Stage Analysis & Discussion Thread

[Krysco]

In regards to Wuhu, there are at least 3 confirmed characters who can perform the glitch: Ness, Lucario and Pikachu, possibly more. I'm not sure if anyone knows who all the glitch works on. The glitch only appears on the boat and the boat only comes after the bridge and even then the jet ski race could appear instead. The glitch is easy enough to avoid since all you have to do is avoid that particular part of the boat and there are similar unfortunate occurrences on stages clearly legal although they aren't exactly 0% ohko. Looking at APEX I saw at least one or two kos from Sonic's back throw on the platform of Smashville when it was near the borders and with Delfino, there can easily be many kos from the shifting borders. Those aren't glitches mind you but they are still easy kos given by perks of the stage and they appear much more often than the boat of Wuhu.

And since the topic of stage glitches is going on at the moment, I've got a question. What about the Garden of Hope glitch with the bowls? Or the Corneria glitch with Rosa/Ness and the lasers? I know those stages are banned for reasons other than glitches (giant killer crab on a large stage and Corneria has been banned in two other games without the glitch due to camping the right side among other things) but what if those bad points were gone? Like, if Garden of Hope lacked the killer crab and was maybe a bit smaller but still had the glitch with the bowls would it be allowed? At what point does a glitch cause too large of an impact on a stages legality? The Garden of Hope glitch makes you stuck in small form but doesn't take a stock like the Wuhu glitch, granted it also has a higher chance of happening and it's debatable which is easier to avoid. Heck, Halberd had a glitch in Brawl where MK and Ike could get under the stage when it was actually on the Halberd and in 4 numerous characters can get at least partially stuck in there and as others have mentioned, falling through stages has been an issue on numerous legal stages.

As for the discussion on Omegas, I can see the benefits of making only one of each type legal, makes players have to think a lot less over small details that make them different but the problems with that are making a standard list of omegas that are and aren't legal and altogether people caring enough because the differences are so small. Like, if people were to see a list of banned stages and saw a bunch of Omegas banned but saw other similar ones allowed and they asked 'why are these omegas banned?' would the answer 'they're redundant and similar to the legal versions' be a good enough reason to ban them?

I gotta stop bringing so many questions to these kinds of threads and start bringing answers '-' I also gotta stop making walls of text...

 

[Lavani]

I would assume that the dthrows that can stagespike on the ledges of certain other stages also work for the Wuhu glitch. Falco and Shulk come to mind.

At any rate, if this is fine in PS in Melee (didn't know before @RaccoonBL's post that this wasn't the only spot it could happen in), I don't see how one spot on an even less common stage transformation is a reason to ban Wuhu.

Or the Corneria glitch with Rosa/Ness and the lasers?

I don't understand why people call this a glitch. The ship fires lasers, these moves vaccuum the lasers. That's just how things work.

 

[Krysco]

I don't understand why people call this a glitch. The ship fires lasers, these moves vaccuum the lasers. That's just how things work.

Well I've just seen other people call it a glitch so figured I'd mention it. It's honestly the smaller example since as I said, even without that glitch or mechanic or whatever you wanna call it Corneria has been banned before. I probably could've made the same point without bringing up Corneria but I did.

 

[Wilyen]

quick question. why are stages with walk-offs banned. cause coliseum looks like a viable stage.

 

[DavemanCozy]

quick question. why are stages with walk-offs banned. cause coliseum looks like a viable stage.

Back throws give very easy and effortless KO's when you're that close to the blast zone.

This is what I'm talking about:
http://tinyurl.com/qarhyzj

 

[ParanoidDrone]

Back throws give very easy and effortless KO's when you're that close to the blast zone.

This is what I'm talking about:
http://tinyurl.com/qarhyzj

I'd blame the water more than anything else there if I'm being honest. Remember that Coliseum (and Wii Fit Studio/Mario Galaxy) have nothing to physically push fighters to the edge and until the water came along Little Mac seemed to be doing a good job staying away from the edges.

Also, what about doubles? Would the presence of additional players make it easier or harder to camp the edges successfully?

 

[DavemanCozy]

I'd blame the water more than anything else there if I'm being honest. Remember that Coliseum (and Wii Fit Studio/Mario Galaxy) have nothing to physically push fighters to the edge and until the water came along Little Mac seemed to be doing a good job staying away from the edges.

