Meta Stage Legality Discussion Thread:

[clydeaker]

How about instead of arguing about stage legality we only use Omega form stages just like For Glory mode.

 

[Ulevo]

The problem is that only one player (chosen at random) gets the chance to capitalize and make that play, whereas a stage transformation is more neutral (and hopefully has no RNG element, another problem I have with Skyloft).

This is not the case. The claw is very discriminant, yes, but it is harder to capitalize on as it will not hit a moving target. The other two, while they target a player, are much broader in their range and blast radius, but much easier to react to. This gives both players a relatively equal opportunity to capitalize. On the one hand, the player being targeted is the one that has to move to avoid being hit, but on the other hand they can control where the hazard is placed, and can do so strategically to gain stage control. In a sense, this balances out.

Think of it like interactables from Mortal Kombat X and Injustice. These elements do not have to be harmful to gameplay just because they are hazards by definition.

The problem isn't necessarily being forced to approach on the 2nd stage, it's the waiting itself. I'm mostly thinking about spectating here, because I don't really mind waiting as a player. But a match being paused for 45 seconds twice or three times because of the stage is something that could be very dangerous for the game's health if it happened at, say, EVO.

This is not going to happen commonly enough for it to become a spectator concern. Dabuz stalled out quite a few times at EVO, but you never saw complaints about the stage or the character Rosalina; the negativity was directed at Dabuz. Regardless of whether or not that negativity was deserved, it was rightfully placed. It was the players decision to play that way, and we do not see enough Castle Siege with the particular match ups that would promote this behaviour for it to garner a stage ban from a spectator point of view.

 

[RayNoire]

This is not the case. The claw is very discriminant, yes, but it is harder to capitalize on as it will not hit a moving target. The other two, while they target a player, are much broader in their range and blast radius, but much easier to react to. This gives both players a relatively equal opportunity to capitalize. On the one hand, the player being targeted is the one that has to move to avoid being hit, but on the other hand they can control where the hazard is placed, and can do so strategically to gain stage control. It a sense, this balances out.

Fair enough. My issue just lies with the randomness aspect. Even if both sides get some opportunity from the hazard (I'll give you the bomb and cannon but not the claw), the opportunity is not the same, and depending on the situation, the benefit can be heavily skewed (like if a player throws their opponent offstage and then gets targeted by the cannon, setting up a foolproof ledgeguard that they could not have planned for).

This is not going to happen commonly enough for it to become a spectator concern. Dabuz stalled out quite a few times at EVO, but you never saw complaints about the stage or the character Rosalina; the negativity was directed at Dabuz. Regardless of whether or not that negativity was deserved, it was rightfully placed. It was the players decision to play that way, and we do not see enough Castle Siege with the particular match ups that would promote this behaviour for it to garner a stage ban from a spectator point of view.

I'd argue the only reason it doesn't happen all the time is that even the highest level players handicap themselves when it comes to stages (like FOW taking Zero to FD 7 times despite losing there over and over, or everyone going to Smashville all the time). Very few players actively CP right now, and so the meta for stages like Castle Siege (the rarest stage by far of the EVO list) is really underdeveloped.

But players should never catch heat for playing optimally. I hated people's reaction to Dabuz at Apex.

 

[ArikadoSD]

https://gfycat.com/UnrulyMeaslyEagle


Soooo... why is that stage legal again?

 

[Omegaphoenix]

https://gfycat.com/UnrulyMeaslyEagle


Soooo... why is that stage legal again?

Cause the guy got outplayed. Both players knew the stage was about to turn, as it is on a timer, and the Sheik player took advantage of good positioning and combos to pull off a hype early kill. Nothing inherently anti-competitive about it.

 

[Ulevo]

https://gfycat.com/UnrulyMeaslyEagle


Soooo... why is that stage legal again?

Shine Gate, East Island, and Pillars have the lowest ceilings in the game when they are transitioning from the respective transformations to the Platform 1-4, particularly Platform 1 & 2. Competitive players should know this, and this sort of situation should not come as a surprise, especially when these transformations change at specific timed intervals.

