best for the game. Now Mario is the only viable character, as you removed all the stages that R.O.B. and Luigi had the advantage on. You effectively unbalanced the a completely balanced game by neutering the stage list. Now Mario is the only character thats considered viable.

Also @BrimeZ , all Omega's have the same ceiling

A smaller stage list does not make a less balanced game nor does it make a more balanced game. Now for your hypothetical example why would those stages be good for those characters. Is R.O.B. performing better on stages with no platforms, is Mario doing better because of platforms, and is Luigi doing better on moving stages if that is the case then those are reasonable reasons to include more variety but in your hypothetical what is the reasons for removing those stages? D Do they interfere with the flow of the match too much, is there hazards, is there glitches on those stages, is it called 75m or Mario Bros., do they promote stalling and camping heavily? Those are reasons to ban stages no reason to have stages cheat for "balance" because a character does not possess the tools for success in a more balanced and neutral setting. Now what I posted in for my original stage list is stages that are definitely good for competitive play I made a post earlier today about more stages such as Pokemon Stadium 2, Luigi's Mansion, Orbital Gate, Pilot Wings, Big Battlefield, and Windy Hill Zone that seem viable so I am not against a bigger stage list I like variety but not just for the sake of it. Now one thing I would like to add to the conversation is walkoffs because they are deemed bad though I don't see much issue with it due to a risk to them and no more chain grabs though getting rid of the ledge game is not favorable this would open much more stages for viability if the community is ok with walkoffs.

I mean specific stages. Any stage can help affect the flow of the match, and a little can go a long way. You talk about hazard, but you don't seem to distinguish between any. You talk about too big stages, but what is even too big, etc. This broad stage discussion gets us nowhere.

Stages that affect the flow of battle directly like that Donkey Kong stage in Brawl that has you constantly moving, hazards like the kremling in Jungle japes that jumps out of the water on occasion, and too big would be stages that have so much room that a character with great movement options can jump around and stall with no way of retaliation.

 

[Davis-Lightheart]

The thing is, don't assume we're asking for variety just for the sake of it. We're asking for strong look before automatically banning.

For starters, why don't you list your bans now? You just threw out the stages from explanation, assuming we'd understand your points or something? Not every banned stage is equal in understanding.

Stages that affect the flow of battle directly like that Donkey Kong stage in Brawl that has you constantly moving, hazards like the kremling in Jungle japes that jumps out of the water on occasion, and too big would be stages that have so much room that a character with great movement options can jump around and stall with no way of retaliation.

Just give a list man.

(Dangit. Now I'm double posting.)

 

[ShadyWolfe]

I think your definition of gimmick is a little subjective. While you might consider the hazards on Halberd a bad thing, I might say the add competitive depth since resourceful players will see them coming and use them to their advantage.

The problem with the hazard in Halberd is that the person it decides to target now has to deal with fighting an opponent while being cautious of the hazard targeting them and even though this can become advantageous to either player they shouldn't be fighting the stage even if it is as predictable as a lv1 CPU.

 

[Davis-Lightheart]

The problem with the hazard in Halberd is that the person it decides to target now has to deal with fighting an opponent while being cautious of the hazard targeting them and even though this can become advantageous to either player they shouldn't be fighting the stage even if it is as predictable as a lv1 CPU.

But does this affect the whole match? When has this hazard ever really affected the flow of the whole match? Chances are that it's the resourceful player who takes advantage of it, like they should be doing with all their resources at hand and it's not like even one character can take full advantage of it better than others. Situations like this where the tide of the match is turned has never really been dictated by the stage, but the players who choose their layout because they are players know they are good enough to take advantage of whatever the stage throws at them. You're never fighting the stage on Halberd, but the player as it should be. The existence of the cannon is null.

 

[ShadyWolfe]

The thing is, don't assume we're asking for variety just for the sake of it. We're asking for strong look before automatically banning.

For starters, why don't you list your bans now? You just threw out the stages from explanation, assuming we'd understand your points or something? Not every banned stage is equal in understanding.



Just give a list man.

That will take a while I will have to do that some other time but I could give you a list of ones that I think are good I have spotted some nice ones that could bring the list to 15 or you could ask me about my stance on a given stage but I will not be on here that much longer so I will give you a full list later and thanks for discussing in a civil way tired of other sites flaming me without giving reasons on why they disagree(YouTube comments are cancer)

But does this affect the whole match? When has this hazard ever really affected the flow of the whole match? Chances are that it's the resourceful player who takes advantage of it, like they should be doing with all their resources at hand and it's not like even one character can take full advantage of it better than others. Situations like this where the tide of the match is turned has never really been dictated by the stage, but the players who choose their layout because they are players know they are good enough to take advantage of whatever the stage throws at them. You're never fighting the stage on Halberd, but the player as it should be. The existence of the cannon is null.