Also, what about doubles? Would the presence of additional players make it easier or harder to camp the edges successfully?

Yeah, of course the water is to blame here. Unova is a very janky stage.

The video was to demonstrate how powerful the backthrow is close to the edge.
Even with Chain grabs gone and with no gimmicks like these though, walk-off camping is still a very powerful strategy. The simple fact that you can just sit at the edge creates unreasonably powerful camping positions and allows for brain-dead easy zero-to-deaths that shouldn't be occuring, as well as completely eliminating offstage play giving gross advantages to characters with excellent ground games and poor recoveries.

In the case of Little Mac (I am the Sheik in that video, btw), I can say that playing on walk-off stages against him (such as Mario Galaxy, Coliseum, and Wii Fit Studio) makes the matchup vs him feel like 9-1 against most of the cast and 7-3 against his normally worse matchups. His ground game is just that good.
I get that counterpicks are there to mitigate flaws against the matchups you have trouble with, but when a stage gives an advantage this gross, it goes from being a counter-pick to being a nearly guaranteed auto-win.

For 2vs2... maybe. I think they'd be better suited for 2vs2, potentially for 4vs4s as well.

Temporary walk offs are fine because you can't camp them forever. It's why stages like Delfino are allowed and why stages like Wuhu should be allowed (imo), but a permanent walk-off is much stronger and more detrimental to gameplay.

 

[ParanoidDrone]

Yeah, of course the water is to blame here. Unova is a very janky stage.

Kalos, not Unova. </nitpick>

 

[MidnightAsaph]

Something I don't understand is why we don't just establish that players can't camp on walk-off ends. Sorry if the reason is obvious. I don't really care if the reason is, "It's not too good, just really good." There's something really grimy about players that get a 5% lead and then run away or take extremely difficult to approach positions like walk-offs. In some cases in certain match-ups or stages this makes it almost unwinnable.

 

[ParanoidDrone]

Something I don't understand is why we don't just establish that players can't camp on walk-off ends. Sorry if the reason is obvious. I don't really care if the reason is, "It's not too good, just really good." There's something really grimy about players that get a 5% lead and then run away or take extremely difficult to approach positions like walk-offs. In some cases in certain match-ups or stages this makes it almost unwinnable.

Because it's very difficult if not impossible to enforce. How close must they be to the edge to count? How long must they do it for? What if they're constantly weaving back and forth and trying to bait a punishable action?

 

[MidnightAsaph]

Because it's very difficult if not impossible to enforce. How close must they be to the edge to count? How long must they do it for? What if they're constantly weaving back and forth and trying to bait a punishable action?

I see what you're saying. I think if we were to try curbing that strategy it would be pointing out when the character cannot be seen. But for how long and other questions, I don't know.

The easiest way would be to universally decide not to be assclowns and take advantage.

At the same time though, I feel like neither player can see, so it's hard to know who is exactly in front or behind, depending on how the second player approaches. So it's entirely possible that in some scenarios, it's a Russian Roulette.

I almost feel like there's a high chance that in some - maybe many - MUs, it's entirely possible the camping player is not nearly guaranteed a KO as they think, especially against smarter players.

However, I don't have enough experience. Is there a significant amount of discussion on this for Brawl or Melee that I could read to get better informed?

 

[The_Jiggernaut]

As for the discussion on Omegas, I can see the benefits of making only one of each type legal, makes players have to think a lot less over small details that make them different but the problems with that are making a standard list of omegas that are and aren't legal and altogether people caring enough because the differences are so small. Like, if people were to see a list of banned stages and saw a bunch of Omegas banned but saw other similar ones allowed and they asked 'why are these omegas banned?' would the answer 'they're redundant and similar to the legal versions' be a good enough reason to ban them?

I think the problems you're mentioning are problems of how format and talk about what we're doing. If we do it wrong, I agree that it confuses the issue.

Firstly it is arbitrary which Omega stage we use to represent a group. But that just means we get to choose one that functions like it actually looks visually and has a good background for a tournament setting (unlike FD itself). I think that's what you were getting at, correct me if you mean something else.

I think it's important to not think of banned omegas in the same way as we think of our usual banned stages. That would include not listing these Omegas with the likes of 75m and Wrecking Crew. No Omega stage is "Ban-worthy" by our usual standards. We aren't banning them in the same way as we do to stages that invalidate characters or gameplay elements, we're taking them out because they aren't needed.