Case in point, be careful at Shine Gate.

 

[Illuminose]

Shine Gate, East Island, and Pillars have the lowest ceilings in the game when they are transitioning from the respective transformations to the Platform 1-4, particularly Platform 1 & 2. Competitive players should know this, and this sort of situation should not come as a surprise, especially when these transformations change at specific timed intervals.

Case in point, be careful at Shine Gate.

That's not a 'case in point' lmao. You're seriously going to call that a deserved kill? Sheik's one grab, which normally isn't that potent, turned into a stupidly powerful kill option that is hard to avoid because Sheik is, well, fast. It's absolutely ridiculous to expect the Bowser player to react and realize the transformation while trying not get grabbed by a character that's amazing at running and getting grabs. 'Be careful' is just silly.

 

[Omegaphoenix]

That's not a 'case in point' lmao. You're seriously going to call that a deserved kill? Sheik's one grab, which normally isn't that potent, turned into a stupidly powerful kill option that is hard to avoid because Sheik is, well, fast. It's absolutely ridiculous to expect the Bowser player to react and realize the transformation while trying not get grabbed by a character that's amazing at running and getting grabs. 'Be careful' is just silly.

No it's not. A player should respect good kill options. Delfino Plaza has a low ceiling when transforming. The Bowser player had bad positioning, and either was caught off guard by the transformation, in which case he was outplayed, or he didn't make a move to change to a more neutral position in preparation of the transform, which means he was outplayed.

One bad player does not equal stage ban. Smashville can get Zero Deaths somewhat reliably using the platform, and that's the Mecca of Smash stages. It's not banned, so we can't ban Delfino. Essentially, git gud, that death was preventable, not a good reason to ban

 

[Ulevo]

That's not a 'case in point' lmao. You're seriously going to call that a deserved kill? Sheik's one grab, which normally isn't that potent, turned into a stupidly powerful kill option that is hard to avoid because Sheik is, well, fast. It's absolutely ridiculous to expect the Bowser player to react and realize the transformation while trying not get grabbed by a character that's amazing at running and getting grabs. 'Be careful' is just silly.

And here in lies the problem with your approach. It's ridiculous to expect the Bowser to react? No. Bowser should not have been reacting to anything--that's how he died. He should have known ahead of time that that was a dangerous situation to be in and respected Sheik's options during the 6-7 seconds that that transformation occurs. It's a very specific spot in the stage. All Bowser needed to do was back off, stop baiting the Sheik, and he would have been fine. Instead he decided to play with fire and he got burned for it.

Basically you're displaying the same ignorance that got that Bowser killed. Learn the stages and adapt to them before you decide to influence policy.

 

[Illuminose]

And here in lies the problem with your approach. It's ridiculous to expect the Bowser to react? No. Bowser should not have been reacting to anything--that's how he died. He should have known ahead of time that that was a dangerous situation to be in and respected Sheik's options during the 6-7 seconds that that transformation occurs. It's a very specific spot in the stage. All Bowser needed to do was back off, stop baiting the Sheik, and he would have been fine. Instead he decided to play with fire and he got burned for it.

Basically you're displaying the same ignorance that got that Bowser killed. Learn the stages and adapt to them before you decide to influence policy.

I think you're misunderstanding; I don't think that a scenario like this should exist on a legal stage.

 

[Omegaphoenix]

I think you're misunderstanding; I don't think that a scenario like this should exist on a legal stage.

Okay. It's nice that you don't think so. The problem is, it doesn't matter. If the Bowser was truly better than the Sheik, he would have known that could've happened, wouldn't have easily opened himself up with ridiculous bait, and thus, would not have been utterly rekt like he got.

Besides, Smashville gets Zero-Deaths anyway, with boring fair strings. So would you want to ban Smashville?

 

[Illuminose]

Okay. It's nice that you don't think so. The problem is, it doesn't matter. If the Bowser was truly better than the Sheik, he would have known that could've happened, wouldn't have easily opened himself up with ridiculous bait, and thus, would not have been utterly rekt like he got.