You are right that it does not dictate the flow of the entire match you bring up a good point I still don't like the stage I am very conservative in that way I don't want the stage attacking anyone during any phase of the battle but thanks for the thorough explanation you bring some good points.

 

[Piford]

The problem with the hazard in Halberd is that the person it decides to target now has to deal with fighting an opponent while being cautious of the hazard targeting them and even though this can become advantageous to either player they shouldn't be fighting the stage even if it is as predictable as a lv1 CPU.

Here's how you can use it to your advantage.

He knows its targeting him so he wants to stay close to the opponent so it can his opponent. It also frees him from the grab.

 

[Moon Monkey]

Here's how you can use it to your advantage.

He knows its targeting him so he wants to stay close to the opponent so it can his opponent. It also frees him from the grab.

And looking at this


I wonder if Rosalina might be able to exploit the canon bomb to her advantage on Halberd.

 

[ShadyWolfe]

Windy Hill is looking better and better stalling may be of no issue here should be a good counterpick
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p2q1Mgmkd04

Here's how you can use it to your advantage.

He knows its targeting him so he wants to stay close to the opponent so it can his opponent. It also frees him from the grab.

I know you can use it to your advantage I don't like seeing the stage target people but thanks for sharing this

 

[Davis-Lightheart]

You are right that it does not dictate the flow of the entire match you bring up a good point I still don't like the stage I am very conservative in that way I don't want the stage attacking anyone during any phase of the battle but thanks for the thorough explanation you bring some good points.

I understand that you have your fears. So tell me, as a player, what do you feel like when you play on Halberd? Just Halberd. I'd like to understand you better.

 

[ShadyWolfe]

I understand that you have your fears. So tell me, as a player, what do you feel like when you play on Halberd? Just Halberd. I'd like to understand you better.

I like Halberd and I like playing it in tournaments it was one of my favorite counterpicks back in Brawl but I don't like seeing a stage with a hazard that targets players even if it is predictable and even though the targeted player can use it to their advantage I feel a stage that targets a player, even if it doesn't have that much impact or pops up much, isn't good to be in a tournament but if it is allowed I will use it despite me not liking a hazardous stage.

 

[LiteralGrill]

Hey guys, you know how Rosalina can abuse the lasers on Corneria?

What if she can do that on Halberd?

 

[Davis-Lightheart]

I like Halberd and I like playing it in tournaments it was one of my favorite counterpicks back in Brawl but I don't like seeing a stage with a hazard that targets players even if it is predictable and even though the targeted player can use it to their advantage I feel a stage that targets a player, even if it doesn't have that much impact or pops up much, isn't good to be in a tournament but if it is allowed I will use it despite me not liking a hazardous stage.

Does the hazard make you nervous when you get to it or something? Because if you really enjoy the stage, why should one not obtrusive element really bother you?

Hey guys, you know how Rosalina can abuse the lasers on Corneria?

What if she can do that on Halberd?

I don't think so. It may just be too big or not have the same properties as the corneria lasers; but if she can, we'll have to see how that turns out. I expect it to be banned the second it's found out she can.

 

[Piford]

I doubt it since I don't believe Fox could reflect the hazards on Halberd, meaning they don't have the same properties. Also Corneria has always been a wonky stage.

 

[Amazing Ampharos]

None of Halberd's hazards were interactive at all in Brawl; you can't reflect them, and Ness can't absorb the laser. I'm pretty sure Marth wasn't even allowed to counter them (Counter vs stage hazards was mega goofy, totally arbitrary which ones it worked against but I don't think any of Halberd's were on the list if my memory serves). The Corneria glitch is obviously caused by projectiles that were designed to only move in one direction getting confused when forced to move in another; I doubt this will be a problem anywhere but Corneria which will most likley not be on Wii U.

I just don't understand why people get so anxious over any kind of hazard, especially mild ones like Halberd's. I mean, my region in Brawl had Norfair legal for a long time, and it was my main counterpick. In matches players are taking seriously, hazards only ever hit on Norfair either as a result of a player's pressure (which is an earned hit!) or when the "victim" actually intends to be hit (sometimes useful in recovery). That part where Norfair attacks and you get hit because Norfair is dangerous just plain does not happen. Norfair barfs fire all over the screen about every 30 seconds, and it was honestly very easy to deal with and didn't really cause inconsistent match results at all. So then you have a stage like Halberd that barely ever attacks and only attacks with much larger telegraphs. I don't think being the target vs not target of the laser is even an advantage either way, and no one even knows who the claw's target is until the last minute so everyone has to react to the pressure situation equally (but since you know it's going to attack someone at a very particular time, it's very easy to avoid unless you choose to take a risk and assume it won't target you which is a generally bad gamble that is the player's choice to make). Then there's the bomb that just falls where it's going to fall... really slowly. It's just so easy to deal with this; the hazards sometimes break up some spatial control stuff, but it tends to be on pretty equal footing and just adds another interesting dynamic for players to consider.