On that note, I would say that yes, it's proper to answer the question of "Why are these Omega's banned?" by saying that the they're redundant to the legal ones, or that we already have that stage on the list.

For example, if Smashville and Town & City were literally the same, (jokes about my prejudices towards their similarities aside) as in the platform layout was the same always, but Town & City traveled between the town and the city every so often, I think it goes without saying that the community would only allow one of them on the stage list, or at least banning one would ban the other (which is functionally the same thing).

I see what you're saying. I think if we were to try curbing that strategy it would be pointing out when the character cannot be seen. But for how long and other questions, I don't know.

The easiest way would be to universally decide not to be ********s and take advantage.

At the same time though, I feel like neither player can see, so it's hard to know who is exactly in front or behind, depending on how the second player approaches. So it's entirely possible that in some scenarios, it's a Russian Roulette.

I almost feel like there's a high chance that in some - maybe many - MUs, it's entirely possible the camping player is not nearly guaranteed a KO as they think, especially against smarter players.

However, I don't have enough experience. Is there a significant amount of discussion on this for Brawl or Melee that I could read to get better informed?

I don't think you'd find much of value in those old discussions. At least in Brawl, discussion was centered around infinite chain grabs that would make 1 grab=1 kill on walk-offs inside of certain matchups.

You absolutely cannot enforce or expect people to not be jerks to each other in a tournament setting. Not only is that reaaaally hard to define, it sort of cuts out the value of high-level play if players are only using moves and strategies deemed as "fair."

When you're talking about either player being "unable to see", I image you're talking about being close enough to the blastzones that both characters are within the magnifying glass. The problem exists much farther out than that, as strong throws that can kill are almost commonplace in this game.

The reason walkoffs are banned is because they invalidate certain characters within matchups. If a character has a throw that would kill sooner than that of his opponent's, he can get a percent lead and stand in spot where his throw would killl, but his opponent's would not. Thus, this forces the "Russian Roulette" scenario that you described except for one player it's a guaranteed kill and for the other it's 10% damage. If the player with the better kill throw also has a superior grab range, or the opposing character has no projectiles, the situation is just that much worse.

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

I ran a small tournament with 13 starter stages today. Striking took around 30 seconds on average.

 

[The_Jiggernaut]

I ran a small tournament with 13 starter stages today. Striking took around 30 seconds on average.

Any major outliers? Like one time that took exceptionally long? And was it easy to explain to people unfamiliar with striking? I'll be helping a tournament try it out tomorrow I believe, so I'm curious if there are things to look out for.

 

[MidnightAsaph]

You absolutely cannot enforce or expect people to not be jerks to each other in a tournament setting. Not only is that reaaaally hard to define, it sort of cuts out the value of high-level play if players are only using moves and strategies deemed as "fair."
When you're talking about either player being "unable to see", I image you're talking about being close enough to the blastzones that both characters are within the magnifying glass. The problem exists much farther out than that, as strong throws that can kill are almost commonplace in this game.

The reason walkoffs are banned is because they invalidate certain characters within matchups. If a character has a throw that would kill sooner than that of his opponent's, he can get a percent lead and stand in spot where his throw would killl, but his opponent's would not. Thus, this forces the "Russian Roulette" scenario that you described except for one player it's a guaranteed kill and for the other it's 10% damage. If the player with the better kill throw also has a superior grab range, or the opposing character has no projectiles, the situation is just that much worse.

That first paragraph, I do see something sort of wrong with what you're saying

You're saying we shouldn't "cut out the value of high-level play" by coming up with a way to curb this "unfair" strategy, and yet we're already doing that: but by banning the stage altogether.

I mean, I guess you're right anyway. It's either throw up our hands in distress and just ban the stage... or work really hard on making a concrete rule (that might not even be possible) to curb walk-off strategies so we can expand the stage list. Still, on the other hand, I don't think I'm the only one who really doesn't like breaking a tie via percent differences (because this is the thing that allows people to run to the edge and camp, because they're technically winning because of a stupid 5 percent lead). And yet, this may be another example of a long list of things the community doesn't like but can't really find a better solution to.

If only super sudden death didn't have bombs.

Still shocked that they censored that word I used. I understand the first 3 letters, but not "clown." lol

As for the "unable to be seen" I mean that little area where you're not in the magnifying glass but not on the stage. So you're completely invisible.