Besides, Smashville gets Zero-Deaths anyway, with boring fair strings. So would you want to ban Smashville?

Smashville gets 0-death strings if you don't know how to DI a fair string (you literally have to DI straight in for those fairs to connect to a 0-death). Please...that's not the same thing.

 

[PUK]

No that's exactly the same thing.

 

[Omegaphoenix]

Smashville gets 0-death strings if you don't know how to DI a fair string (you literally have to DI straight in for those fairs to connect to a 0-death). Please...that's not the same thing.

It kind of is. It's a stage specific combo that leads to death. Both are area and platform specific, Delfino during trans, and Smashville when the plat if off stage. Either way, it's a situation the player doesn't want to be in. If you are getting fair stringed on Smashville, or if you are getting uaired on Delfino, its because the opponent outplayed you. There's nothing wrong with that. In either case, you could have taken advantage of it yourself, or banned it if you couldn't deal with it. The Bowser was a fool in that matchup, tryng to approach Sheik and fake her out with a full hop fair while knowing he was both against a character with good uairs, and on a stage that was right about to massivly reduce the top blast zone for a few seconds. He was outplayed. A better player will not be in that situation against a lesser player. That's why the stage is competitive, and legal.

 

[SmashChu]

So, changing the subject here a bit but it's probably better here than having a new thread.

So I'm seeing that 7 stages are off solely because of "walk-off" Now, from the research I did on it, it seems the reasons it was banned in previous games was due to waveshining in Melee and chaingrabbing in Brawl. But neither of these exist in this game, yet they are still banned and have this strange reputation. I feel like some people hate on certain stages for being walk-offs with out even knowing why they were banned in the first place.

Since this is a brand new game with new potential, we should at least be discussing this and trying them out. Maybe not at nationals or even large regionals, but they should at least be in rotation in some tournaments to really see how they work. It also adds a new dynamic to the game as character's ability off stage and gimp-ability are non-issues, requiring players to think differently. As such, they not only improve the variety of the stage polls but add a new dynamic to counter picks. At the very least, we should be trying them out.

https://gfycat.com/UnrulyMeaslyEagle


Soooo... why is that stage legal again?

We shouldn't ban stages just because there is a remote possibility that something doesn't go exactly how we like it. If that were the case, it would be Final Destination only. Everyone else addressed the fact that there aren't too many surprises with this change.

 

[Ulevo]

So, changing the subject here a bit but it's probably better here than having a new thread.

So I'm seeing that 7 stages are off solely because of "walk-off" Now, from the research I did on it, it seems the reasons it was banned in previous games was due to waveshining in Melee and chaingrabbing in Brawl. But neither of these exist in this game, yet they are still banned and have this strange reputation. I feel like some people hate on certain stages for being walk-offs with out even knowing why they were banned in the first place.

Since this is a brand new game with new potential, we should at least be discussing this and trying them out. Maybe not at nationals or even large regionals, but they should at least be in rotation in some tournaments to really see how they work. It also adds a new dynamic to the game as character's ability off stage and gimp-ability are non-issues, requiring players to think differently. As such, they not only improve the variety of the stage polls but add a new dynamic to counter picks. At the very least, we should be trying them out.


We shouldn't ban stages just because there is a remote possibility that something doesn't go exactly how we like it. If that were the case, it would be Final Destination only. Everyone else addressed the fact that there aren't too many surprises with this change.

The bottom line is that walk off stages devolve in to degenerative and inconsistent gameplay. A thread was made discussing walk offs and while there was arguments on both ends, the pro walk off argument hinges on the idea that due to the risk posed by the blast zone, degenerative gameplay will not occur because the risk attempting to do so is too great. There are a lot of flaws to this that I am not going to repeat again. If people want to test this, then all the power to them, but I do not feel it will garner much support. The gameplay tactics surrounding walk offs do not consistently reward player skill, nor do they test the skills we seek to challenge in competitive Smash.

