Stage Discussion - Pokemon Stadium

[Marc]

I believe FoD is generally a better starter, but that and YS are definitely a tad below BF and DL in terms of ideal first stages.

 

[Skler]

FoD is a better stage than YS, both feature a random element that affects the game, but FoD's random element is less obnoxious (though it occurs more frequently) and it doesn't have Randall or sloped edges.

It would also feel dirty to get rid of FD, imbalanced as it is, because it features 0 random elements. If I had to pick two stages to go I'd say YS and PS and be extremely happy about it, if I had to pick 3 I'd toss FD into the mix as well.



If I had my way the stages would look like this

Starters: Fountain of Dreams, Battlefield, Dreamland 64

Counter picks: Yoshi's Story, Final Destination

Too cool for school: Rainbow Cruise

One ban for any stage (used after the first game is played) and each player strikes a single stage double blind so you could each strike the same stage or choose to strike no stages. The starter is then randomly selected between the remaining stages unless both players agree on a specific stage.



I'd be pretty ok with Yoshi's getting swapped with FoD in that scenario as well because it seems universally disliked (Falcon players hate it).


Edit: The more I think about this the better that stage list sounds. I propose we change the stages to that list (even if Yoshi's needs to be a starter). It's too balanced, yo.

 

[Fortress | Sveet]

Now I feel so progressive... Rat and I were arguing 3 stage strikes when the new MBR first opened lol.

Honestly, I don't like 3 stage strikes anymore. Its really boring, there no data mining you can do about your opponent during the strike, and almost every single time it will go battlefield.

 

[Skler]

Now I feel so progressive... Rat and I were arguing 3 stage strikes when the new MBR first opened lol.

Honestly, I don't like 3 stage strikes anymore. Its really boring, there no data mining you can do about your opponent during the strike, and almost every single time it will go battlefield.

That's because Battlefield is the most neutral stage in the game. Should stage select even be a skill we care about?

 

[Fortress | Sveet]

Well theres information you can gain about a player during the strike. You sit down with a player for the first time (say at a national or something) and you've never heard of them. Their character and their striking options can tell a lot about their play style and more importantly what stages they will be interested in counter picking.

And for those with good strategies on specific maps (personally, YS is my favorite stage with any character) you can strike so that your opponent may consider striking battlefield.

For a 3 stage strike there is no thought. "Oh you struck dreamland? oh well I don't want fountain, so its BF." The only interesting thing you can do is strike battlefield yourself, which lets the opponent choose big/small (not a good trade off, IMO).

Also it makes the order of strikes matter more (despite the strikes themselves mattering a lot less). In a 5 stage strike, 1 player makes a strike, then the other chooses 2 and then the first player takes 1 more. Each player has a chance to respond to the other's choices, but in a 3 stage strike there is no rebuttal.


This is just my $0.02 from running tournaments with a 3 stage strike

 

[Skler]

I suggested using a double blind strike, which allows for more than just battlefield if both people hate one of the other two stages while eliminating strike order being a factor (again, I think playing the actual game is where the focus should be). Picking the starting stage shouldn't be a big deal.

Besides, I never found the old striking order to be interesting. There were pretty much always two stages that were bad for a matchup and two stages that were good, it almost always went to Battlefield. I (almost) always struck Yoshi's and FD against anyone who wasn't floaty, it was my opponent who would always strike Fountain and Dreamland 64 (unless they were going to circle camp).

The advantages are too obvious for there to be any real strategy.

 

[Fortress | Sveet]

If we move down to 3 stages, it would probably be better to just random from there. Double blind has the problem of requiring a 3rd party or a way to write down the choices, either of which would be cumbersome.

I find stale strike order only comes into play if players play each other often. For example, if I were to play against you as fox, I wouldn't mind any stage. I would actually be confused at you striking FD and expect you to strike towards a stage where you could keep me away better. Depending on how i'm feeling that day, I could choose any stage except probably FD. From my last few sentences you can probably guess how I plan to approach the match-up. On the other hand if you play the opponent a lot, you will know how they intend to approach the match-up and probably agree to play battlefield (or strike there just by knowledge of the other's strengths).