I ran a small tournament with 13 starter stages today. Striking took around 30 seconds on average.

What were the stages?

 

[Piford]

Any major outliers? Like one time that took exceptionally long? And was it easy to explain to people unfamiliar with striking? I'll be helping a tournament try it out tomorrow I believe, so I'm curious if there are things to look out for.

People who don't get striking probably won't understand striking even after you explained it to them. The tournament I went to today I tried to explain striking to like 5 people and every time they were like "can we just go to FD" or "you can just pick the stage." It was mildly infuriating, but explaining having starter/counterpick stages is just another thing to add on to explaining the stage selection process.

 

[Locke 06]

I don't really like the idea of calling redundant stages "banned." Why don't we call it what it is, redundant. If omega Wily and omega onett are exactly the same (both straight walled without grass... I think they're the same) "banning" one over the other makes no sense. Smashboards can recommend a preferred omega (Wily>Onett obviously) but I think it should be up to the players/TO to decide. If Smashboards declares omega Onett to be "Banned," people will ask what is wrong with it. If we use the word "redundant" the question will be "redundant with what?" And then the players/TO should pick whichever stage they like.

Wording is important.

 

[The_Jiggernaut]

That first paragraph, I do see something sort of wrong with what you're saying

You're saying we shouldn't "cut out the value of high-level play" by coming up with a way to curb this "unfair" strategy, and yet we're already doing that: but by banning the stage altogether.

I mean, I guess you're right anyway. It's either throw up our hands in distress and just ban the stage... or work really hard on making a concrete rule (that might not even be possible) to curb walk-off strategies so we can expand the stage list. Still, on the other hand, I don't think I'm the only one who really doesn't like breaking a tie via percent differences (because this is the thing that allows people to run to the edge and camp, because they're technically winning because of a stupid 5 percent lead). And yet, this may be another example of a long list of things the community doesn't like but can't really find a better solution to.

If only super sudden death didn't have bombs.

Still shocked that they censored that word I used. I understand the first 3 letters, but not "clown." lol

As for the "unable to be seen" I mean that little area where you're not in the magnifying glass but not on the stage. So you're completely invisible.



What were the stages?

So like, what I guess I'm trying to say is that it can be really hard differentiating between playing fair and going easy on an opponent. It's more a 'during' a match thing, where it forces the players to be thinking about some extra, honestly subjective thing rather than using everything in their power to win. And I feel that would dampen the explosiveness of high-level play. If we instead ban a stage, there doesn't have to be this "going easy on the opponent" effect in play.

I think you're right that % leads as a tie breaker isn't perfect, and the reason we use it is in fact because we don't have better. For instance a Jigglypuff at 80% is far closer to death than a Dedede as 90%. So there's this bias against heavy-weights. However, on stages without walkoffs, Smash 4 no longer has the problems of camping at the edge when you get a percent lead. A lot of problems from Brawl were fixed in that regard, like no ledge invincibility if you regrab a ledge without taking damage.

People who don't get striking probably won't understand striking even after you explained it to them. The tournament I went to today I tried to explain striking to like 5 people and every time they were like "can we just go to FD" or "you can just pick the stage." It was mildly infuriating, but explaining having starter/counterpick stages is just another thing to add on to explaining the stage selection process.

Actually, I had a similar difficulty explaining striking at the last tournament I was helping at. There will always be that difficulty. But now that you mention it, the lack of starters/counters is one less moving part and technically means there's even less to explain than our "previous" method.

I don't really like the idea of calling redundant stages "banned." Why don't we call it what it is, redundant. If omega Wily and omega onett are exactly the same (both straight walled without grass... I think they're the same) "banning" one over the other makes no sense. Smashboards can recommend a preferred omega (Wily>Onett obviously) but I think it should be up to the players/TO to decide. If Smashboards declares omega Onett to be "Banned," people will ask what is wrong with it. If we use the word "redundant" the question will be "redundant with what?" And then the players/TO should pick whichever stage they like.

Wording is important.

I completely agree with this. It's not the same thing as what we use the word "ban" for, so yeah, we should use a different word. Redundant is a good one, I'd say.

As long as they stay within the pool of redundant stages, I see no reason why a TO shouldn't be able to decide what representative they use. I think this is a good way to handle things, as even when I made choices on which stage should represent a group it felt really arbitrary that I alone should make that choice.