 

[Illuminose]

So, changing the subject here a bit but it's probably better here than having a new thread.

So I'm seeing that 7 stages are off solely because of "walk-off" Now, from the research I did on it, it seems the reasons it was banned in previous games was due to waveshining in Melee and chaingrabbing in Brawl. But neither of these exist in this game, yet they are still banned and have this strange reputation. I feel like some people hate on certain stages for being walk-offs with out even knowing why they were banned in the first place.

Since this is a brand new game with new potential, we should at least be discussing this and trying them out. Maybe not at nationals or even large regionals, but they should at least be in rotation in some tournaments to really see how they work. It also adds a new dynamic to the game as character's ability off stage and gimp-ability are non-issues, requiring players to think differently. As such, they not only improve the variety of the stage polls but add a new dynamic to counter picks. At the very least, we should be trying them out.


We shouldn't ban stages just because there is a remote possibility that something doesn't go exactly how we like it. If that were the case, it would be Final Destination only. Everyone else addressed the fact that there aren't too many surprises with this change.

The issue is that these sorts of things happen on Delfino ALL THE TIME in TOP LEVEL PLAY. Look I wouldn't care but this sort of stuff occurs in almost every other match I see Delfino played in tournament. It's not a 'remote chance'; it's a very high likelihood due to the multitude of transformations that allow for this to occur.

 

[Ulevo]

The issue is that these sorts of things happen on Delfino ALL THE TIME in TOP LEVEL PLAY. Look I wouldn't care but this sort of stuff occurs in almost every other match I see Delfino played in tournament. It's not a 'remote chance'; it's a very high likelihood due to the multitude of transformations that allow for this to occur.

Except there is only three.

 

[Amazing Ampharos]

I don't think walk-offs are as degenerate as the hype would suggest if all players invoke good decision making (it's really easy for players who make bad decisions to lose badly on walk-offs), but at the same time, walk-offs have almost no upside. There are a few gimmicky things that work against them, and in exchange for tolerating that, we get a loss of smash 4's rich off-stage game and a bit of unique spatial control dynamics that are overall well represented in full by the legality of Castle Siege. This is why I'm big about looking at stages as a whole and not just listing "problems"; stages like Skyloft or Delfino Plaza have a lot to them so there's a lot of stuff someone could complain about, but among all the things they include are many good things that make the game better for being a part of it. A static and simple walk-off stage like the Wii Fit Studio doesn't have a lot that can go wrong but also doesn't offer much good that would make us really want to use it.

That being said, it's an interesting idea if we look at it in perhaps a more compromising way. Based on the results of Capps' poll on the front page, all nine of the EVO stages are widely supported to stay and a majority of players really want to give Skyloft and Kongo Jungle 64 a fair shot. Procedurally adding just those two doesn't quite work that well (odd number but "unbalanced striking") and would work better if we added two more with them. Wuhu Island had a split vote which already made it a big candidate to use, and since it was patched it doesn't generate much public animosity and actually generates really positive responses when used at tournaments. PS2 polled only slightly worse than Wuhu Island but a lot of players really do dislike PS2 a lot and at actual tournaments complain loudly when it comes time to play on it ("fair but obnoxious" is a good summary of PS2). We've tried Windy Hill Zone here a lot, and it's definitely obnoxious on a pretty deep level and is also a really polarizing stage even though I'm pretty sure it's not actually broken (it also can never be legal at nationals for streaming reasons). Including one of the most tame walk-off stages as an experiment could be interesting; we'd expect it to be struck and banned a lot, but whatever stage is #13 will be struck and banned a lot and it might create better player experiences than other possible choices while also counter-balancing some things that happen naturally in large stage lists that aren't to the favor of characters who like flat, simple stages (a real boon to Little Mac's viability!). How do people feel about that thought? If we were going to do that, what stage would be #13? My intuition says either the Coliseum or Wii Fit Studio and I'm not sure which, but maybe other people feel differently.