 

[Skler]

If we move down to 3 stages, it would probably be better to just random from there. Double blind has the problem of requiring a 3rd party or a way to write down the choices, either of which would be cumbersome.

I find stale strike order only comes into play if players play each other often. For example, if I were to play against you as fox, I wouldn't mind any stage. I would actually be confused at you striking FD and expect you to strike towards a stage where you could keep me away better. Depending on how i'm feeling that day, I could choose any stage except probably FD. From my last few sentences you can probably guess how I plan to approach the match-up. On the other hand if you play the opponent a lot, you will know how they intend to approach the match-up and probably agree to play battlefield (or strike there just by knowledge of the other's strengths).

It is true that Fox doesn't have a disadvantage on any stage that isn't like Brinstar or Mute City with its hazards. Striking as Fox is more of a "what do I feel like" sort of thing. Most other characters have more clear-cut problems on certain stages.

Double blind is pretty easy, just have two slips of paper and a pencil. You could even just say "Rock is dreamland, paper is battlefield, scissors is FoD" and strike by doing an RPS throw (you just pick the stage that wasn't thrown). Both of those methods take less time than alternate strikes (writing two letters on a piece of paper is very fast). Then again, most people will probably say "battlefield?" and be done with it because almost everyone likes battlefield.

 

[Fortress | Sveet]

Having paper for every game for pools at a national... not to mention pens at every station. Idk, even if its not cumbersome for the players, its really cumbersome for the TOs. I like that RPS idea tho

 

[Skler]

I agree that getting a pack of pens and some note cards can be annoying for TOs, but it's a very low cost (like, $2 for the pencils and cards) and they can be re-used after.

As a re-usable strategy, you can let each station have 6 cards to choose from divided into two piles, with each pile having one of each stage on it. Each player reveals their pick at the same time and bam, stage strikes. That way players don't even need pens or anything, just cards (and they could be BADASS and have the stage drawn on them or something).

The hand signal (RPS toss) method is cheap and effective, though. I do think cards could be neat and more user-friendly, they just require more effort on the TO's part. My only worry with the RPS style is if people weren't 100% sure of what each hand signal meant, but listing it in the rules and/or having a general reference sheet at the tournament can prevent that. Even just announcing "hey everybody, remember that X hand toss means you're striking Y stage!" before pools/brackets would work.

If the hand signal method gets used I propose the following:

Battlefield is Rock, because it's SOLID and COMMONLY USED

Dreamland is paper because it's LONG and BORING

and either

Fountain is scissors because it's EXCITING and DYNAMIC
or
Yoshi's is scissors because it's DANGEROUS TO RUN WITH and SLANTED

 

[Deleted member]

Here's the list of known problems with Stadium:

1. The mountain coming up during an edge guard is a thing that randomly happens and favors a certain player. The grass stage is similar, but some characters do not benefit from a sloped edge.

2. There is a glitch on the stage that, though rare, can make players fall through the floor and lose a stock.


Debatable problems:

1. The flow of the game is broken on certain transformations because of the strong defensive positions that are created.

2. The left side is at an inherent disadvantage because they have to be the aggressor or eventually be forced into a worse position unless they have a means of forcing the opponent to engage (projectiles). One player starts on the left side, thus that player is at a disadvantage from the start of the game depending on the matchup.

3. Some transformations have walls, and stages with walls have all been banned with the walls being part of the reasoning behind the ban.