We can (and I believe absolutely should) recommend a few that make good representatives in each group, but leaving that freedom up to the region is a better plan, now that you mention it.

 

[Krysco]

So rather than banning Omegas, we simply label them as redundant. We come up with a list, pass it around but accept the fact that aside from Lylat, any Omega can be replaced by at least one other kind. Sounds good to me so long as people actually make use of the list. The details are minor but it'd be much easier to memorize the difference between 9 commonly picked Omegas than the whole 40-50 we have to choose from. Doesn't matter too much but it is helpful.

Also, don't the 2D Omegas have some distinct difference? Omega Duck Hunt, Pac-Land and Flat Zone I believe are the only ones. Something about them correcting or changing certain hitboxes at least on Greninja? Not sure if that would play into much effect at all. I guess if anything it'd be a possible choice for anyone who uses a character where it matters since they wouldn't be banned.

 

[Locke 06]

That is the issue. There are many unique omegas. 2D is a strong pick due to a lack of Z-axis, PAC land omega is strong for villager since the wall allows for bowling ball gimps but it's unable to be wall jumped, etc.

The bottom of most omegas differ as well and can make a difference in recoveries/stage spiking. While it is somewhat trivial, it is a difference and players are always looking for those slight advantages. Good luck to the person who takes on this project.

 

[The_Jiggernaut]

So rather than banning Omegas, we simply label them as redundant. We come up with a list, pass it around but accept the fact that aside from Lylat, any Omega can be replaced by at least one other kind. Sounds good to me so long as people actually make use of the list. The details are minor but it'd be much easier to memorize the difference between 9 commonly picked Omegas than the whole 40-50 we have to choose from. Doesn't matter too much but it is helpful.

Also, don't the 2D Omegas have some distinct difference? Omega Duck Hunt, Pac-Land and Flat Zone I believe are the only ones. Something about them correcting or changing certain hitboxes at least on Greninja? Not sure if that would play into much effect at all. I guess if anything it'd be a possible choice for anyone who uses a character where it matters since they wouldn't be banned.

Yeah, that's the gist of it. If someone doesn't care what Omega they get taken to, the rule that "two players can go to any stage if they both agree to it" can be used, but if someone does care they aren't forced into memorizing every stage, the commonly used list of 9 would come into effect.

2D Omegas (yes, there are only 3), as well as Duck Hunt itself, do change certain attributes of a match. Along with grass halving the distance of dashes and slides, these two types of stages do make small, although noticeable, changes to a match.

Rather than something I don't think is important, I was more hoping to get the discussion of the geometry of the stages out of the way first. And that seems to be at a fairly good point, although it would be nice to know if we can reduce the number of non-redunant stages to something less than 9, (This thread I'm working on in a Proof-by-Contradiction style aims to objectively show if that's possible or impossible. I'll get back to you guys on that when it runs its course) since then it would be sort of easy to add 2D and grass options without making the number too big.

So, what is everyone's thoughts on grassy stages? There are 5 Omega stages and 0 standard legal stages with grass, and not all of them have grass on the entire surface. Is anyone of the opinion that grass doesn't matter?

That is the issue. There are many unique omegas. 2D is a strong pick due to a lack of Z-axis, PAC land omega is strong for villager since the wall allows for bowling ball gimps but it's unable to be wall jumped, etc.

The bottom of most omegas differ as well and can make a difference in recoveries/stage spiking. While it is somewhat trivial, it is a difference and players are always looking for those slight advantages. Good luck to the person who takes on this project.

There's been major discussion in the Ottawa region (613Smash) about banning Duck Hunt and other 2D stages, actually. And I mean banning like 75m, not calling the lot redundant.

The official discussion will be happening sometime tomorrow, but here's what will be my piece on the issue. It's clear that there are changes that the lack of a Z-axis causes. Some are are good for characters like normally non-functional multi-hit moves connecting properly (the only one known to me is Greninja, though I'm sure there are more) while others are detrimental (Rob and Dedede have less invincibility frames on their dodges, and this is confirmed). Because some spot and air dodges move into the background as part of their dodge, the lack of a background to move into means certain characters have worse dodges. And this change is by virtue of how the animators happened to depict these dodges.