I am not trying to take a strong position in favor of that to be clear; it's just an interesting idea I had that I thought I'd share and see what other people thought.

 

[MajorMajora]

While not truly in support of walk offs, I do feel the removal of off stage gameplay is a valuable addition to the meta-game in and of itself. Call it rich, dynamic, whatever rhetoric you want, some characters will perform better without having to deal with an off stage game. It adds variety and a new dynamic. Does that make it worth it? Dunno, but I think it's presumptuous to say that it "adds nothing".

 

[Jucchan]

While not truly in support of walk offs, I do feel the removal of off stage gameplay is a valuable addition to the meta-game in and of itself. Call it rich, dynamic, whatever rhetoric you want, some characters will perform better without having to deal with an off stage game. It adds variety and a new dynamic. Does that make it worth it? Dunno, but I think it's presumptuous to say that it "adds nothing".

Interesting since I think it's the exact opposite. Walk offs remove key elements of competitive smash: stage control, edge guarding, and ledge getup reads. It also makes characters with bad recoveries much better, which I don't see as a good thing. Having a bad recovery is all part of the balance of the game. I'd imagine that fair strings would be more lethal as well; do we really want more Sheik and Ness cheese kills?

 

[ParanoidDrone]

I don't think walk-offs are as degenerate as the hype would suggest if all players invoke good decision making (it's really easy for players who make bad decisions to lose badly on walk-offs), but at the same time, walk-offs have almost no upside. There are a few gimmicky things that work against them, and in exchange for tolerating that, we get a loss of smash 4's rich off-stage game and a bit of unique spatial control dynamics that are overall well represented in full by the legality of Castle Siege. This is why I'm big about looking at stages as a whole and not just listing "problems"; stages like Skyloft or Delfino Plaza have a lot to them so there's a lot of stuff someone could complain about, but among all the things they include are many good things that make the game better for being a part of it. A static and simple walk-off stage like the Wii Fit Studio doesn't have a lot that can go wrong but also doesn't offer much good that would make us really want to use it.

That being said, it's an interesting idea if we look at it in perhaps a more compromising way. Based on the results of Capps' poll on the front page, all nine of the EVO stages are widely supported to stay and a majority of players really want to give Skyloft and Kongo Jungle 64 a fair shot. Procedurally adding just those two doesn't quite work that well (odd number but "unbalanced striking") and would work better if we added two more with them. Wuhu Island had a split vote which already made it a big candidate to use, and since it was patched it doesn't generate much public animosity and actually generates really positive responses when used at tournaments. PS2 polled only slightly worse than Wuhu Island but a lot of players really do dislike PS2 a lot and at actual tournaments complain loudly when it comes time to play on it ("fair but obnoxious" is a good summary of PS2). We've tried Windy Hill Zone here a lot, and it's definitely obnoxious on a pretty deep level and is also a really polarizing stage even though I'm pretty sure it's not actually broken (it also can never be legal at nationals for streaming reasons). Including one of the most tame walk-off stages as an experiment could be interesting; we'd expect it to be struck and banned a lot, but whatever stage is #13 will be struck and banned a lot and it might create better player experiences than other possible choices while also counter-balancing some things that happen naturally in large stage lists that aren't to the favor of characters who like flat, simple stages (a real boon to Little Mac's viability!). How do people feel about that thought? If we were going to do that, what stage would be #13? My intuition says either the Coliseum or Wii Fit Studio and I'm not sure which, but maybe other people feel differently.

I am not trying to take a strong position in favor of that to be clear; it's just an interesting idea I had that I thought I'd share and see what other people thought.

There are also certain obnoxious strategies (mostly Villager ledgestall) that are flat out impossible to perform on walkoffs. Transforming stages do artificially restrict it as well (and the 3 major ones all have walkoffs at some point anyway) but a permanent walkoff makes it a complete non-option.

Regarding the merits of Coliseum vs. Wii Fit Studio:

Coliseum

• Platforms come and go from the ground. Can disrupt strings upon arrival (compare Duck Hunt) but unobtrusive when descending again.
• Platforms are unequal in size.