Argue against the ones that are up for debate, and argue why the ones that are known are not a big deal. Anecdotes are not arguments.

the walls argument i think is untrue, although related. typically the playable wall stages like corneria and peach's castle were banned because camping the walls themselves were thought to be overly effective. for example, i think it was falco bair/laser camping that got peach's castle banned.

i think the main point of the stage list is determining how we want the interactions of the game to look like, or in another sense, to encourage interaction as much as possible. so for example, we banned hyrule temple because it encourages the players to interact with each other as little as possible. some characters also interact very little if possible, and non-interactive strategies have shown to be the best ones in the game (dashdancing, falco laser, chaingrabs).

i'd be closer to arguing that stadium's lack of a high middle platform makes it a favorable stage, as the problem characters (fox falco) are so very good at using those top platforms. how is a character like peach supposed to interact with a character on the top platform of battlefield?

i agree that the effectiveness of the stage is overstated. as a zelda player, i have never lost to a fox/falco player solely because we went to stadium, it's always because of the MU disparity or my own lack of ability.

also, fox's bans are alarmingly easy. if the opponent can chaingrab you, ban FD. if not, don't ban FD because you'll be the better character on that stage every time with your dashdance.

 

[Skler]

the walls argument i think is untrue, although related. typically the playable wall stages like corneria and peach's castle were banned because camping the walls themselves were thought to be overly effective. for example, i think it was falco bair/laser camping that got peach's castle banned.

i think the main point of the stage list is determining how we want the interactions of the game to look like, or in another sense, to encourage interaction as much as possible. so for example, we banned hyrule temple because it encourages the players to interact with each other as little as possible. some characters also interact very little if possible, and non-interactive strategies have shown to be the best ones in the game (dashdancing, falco laser, chaingrabs).

i'd be closer to arguing that stadium's lack of a high middle platform makes it a favorable stage, as the problem characters (fox falco) are so very good at using those top platforms. how is a character like peach supposed to interact with a character on the top platform of battlefield?

i agree that the effectiveness of the stage is overstated. as a zelda player, i have never lost to a fox/falco player solely because we went to stadium, it's always because of the MU disparity or my own lack of ability.

also, fox's bans are alarmingly easy. if the opponent can chaingrab you, ban FD. if not, don't ban FD because you'll be the better character on that stage every time with your dashdance.

I think walls were banned for a lot of reasons. Onett was banned because it was Fox's playground, Corneria, Peach's castle and Venom were banned because of defensive positions (with Marth being a huge deal on castle and venom or something).

For what it's worth, Fox kills floaties about 20% earlier on PS than on other stages. He really doesn't need to abuse a top platform to win there because of how much stronger his kill method against floaties is and how good he is on certain transformations. I really don't think the spacies are over powered on Stadium, just that the stage (thanks to the transformations) is bad.

Speaking of interactions though, the stage essentially stops play for 30 seconds at a time because walls create such strong positions and make approaching (especially against wall-infinite capable characters) a huge mistake. Two of the stage transformations are just so terrible that most people camp it out, which is pretty lame for everyone involved.

If we want to get on the subject of encouraging interaction I'd say bring Cruise back. Say what you will about it, but nobody can say it didn't force a lot of interactions thanks to its movement and clearly powerful positions.

Edit: If we want to get rid of non-interaction DL64 should be banned immediately. I would not be bothered by this.

 

[Cactuar]

I read "the stage transformations are just so terrible that most people camp it out", and think "most people are so bad at playing on unfamiliar/non-standard terrain that they just camp it out".

I don't view the fire transformation as being problematic on the same level as the mountain transformation. The mountain is an issue due to it completely cutting off the stage and leaving that minute space on the left side, which is abusable if it happens to transform during a sequence involving the opponent or you being off stage. Falling through the tree is difficult to reproduce, and in the 6-7 years I've been playing, I've never experienced it, and after finding out its a possibility, I know to avoid that area in tournament play.

We don't want to force interaction. The gap between encouraging interaction and forcing it is a large one.

You can't complain about PS killing floaties slightly earlier on PS, then advocate for RC, where Falco kills nearly everyone at whatever percent he wants thanks to shine->shine and the super low ceiling during half of the stage rotation.