 

[Thinkaman]

If you get hit on Halberd or Norfair, it is because your opponent outplayed you and made you get it. Period.

 

[Piford]

If you get hit on Halberd or Norfair, it is because your opponent outplayed you and made you get it. Period.

It could also be you didn't take the time to learn the stage, which is still the players fault no the stage's.

 

[Thinkaman]

It could also be you didn't take the time to learn the stage, which is still the players fault no the stage's.

True!

This also applies to custom moves, and new characters/matchups in general.

 

[The_Altrox]

If you get hit on Halberd or Norfair, it is because your opponent outplayed you and made you get it. Period.

Normally, I agree, but the lava spray on Noirfair was pretty ridiculous. Everything else (lava wall, lava floor, and lava wave) was fine.

 

[oldkingcroz]

A smaller stage list does not make a less balanced game nor does it make a more balanced game. Now for your hypothetical example why would those stages be good for those characters. Is R.O.B. performing better on stages with no platforms, is Mario doing better because of platforms, and is Luigi doing better on moving stages if that is the case then those are reasonable reasons to include more variety but in your hypothetical what is the reasons for removing those stage?.

It comes down to whatever stage the user is most comfortable with. Sure some stages are better for certain characters (as a ROB main, I would be an advocate for Halberd because of the low ceiling death zones. ROB's killing power up the top is among one of the best), but it all comes down to who is playing. A player might select Final Destination for X character, because it may be the best for X character, but if they don't know how to use the stage properly, then it won't provide whatever benifits it may offer. It requires a more skillful player to chain grab/ fair combo with Marth on Final Destination. But if a newby Marth selects Final Destination, because it's a good stage for him, the better player still (usually) wins.

Yes, I agree that stages like 75m, Bridge of Eldin, or Flat Zone 2 should be insta-banned, but, there are borderline stages that offer slight buffs for certain players (opposed to characters). I might have a lot of experience on Brinstar or Mute City, and I may know how to use the stage orientation/ hazards to my advantage. It comes down to the player, and if they are crafty and practice enough, then they might receive an advantage on a weird stage.

Some stages slightly benifit certain characters (seeing that I used that Marth Final Destination example earlier), and some stages become outright cheap for certain characters (the infamous Kirby grab->kill on the Boxing Ring at the Smash Bros e3 invitational). I say we keep the stages that give advantages, but aren't campable or abuse-able for certain characters like Kirby/Charizard in the Boxing Ring. I like Pictochat and Luigi's Mansion quite a bit in Brawl, and play on them casually with my brother pretty often. If I've played on these stages, let's say, 500 times each, and the person I am versing (in a tournament) has only played on each stage once, it is only fair that I have the advantage on those stages, because I practiced on those stages more than them.

 

[ParanoidDrone]

Departing a bit from the current discussion, I'm convinced that Wii U tournaments should have a liberal stage list from the beginning and ban stages if and only if they are proven to lead to degenerate gameplay, as opposed to sticking to Battlefield/FD/Omega and allowing other stages as they "prove themselves" to be tournament legal. In other words, no theorycrafting about whether a stage should be banned, either point to an actual match (preferably several) where someone did the thing or shut up.

The reason I say this is related to the POTD. Sakurai showed off Wuhu Island, which by all appearances is basically Delfino Plaza on a different island. I have seen people say, with complete seriousness, that the water by itself makes the stage banned, that the walkoffs on some transformations make the stage banned, that some of the transformations are too big and thus the stage should be banned. They back their statements up with incorrect facts, such as Pirate Ship being banned due to the water. (It was banned due to stalling and the catapult.) In general I get the overwhelming impression that people are afraid of change, no matter how innocuous.

I understand that these people are not necessarily representative of the competitive scene. (On Reddit at least they're getting downvoted, so someone disagrees with them.) But they are a voice and their message disturbs me. It tells me that we cannot count on people to willingly try new stages for themselves unless circumstances force them to. And the only way I can think of to do that is if the early tournaments use a liberal stage list. Even then, I'm worried people will just flock to Battlefield/Final Destination en masse and not even look at the other offerings. (Maybe ban Battlefield/Final Destination for a few events? That would be interesting to see.)

(Sorry if this got a bit ranty, I've been worrying about this for a while lately.)