So it's my opinion that there's a point where we're suddenly playing a different game with different rules and physics. It doesn't feel to be in the spirit of how we usually counterpick to choose a stage because "Dedede dodges worse there". The other thing is, that finding out what the changes even are will take a great deal of precise work, but I can almost guarantee we will find more frame-reductions to spot dodges and more moves that hit better if we look. I dislike the idea that a player can counterpick a different game engine, balanced by happenstance.

If a character "needs" 2D stages to win, then they're already out of luck because no one would ever let them strike to such a stage. This means only 1 of 3 games can happen on a 2D stage, which isn't enough for them to win the set.


And yes, especially the stages grouped under the name (coined by Cornstalk) Fat Lip Floater, there is a lot of varying geometry under the stage. It's sort of hard to know how to handle that. The differences seem small compared to the differences within the group, and even the differences can seem small between these non-redundant groups... It needs to be looked into more I guess.

As far as considering this a project, it is something that I would be willing to undertake. Is there another aspect of it that you had in mind, besides something of the sort I've started in the thread I've linked above?

 

[SpandexBullets]

Look what this lucky youtuber discovered!
Tournament viable maps!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=afhOUrOZPzI

Easily exploitable, SD all stocks with 3 dummy players for 1v1's and 1 dummy player for doubles.

I'd love to see triples emerge from this game though.
That'd be awesome to see.

 

[Firefoxx]

Look what this lucky youtuber discovered!
Tournament viable maps!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=afhOUrOZPzI

Easily exploitable, SD all stocks with 3 dummy players for 1v1's and 1 dummy player for doubles.

We've basically been over this already but SD'ing three players at the start of a match is kind of ridiculous and requires three extra controllers at every setup. Also, Pokémon Stadium 2 is better when its able to transform.

 

[SpandexBullets]

We've basically been over this already but SD'ing three players at the start of a match is kind of ridiculous and requires three extra controllers at every setup. Also, Pokémon Stadium 2 is better when its able to transform.

Yeah.
Both are available to play, and the Gamepad - already restricted from use as only one player can have it - counts as a controller.
It'd take approximately 12 seconds in a 2 stock match, if you pick heavy fastfalling characters. About 16 with 3 stocks.

Very simple to do, I think.

 

[SpandexBullets]

Hell, 3DS games already have one player (the 3DS with the recording equipment) SD at the start of every match.

 

[Firefoxx]

Yeah.
Both are available to play, and the Gamepad - already restricted from use as only one player can have it - counts as a controller.
It'd take approximately 12 seconds in a 2 stock match, if you pick heavy fastfalling characters. About 16 with 3 stocks.

Very simple to do, I think.

I don't think the logistics are simple and feasible for everyone, but let's say they are. The reward isn't very high, at least not for singles. In 8p PS2 you essentially get a less dynamic Town and City. And in Pyrosphere you get a bad platform layout. We have enough flat stages with some platforms and nothing else already, we don't really need more.

Also it's accepted on the 3DS and online on Wii U out of necessity.

 

[The_Jiggernaut]

It's just... messy really. Even if 8 player-mode worked without 2-3 extra controllers, you'd have to switch between two game modes depending on the stage. That means re-selecting characters, making sure you don't forget your tag, and pretty sure you have to re-set the rules. You have to choose one mode to use the random stage select on for stage striking, so that means switching modes depending on what you strike to.

Additionally, has anyone even considered how to handle the time it takes to kill the extra players? As in, if the rules say it's a 6 minute match, how do you enforce this? Do you just accept that all matches in 8-player mode have random lengths? Do you set the timer to 7 minutes, kill the others within a minute and wait for the timer to hit 6 minutes?

Even if there was a good stage to gain (which there arguably isn't), it doesn't sound like something the community should be doing.

 

[SpandexBullets]

It's just... messy really. Even if 8 player-mode worked without 2-3 extra controllers, you'd have to switch between two game modes depending on the stage. That means re-selecting characters, making sure you don't forget your tag, and pretty sure you have to re-set the rules. You have to choose one mode to use the random stage select on for stage striking, so that means switching modes depending on what you strike to.

Additionally, has anyone even considered how to handle the time it takes to kill the extra players? As in, if the rules say it's a 6 minute match, how do you enforce this? Do you just accept that all matches in 8-player mode have random lengths? Do you set the timer to 7 minutes, kill the others within a minute and wait for the timer to hit 6 minutes?