 

[Skler]

I read "the stage transformations are just so terrible that most people camp it out", and think "most people are so bad at playing on unfamiliar/non-standard terrain that they just camp it out".

I don't view the fire transformation as being problematic on the same level as the mountain transformation. The mountain is an issue due to it completely cutting off the stage and leaving that minute space on the left side, which is abusable if it happens to transform during a sequence involving the opponent or you being off stage. Falling through the tree is difficult to reproduce, and in the 6-7 years I've been playing, I've never experienced it, and after finding out its a possibility, I know to avoid that area in tournament play.

We don't want to force interaction. The gap between encouraging interaction and forcing it is a large one.

You can't complain about PS killing floaties slightly earlier on PS, then advocate for RC, where Falco kills nearly everyone at whatever percent he wants thanks to shine->shine and the super low ceiling during half of the stage rotation.

The fire and mountain benefit certain characters too much while providing a really strong defensive position for people who don't want to fight. I rarely see people actually fight unless they have the advantage on those transformations, and then they tend to just get camped by the other person. I know I'm uncomfortable on them in most MUs and will usually just camp it out if possible.

I only bring up the fire transformation insta-kill because I've fallen through it in friendlies while camping under the fire tree. If that happened to me in a tournament I'd be super pissed.

I didn't complain about PS killing floaties though, that isn't a problem with the stage, I was just responding to Mow about why PS neutral is considered good for Fox. My problem is the transformations, flow breaking, and the random factor (transformations during edge guards and the extremely rare insta-kill). RC is a different discussion, but I brought it up because of the interaction thing. I don't really have a position on forcing interaction, I do think we should discourage non-interaction though. Screw DL64!


I do really want to know what to do if somebody gets killed by PS in a tournament. Do we just "no johns" it and keep going? I don't think it's happened in tournament yet, but I'm curious.

 

[Fortress | Sveet]

if you're worried about dying from falling through, play samus

 

[Cactuar]

The fire and mountain benefit certain characters too much while providing a really strong defensive position for people who don't want to fight. I rarely see people actually fight unless they have the advantage on those transformations, and then they tend to just get camped by the other person. I know I'm uncomfortable on them in most MUs and will usually just camp it out if possible.

I only bring up the fire transformation insta-kill because I've fallen through it in friendlies while camping under the fire tree. If that happened to me in a tournament I'd be super pissed.

Don't be vague and say "certain characters". Be specific about which characters, and be specific about in what matchups and why it is too big of an advantage in either offense or defense.

Regarding the stage hole, I suggest getting a collection of clips that show it happening to continue the conversation around if the fall-through is a legitimate concer for youn, because its rare enough for me to consider it as insignificant.

 

[HyugaRicdeau]

It happened to Zhu in a tourney teams match I was in, although it didn't really materially affect the match. I know I've seen it in one other tourney match too, I think it was at Pound 4. That makes twice over 8 years in my experience. I've never seen it in friendlies for some reason.

Why does everyone hate FoD? It's pretty and has the best stage music in the game.

 

[Skler]

Don't be vague and say "certain characters". Be specific about which characters, and be specific about in what matchups and why it is too big of an advantage in either offense or defense.

Regarding the stage hole, I suggest getting a collection of clips that show it happening to continue the conversation around if the fall-through is a legitimate concer for youn, because its rare enough for me to consider it as insignificant.

Fox ***** the universe on both Fire and Mountain stages due to his platform and wall game. His combos are disproportionately rewarded when he lands hits on those transformations, and it's easier for him to land hits unless his opponent is camping one of the extremely strong defensive positions.

Marth gains an almost unbeatable defensive position on both Fire and Mountain stages (which he uses to stall it out). Really any character with a disjointed hitbox gains a very strong defensive position on Fire and Mountain, so it includes the Links and Roy.

Peach gains a stupidly strong defensive position on the Mountain and Fire transformation. Peach can camp on the fire or Mountain stage and just attempt to pull a stitch face/dumb/bomb/sword for the entire time as her opponent has no solid approach against her.