Wii Fit Studio

• Platforms come and go from the ceiling. Less obtrusive when arriving but can lift players up when leaving. (Platforms vanish before reaching blast line, players can't die this way.)
• Platforms are all the same size.
• Kirby/Meta Knight/Charizard can theoretically get early uthrow kills with good timing/positioning.
• Mirror (only present half the time) lets players see past camera boundaries, possibly reducing effectiveness of camping too close to the blast line.

Wii Fit Studio has more bullet points but it's a mix of positives and negatives. Some of it's theoretical to boot. Honestly it's a tossup IMO.

While not truly in support of walk offs, I do feel the removal of off stage gameplay is a valuable addition to the meta-game in and of itself. Call it rich, dynamic, whatever rhetoric you want, some characters will perform better without having to deal with an off stage game. It adds variety and a new dynamic. Does that make it worth it? Dunno, but I think it's presumptuous to say that it "adds nothing".

Interesting since I think it's the exact opposite. Walk offs remove key elements of competitive smash: stage control, edge guarding, and ledge getup reads. It also makes characters with bad recoveries much better, which I don't see as a good thing. Having a bad recovery is all part of the balance of the game. I'd imagine that fair strings would be more lethal as well; do we really want more Sheik and Ness cheese kills?

I think these contrasting thoughts demonstrate very nicely the need for some actual testing. Not theorycraft, but some serious matches played by serious people with a variety of characters. Otherwise we're just talking in circles around each other.

 

[warriorman222]

I'm thinking about creating a thread for Orbital Gate(Or if banned stages shouldn't be picked, Kongo). What sort of expectations are there for a good OP?

 

[Ulevo]

I'm thinking about creating a thread for Orbital Gate(Or if banned stages shouldn't be picked, Kongo). What sort of expectations are there for a good OP?

I will be creating a thread for Kong Jungle. I just want to give our recent Skyloft thread a bit of time. If you want to go for Orbital Gate, you are welcome to.

Criteria necessary is a simple Yes/No poll. Nothing else, as it skews results. Use the information provided in the research thread to give people a run down of the important things about the stage. i.e. If there is a hazard you want to talk about, using how much damage it does, when it might kill, how long it stays for or when it comes along, et cetera. Those things are important. If you have any good tournament footage or matches that showcase problems or good games, those are good places too. Just include enough information for it to be a relevant read without putting in things that are superfluous. Make sure that the information you present supports your points, but also include information that considers the perspective from the opposite view and talk about it. I am assuming you are trying to promote the idea that it should be legal or tested? Otherwise there may not be a point in talking about it since the majority consensus is that it should not be.

Just check out the other stages that have been put up for a layout on how it might be done.

 

[MajorMajora]

Interesting since I think it's the exact opposite. Walk offs remove key elements of competitive smash: stage control, edge guarding, and ledge getup reads. It also makes characters with bad recoveries much better, which I don't see as a good thing. Having a bad recovery is all part of the balance of the game. I'd imagine that fair strings would be more lethal as well; do we really want more Sheik and Ness cheese kills?

This is essentially an extended form of the 'balanced stage' argument. Should we remove battlefield because it removes platforms and then overly-favors characters with strong ground games? Them having a weaker air game is part of the balance of the game.

But of course that's ridiculous. The stage variety favoring different match-ups/play-styles is the entire point behind the depth of expanded stage lists.

And I find your argument of removing things that are 'key elements' as a little shortsighted. It implies that the game cannot function properly without them. Never has the problem with walk-offs been the removal of them, but really cheesy kills from things like chain grabs, or the possibility of a 50/50 giving one person too much of an advantage. These are the actual problems with walk-offs. Stage control will still be a thing since being near the edge will be different than being in the middle no matter what stage you're on. Some characters do not favor the other 2 you mentioned, but I hardly see how those are integral to smash's gameplay.