Even if there was a good stage to gain (which there arguably isn't), it doesn't sound like something the community should be doing.

I get that this takes extra time to set up (about 1 minute, unless you shoot with this hand), but it should totally be included on the basis that Norfair is an excellent map. Pyrosphere...I don't think has a bad platform layout, I think it's pretty neutral as far as neutral stages go, and the more variation the merrier.
As for Pokemon stadium, it's exactly the same as the project M stage, which I've seen picked often. I know there's a lot you want to include from the Smash 4 plate, but there are about...3 neutral stages, and that's part of what's pushing away to diehard melee fans. I think this is a good idea, it's easily done, so it shouldn't be banned, and I think tournament goers will choose these stages regardless.

 

[SpandexBullets]

I was talking local/con tournaments though.

also, have you SEEN some players picking characters?
Leffen has his stuff sorted in 2 seconds flat!

Counting that the gamepad can't be used by either player as a controller due to preference of one available option, it's already being used for nothing. Afterwards, it can even be used as a display for percentages.

How long does it take 3 captain falcons to SD 2 or 3 times? Try it yourselves.

There is NO obstacle I can think of that ruins the use of these stages.

 

[Firefoxx]

I mean, neutral stages aren't a thing that exist and Melee diehards wouldn't be happy with anything that isn't melee.

And I'm not saying these are bad stages, but we have 13-17 really good stages already and we don't really need 3 more that require additional things to make them function.

Also, the official rule set for CEO went up yesterday and the only rule so far for Smash 4 is 2 stocks 6 minutes. Jebailey seems like a guy that cares about community feedback and if we could direct him to this thread it could be pretty big for us.

 

[SpandexBullets]

I mean, neutral stages aren't a thing that exist and Melee diehards wouldn't be happy with anything that isn't melee.

And I'm not saying these are bad stages, but we have 13-17 really good stages already and we don't really need 3 more that require additional things to make them function.

Also, the official rule set for CEO went up yesterday and the only rule so far for Smash 4 is 2 stocks 6 minutes. Jebailey seems like a guy that cares about community feedback and if we could direct him to this thread it could be pretty big for us.

It would be.
I'm not sure about Wuhu island - it has walk-off, and that's not great if your opponent has a wonderful back-throw.
By 17 stages, do you mean omega stages?
Not counting wall jump, that's the same stage.

A lot of players unwilling to chance ANY hazardous stage movement will take these 3 - I just want to make sure that there's more stage variation for tournaments; I wouldn't necessarily be playing on them myself outside of competitive games, but I will defend them as worthwhile additions.

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

I don't see 17. 13, sure. 14, sure. 15 is kinda pushing it... Not sure what 16 and 17 are. But those 13 outlined by Ampharos a while back? No question. None of these stages even come close to being ban-worthy.

 

[Firefoxx]

Temporary walk-offs aren't bad/camping walk-offs on traveling stages gives up stage control.

and 17 stages means the AA list plus Windy Hill, Mario Circuit U, Norfair, and (edit) Luigi's Mansion (that's number 17), all of which you could make cases for. Not saying those 4 have great cases to be made for them but...

Keep defending them, try to get them instituted into a local or regional and then come tell us if there were any problems with their inclusion.

 

[SpandexBullets]

Temporary walk-offs aren't bad/camping walk-offs on traveling stages gives up stage control.

and 17 stages means the AA list plus Windy Hill, Mario Circuit U, Norfair, and (edit) Luigi's Mansion (that's number 17), all of which you could make cases for. Not saying those 4 have great cases to be made for them but...

Keep defending them, try to get them instituted into a local or regional and then come tell us if there were any problems with their inclusion.

Hazard-less Norfair can be achieved, and that's a good thing. I get that you don't want the possible stages cut in half from nitpicking and whining, but Norfairs lava walls, waves and sprays can seriously hinder some characters and completely benefit i others.
I do want the Paper Mario stage to be included though, but not Mario Bros U, it has a hazard that can rob your stock unless you opponent intervenes.
I like Kalos gym, it's got a few hazards but some personality too.

I think these are good stages, but the hazardless versions should be presented too.