Worst of all, Bowser gains a perfect (99% sure it's perfect, MAGUS WHERE ARE YOU), easily executed stall for the duration of the Mountain stage.


I'd say the fall-through is just a concern because we have no way of handling it. I assume Zhu won his match anyways, but what if the stage kill actually lost him a close match? Is it really just "whoops, that was odd, PLAY ON" if somebody loses a close match where one stock was removed because the stage decided to be messed up?


Also Hyuga, I have no idea. FoD is really balanced. The top platform is not actually safe, so it can't be abused like in Battlefield or Dreamland, and it has wide enough boundaries and a low enough bottom that it isn't gimp city like Yoshi's Story. Nor is it huge enough that, when the two side platforms happen to be down at the same time, it's full of impossible CGs. If anything it limits CGs due to the platform height, and most people seem to dislike CGing (I'm biased because everyone and their mom can CG Link) so that's a good thing in my book.

 

[Cactuar]

There is no such thing as disproportionate hit reward. Wobbling would be banned. Rest would be banned. Peach's downsmash would be banned. The maximum amount of damage any first hit can lead into is 1 stock.

Fox and Falco gain an advantage in pressure game on those locations if they can manage to break through a defense. It's not inherently easier for Fox/Falco to land hits on the transformations. Once they break past neutral and get on someone's shield, the opponent has less escape options. Marth's defense on those transformations is very strong. Peach's defense on them is very strong. Sheik's is very strong. Ganon and Falcon both have crazy large uair for defense. IC's have disjointed hitboxes to protect them. Etc.

Again, what I ended up reading there, was "If the opponent has no idea how to defend on PS, spacies will dominate them". This is implied if the opponent doesn't know how to play any stage, not just PS.

 

[Skler]

There is no such thing as disproportionate hit reward. Wobbling would be banned. Rest would be banned. Peach's downsmash would be banned. The maximum amount of damage any first hit can lead into is 1 stock.

Fox and Falco gain an advantage in pressure game on those locations if they can manage to break through a defense. It's not inherently easier for Fox/Falco to land hits on the transformations. Once they break past neutral and get on someone's shield, the opponent has less escape options. Marth's defense on those transformations is very strong. Peach's defense on them is very strong. Sheik's is very strong. Ganon and Falcon both have crazy large uair for defense. IC's have disjointed hitboxes to protect them. Etc.

Again, what I ended up reading there, was "If the opponent has no idea how to defend on PS, spacies will dominate them". This is implied if the opponent doesn't know how to play any stage, not just PS.

Fox is rewarded more than Fox usually is for getting hits on Fire and Mountain though, it's just how it is. Fox usually can't infinite you, and PS is the only legal stage where that becomes possible. One hit can be a guaranteed infinite combo assuming no big mistakes from Fox on Fire or Mountain, which is pretty crazy when getting dair -> shined or whatever kids are doing these days into shine just ends in a grab or something.

There's a reason people just camp on those transformations, and it isn't because they don't know the stage.

Fox being strong on Fire/Mountain isn't even a big deal because it's so easily camped out. The problem is that play stops for those transformations and that's boring as hell. It's hard to take a game seriously when play stops for 30 seconds because "whoops, stage is being gay LOL."

In addition to screw the mountain's completely game-changing shenanigans and the random death thing. Etc etc rainbow cruise.

 

[Fortress | Sveet]

Stages like that are banned when they are static. Pokemon stadium transforming into a more defensive stage isn't broken or banworthy in and of itself. There are still pokes and approaches that can lead into damage and defensive positions to be held. Rarely does gameplay actually stop, generally people are just more conservative at respecting the other's defensive positions. If this were stretched over the course of an 8 minute game, with no change, then yes it would probably be banned, but it is not over 8 minutes, it is 30 seconds. Matches on Peach's Castle don't generally time out, but the winner is often the one who was more defensive or played lamer. Since not even 1/4 of the game is played with such defensive favoring, the stage isn't banworth because of defensive favoring.