 

[Piford]

Duck Hunt stage footage

It looks completely fine. The trees are a platform. The grass does cover players, but they last a short time and you can see when it comes up.

 

[Davis-Lightheart]

So wait, this isn't a walkoff? Wow, could've fooled me from the original footage.

Well, nothing seems wrong with it at all yet.

Edit: Bush is a platform, and the dog sprite is a platform.

 

[Mr. Johan]

I'm surprised the Ducks didn't fly out during the match. You'd think they'd show up after a minute.

But since this was unlocking Duck Hunt, maybe the stage just toned it down, similar to how unlocking Wario involved a Warioware Inc. without shooting off minigames.

We don't know what happens when 10 Ducks are "shot". So we can't say for certain what's going to happen with this stage.

 

[Piford]

I'm surprised the Ducks didn't fly out during the match. You'd think they'd show up after a minute.

But since this was unlocking Duck Hunt, maybe the stage just toned it down, similar to how unlocking Wario involved a Warioware Inc. without shooting off minigames.

We don't know what happens when 10 Ducks are "shot". So we can't say for certain what's going to happen with this stage.

Ducks fly around and act as a platform. When they are shot the dog comes up and becomes a platform too.

 

[Mr. Johan]

Right, but we have that counter down at the bottom that keeps track of how many Ducks have been shot. What happens if the players focus on the Ducks whenever they come up, and something good happens to the player who shot the most out of the 10 Ducks, or random effects happen to the players once 10 Ducks have been shot?

 

[Piford]

Right, but we have that counter down at the bottom that keeps track of how many Ducks have been shot. What happens if the players focus on the Ducks whenever they come up, and something good happens to the player who shot the most out of the 10 Ducks, or random effects happen to the players once 10 Ducks have been shot?

The ducks are not shot by the players. It's done without player interaction.

 

[Mr. Johan]

The ducks are not shot by the players. It's done without player interaction.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6t5DetuBMOY&t=1m55s

The Duck is hit the instant Duck Hunt Uairs it. The counter on the bottom registers the hit, and the score on the right goes up from 500 to 1000.

Either this trailer was choreographed meticulously, or the Ducks serve a purpose on this stage to benefit the players.

 

[Piford]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6t5DetuBMOY&t=1m55s

The Duck is hit the instant Duck Hunt Uairs it. The counter on the bottom registers the hit, and the score on the right goes up from 500 to 1000.

Either this trailer was choreographed meticulously, or the Ducks serve a purpose on this stage to benefit the players.

I didn't notice that. I still doubt you get a reward for killing the most ducks. It makes sense in wario ware, not really here. What I would expect is maybe the background to change and the ducks to get faster.

 

[Davis-Lightheart]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6t5DetuBMOY&t=1m55s

The Duck is hit the instant Duck Hunt Uairs it. The counter on the bottom registers the hit, and the score on the right goes up from 500 to 1000.

Either this trailer was choreographed meticulously, or the Ducks serve a purpose on this stage to benefit the players.

In the original duck hunt; when getting all ducks the game will say, "Perfect 10000".

The thing is, the duck counter also doesn't color code itself if this trailer is any indication. It might just be aesthetics if we're lucky.

 

[Piford]

Lots of footage today, this time Jungle Hijinx!

So it appears if you use the barrels more than twice two quickly they'll blow up and stop you from switching. Also sometimes the main platform falls and forces you to go into the background. These help stop circle camping, so maybe this stage has a chance.

 

[Davis-Lightheart]

Not sure what I think of Jungle Hijinx. I want to see just how much being in the back affects your knockback.

Here's more footage of Kalos for those of you interested in comparing footage.

 

[LiteralGrill]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6t5DetuBMOY&t=1m55s

The Duck is hit the instant Duck Hunt Uairs it. The counter on the bottom registers the hit, and the score on the right goes up from 500 to 1000.

Either this trailer was choreographed meticulously, or the Ducks serve a purpose on this stage to benefit the players.

Remember how getting points on 75M did nothing? This could be similar, just something interesting and nothing more.

I mean as of now this stage at least is exciting to add to the list of possible legal stages with testing.

 

[Untouch]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoJVk93Sykc

GameXplain has a video up.

Not a walkoff, ducks are VERY rare, grass is easy to tell from the background.

Unless some very obtrusive hazard is found this is legal.

 

[ParanoidDrone]

Not sure what I think of Jungle Hijinx. I want to see just how much being in the back affects your knockback.

Here's more footage of Kalos for those of you interested in comparing footage.

I noticed the dragon room's hazard didn't hit Ike when he was still visually within the flare effect. It may not even reach players standing on the platform, we'll need to verify the exact range.