 

[Firefoxx]

Hazard-less Norfair can be achieved, and that's a good thing. I get that you don't want the possible stages cut in half from nitpicking and whining, but Norfairs lava walls, waves and sprays can seriously hinder some characters and completely benefit i others.
I do want the Paper Mario stage to be included though, but not Mario Bros U, it has a hazard that can rob your stock unless you opponent intervenes.
I like Kalos gym, it's got a few hazards but some personality too.

I think these are good stages, but the hazardless versions should be presented too.

You do realize that Paper Mario is a 3DS stage, right?

 

[Amazing Ampharos]

The Paper Mario stage is pretty awful as well, was one of the stages that disappointed me the most in the 3DS version (though 3DS version stages disappointed me a lot). I was totally ready to explain why the first section wasn't as bad as it seemed, and then I saw the third section and was like "nope, there's no defending this stage". Only Magicant and Mute City were greater disappointments.

Norfair has come up, and I think I should talk about it. As a serious Norfair lover, here's the deal. The hazards don't really matter. Like if you're good at the game, you really shouldn't be getting hit by them except when you deliberately choose to take risks with the hazards (which is your choice, calculated risk, it's all fair). What does matter is the platform lay-out. Norfair doesn't have a "main" stage, and fighting on it requires frequent transitions between the "levels". Some characters are far better at doing this (or preventing this!) than others, and versus Brawl, it's way harder to do safely with the new ledge mechanics. Like I was playing my buddy's Sonic here as Rosalina, and it really just seemed unwinnable for Sonic since the stage totally invalidated Sonic's movement while every platform was the right side for me to implement project fortress Rosalina & Luma that is not a fun thing to approach from the air even for characters good at it (which Sonic is not). I believe in this long run this stage would prove to be fair but significantly more polarizing than most other stages that are worth considering, and it is my judgment that Norfair is probably not worth fighting for in this game as I'm not really convinced the game is a better game with Norfair legal since Norfair legal is just pushing for a greater focus on securing stage advantage in the stage procedure phase and would likely decrease the average viability of the cast. My goal in large part in pushing for stages like Skyloft is that I strongly feel they do the opposite: by being such intrinsically diverse stages, they reduce the polarization to match-ups that we inevitably have to some extent by having to play on one stage or another. It is tragic that people just look at the hazards and turn their brains off to how Norfair really plays, but either way, the stage has real issues.

On a different note, why would 2d stages be ban-worthy? It's different, but what character gets a legitimately gamebreaking advantage (or is gamebreakingly crippled) by the 2d mechanics? Duck Hunt is a pretty great stage and would be non-trivially frustrating to lose; these 2d mechanics would need to have some serious problems for banning them to make sense, and I haven't heard that they have those kinds of problems at all.

 

[J_the_Man]

In one round on Mario Circuit, I just managed two glitches. Both ended up in KOs, but me and the CPU both hit each other with kill moves that would have killed each other regardless. At the starting/finish line, we both landed at the far right that resulted in a see through ground. I'm actually not sure if that caused a KO, but I was going to die regardless. I managed to replicate the OHKO glitch by sending Dedede into the sky and getting him trapped and KO'd. It wasn't at the usual spot though, but I forget where. We were on the moving platform, it wasn't at a stop.

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

In one round on Mario Circuit, I just managed two glitches. Both ended up in KOs, but me and the CPU both hit each other with kill moves that would have killed each other regardless. At the starting/finish line, we both landed at the far right that resulted in a see through ground. I'm actually not sure if that caused a KO, but I was going to die regardless. I managed to replicate the OHKO glitch by sending Dedede into the sky and getting him trapped and KO'd. It wasn't at the usual spot though, but I forget where. We were on the moving platform, it wasn't at a stop.

Did you save the replay? Can you upload it? This seems like phenomenally useful data - the kind of stuff we ought to have already.

 

[J_the_Man]

Did you save the replay? Can you upload it? This seems like phenomenally useful data - the kind of stuff we ought to have already.

Unfortunately, I don't have a memory card to save replays, otherwise it'd already be on here. One thing I can tell you, getting hit onto the ceiling while the flying stage is traversing under the course can also rack up damage.

The Glitch happened when I used Zamus's upair on King Dedede as the track twisted into becoming a ceiling. The floating platform traveled straight under the course without stopping, so Dedede was essentially trapped above the course. I guess it's nothing really new that we didn't know. It's just that it doesn't necessarily have to happen as the stage leaves the transition.

 

[Firefoxx]

So as of right now KTAR XII has Pilotwings legal