And, as cactuar said, on any stage the most resources one can take with a single first hit is a full stock, and that doesn't change.

 

[Skler]

Are you OK with play effectively stopping for 30 seconds at a time? People really do just hang out in their defensive position.

The ease at which you take the stock changes significantly on Fire and Mountain based on your character. If I'm at 0% and Fox dairs me into a shine I'll survive 99% of the time if PS hasn't transformed, if it's fire or mountain there's a good chance I'll spend my entire stock getting kicked and shined against a wall until it comes down and I get usmashed.

So yes, walls disproportionately reward landing hits because they make the follow-up that much more effective. There's a reason people camp those transformations so often. Unless you're seriously arguing "Fox without a wall has 0-death combos that are as easy to execute as Fox with a wall" you have to admit walls make getting that first hit much more important.

Other characters can make use of walls too, but walls make the first hit a lot more important because they can guarantee taking a stock. Again, walls are a large part of the reason people camp so hard in PS. They form an incredible defensive position and make landing the first hit an incredible benefit (which, when combined with strong defensive positions means nobody really does anything).

The stage is banworthy because of randomness (assisting/defeating edge guards, dropping through the stage) and momentum destroying transformations.

 

[Cactuar]

I don't really have an issue with play stopping for 30 seconds at a time. That actually happening is only occasional in the first place, based on player preferance, and only happens on 2 of the 4 transformations, which account for less than half of the total stage time of PS.

Fox successfully doing the shine infinite against a wall:

On PS, this has enough requirements that it is a non-issue.

The opponent has to make a bad play.
The opponent has to take a position that allows for the infinite.
The opponent has to get caught with drill, fail to SDI properly, then get shined into the wall, or get hit with a shine pushing towards the wall while vulnerable.

In addition, if at any point, this combo is "getting kicked and shined against a wall", you are failing to take advantage of escape opportunities and SDI+DI opportunities. Even vs the static, simple infinite waveshine, you have enough SDI control to manipulate your position and force yourself left or right.

Walls + first hit do not guarantee taking a stock unless your opponent has no idea how to play the stage and no idea how to act defensively. Most of the times I can remember a Fox successfully starting a wall infinite involved the opponent standing in the pit trying to defend it, which is in itself a terrible position for any character that doesn't get knocked down from shine. This is an example of playing the stage poorly, and doesn't mean much when trying to make an argument that it increases the reward of landing an individual hit to ban-worthy levels.

The walls are not, by a long shot, an "incredible defensive position".

The extent of the stage being random in assisting/inhibiting edge guards is not beyond a ban-worthy limit, as FoD, YS, and to a much smaller degree, DL, have elements which do the same. It is within an allowable threshold for stages to have this effect, especially when it is easy to anticipate the effect based on the warning the stage gives you, as opposed to YS where the cloud can only be predicted by watching the timer or keeping close track of its movement, or FoD where the platform changes can't be predicted.

Dropping through the stage has also been dismissed as being rare enough that we don't care.

 

[Skler]

If you take no issue with the play stopping and the stage screwing (or helping) with potential edge guards then yeah, I see why you'd think PS is fine.

I think randomness that can save a recovery or crush momentum is not acceptable for a legal stage, especially when we have banned stages that have 0 randomness.

Plus, I believe having a 3 stage neutral list and 2 CPs would be better for the game than 5 neutrals and 1 CP. As-is we have two small stages in the neutrals, two mediums, one large and one counterpick. I think tossing out PS and going to "YS/FoD, BF and DL are neutrals while FoD/YS and FD are counterpicks" would ultimately be better for the game than keeping a stage that is flawed in some pretty serious ways.

I think the "go to a 3 neutral, 2 CP system" is probably worth a different thread.

 

[SwiftBass]

I think randomness that can save a recovery or crush momentum is not acceptable for a legal stage, especially when we have banned stages that have 0 randomness.

but are the occurrences on stadium completely random? same thing with YS and DL. None of it is really random they can all be accounted for. I think it is more of a question as to whether it is better for the community to not deal with them in game.

I do fall on that side of the spectrum that likes less obstacles to overcome (stage-wise) in singles so I can see your plight. I think that PS should be removed because the transformations can either tilt the match heavily or disrupt the flow of the game. YS and DL64 stage hazards do not effect players as much but if there is a hierarchy I would say that YS and DL64 are next on that list of stages with obstacles.

 

[Skler]

but are the occurrences on stadium completely random? same thing with YS and DL. None of it is really random they can all be accounted for. I think it is more of a question as to whether it is better for the community to not deal with them in game.

I do fall on that side of the spectrum that likes less obstacles to overcome (stage-wise) in singles so I can see your plight. I think that PS should be removed because the transformations can either tilt the match heavily or disrupt the flow of the game. YS and DL64 stage hazards do not effect players as much but if there is a hierarchy I would say that YS and DL64 are next on that list of stages with obstacles.

The transformations, both in which one will occur and when they will occur (except that they can't occur for the first 30 seconds or something), are completely random as far as I know.

Shy guys are random in Yoshi's as well, while Whispy Willows (not sure what its name is) is random in DL64, and the platforms rising and falling are random in FoD.

 

[Cactuar]

If you take no issue with the play stopping and the stage screwing (or helping) with potential edge guards then yeah, I see why you'd think PS is fine.

I think randomness that can save a recovery or crush momentum is not acceptable for a legal stage, especially when we have banned stages that have 0 randomness.

Plus, I believe having a 3 stage neutral list and 2 CPs would be better for the game than 5 neutrals and 1 CP. As-is we have two small stages in the neutrals, two mediums, one large and one counterpick. I think tossing out PS and going to "YS/FoD, BF and DL are neutrals while FoD/YS and FD are counterpicks" would ultimately be better for the game than keeping a stage that is flawed in some pretty serious ways.

I think the "go to a 3 neutral, 2 CP system" is probably worth a different thread.

1) 4 of the 6 current stages have shifting elements that can screw up or help with edgeguarding.

2) PS is only called a CP because we can't have an even number of neutrals. Otherwise it would be in the same list as the other stages.

3) The stage sizes don't really influence the argument, and stating stage sizes and including "counterpick" as a size is comparing unlike terms.

4) Yes, I've stated/predicted before, the likely long term goal will be to:

a) Make YS/BF/DL the neutrals
b) Either remove FoD/FD/PS or make FoD/FD the new CPs.

This isn't a secret by any means. I've posted that I think we will end up with a 3 stage list sooner or later.

As a side note: The timing of the transformations on PS is not random last I checked, but I could be wrong...

 

[Strong Badam]

It's pseudo random. It has an upper and lower limit for how long it can stay the same and varies randomly within those limits. What those limits are I don't know or care to find out.

 

[Deleted member]

none of the transformation make the game unplayable. they just alter the type of interaction and the relevant risk assessment. at worst, the rock formation ruins momentum for a brief period. this stage is clearly fine as is.

 

[SwiftBass]

on another note with stadium does anyone else have a problem with the lower stage vision and the blended background?

green marth and fox I notice get lost in the neutral stage if they are being projected on the screen in the back while jumping parallel with the screen.(maybe its just my eyes) also the lower view is at angle. These two occurrences I think make stadium unique and perhaps provide more fuel towards the non-neutral argument.

On another semi related note:
Does anyone have thoughts on the PS neutral Green greens mod?

 

[Cactuar]

Mods are not up for consideration for official rulesets. The stage area of PS being slightly higher messes up my FB to the edge constantly.

 

[Strong Badam]

Yeah, I don't see the point of bringing up modified stages here.

 

[SwiftBass]

okey dokey =(