Look at it this way. There are 2 game modes: on stage and off stage. In on stage mode there is depth, and in off stage mode there is depth. When the game fluctuates between on and off stage, there is also depth regardless. In this way, platform stages are always deep. Similarly, when a game is on stage the entire time and it never switches to off stage, it remains in a game mode with a lot of depth. It doesn't remove depth, it simply favors a particular kind of skill-set.

Honestly, the more I talk about it, the more I want there to be serious consideration of a walk-off stage or 2 in the stage list. There should definitely be enough bans to ban them all, since some match ups are essentially assured losses on those stages, but 1 or 2 could add a lot. There's talk about Wii fit and Coliseum, but I think Mari Galaxy deserves some consideration. i see nothing degenerate or unpredictable about the gravity and the platforms are nice. (Now that I think of it, this game has a lot of nice walk-off stages).

I think it would be an interesting sort of 'super liberal' stage list. You take the current stage list of
Battlefield
FD
Smashville
T&C
Duck Hunt
Delfino
Skyloft
Wuhu
Lylat
Castle Siege
Halberd
Kongo Jungle
PS2

And then add 1-2 walk-offs and 2-3 other ones that are being considered (Norfair, Mario kart 8, kalos, OGS, Windy hill zone), depending on how testing on those goes. Of course if we find something absolutely deplorable on walk offs that transcends match up specificity, then this idea may need to be scrapped, but hey.

Honestly, I really like the idea of increasing the stages available because it increases the value of the counter pick position, but only for people better versed in stages than the opponent. There will be enough stage bans to ban things that swing wildly in the favor of a match up, but if the counter picker knows other stages better,t hen they have an advantage for that game. It also boosts the power of characters that thrive on stages other than BF/FD/Smashville in the first game, assuming FLSS is used and everyone is brought to a more even stage (which will therefore be less 'normal').

 

[SmashChu]

Interesting since I think it's the exact opposite. Walk offs remove key elements of competitive smash: stage control, edge guarding, and ledge getup reads. It also makes characters with bad recoveries much better, which I don't see as a good thing. Having a bad recovery is all part of the balance of the game. I'd imagine that fair strings would be more lethal as well; do we really want more Sheik and Ness cheese kills?

Different stages always cater to certain characters. Final Destination helps characters with projectiles and Battlefield is good if your character uses platofrms. Walk-offs will cater to certain character such as Little Mac and Sonic, but other stages help other characters.

I think one important thing to consider is that having a wide variety of stages helps the metagame by making richer, more complex matches and providing some balance to the characters. Custom moves also help this as characters may have to consider altering customs mid match to potentially deal with a bad stage (i.e. Villager and walk offs).

I think these contrasting thoughts demonstrate very nicely the need for some actual testing. Not theorycraft, but some serious matches played by serious people with a variety of characters. Otherwise we're just talking in circles around each other.

I agree. We may find these don't work for other reasons, but at least testing the stage pool gives us an idea of how these stages will work.

To your point above, I think one advantage of Wii Fit Studio is its smaller than Coliseumwhich will make the matches less "campy." Its also harder for some characters to reach the platforms because, if I recall, they are fairly high.

The one thing I truly like is that the community is more open to talking about these things rather than shrugging them off. Back in the Melee days, it ever questions the current rules you would be labeled a scrub and told not to question it. But I like that, no, we're willing to have an open dialogue about these things.

 

[AmericanDJ]

What sizes are the blast zones for Skyloft, PS2, and Castle Siege (1st and 3rd) transformations? I kind of forgot.

 

[ParanoidDrone]

To your point above, I think one advantage of Wii Fit Studio is its smaller than Coliseumwhich will make the matches less "campy." Its also harder for some characters to reach the platforms because, if I recall, they are fairly high.

Is it actually smaller, or does it just feel smaller? (I may test this later today if I remember/feel like it.)

Coliseum's platforms can rise to basically any height, FYI.

 

[MajorMajora]

I put some time into playing on the 3 viable walk-offs (Coliseum, WFS, Mario Galaxy). From what I played, Coliseum was what I considered the most fun, but honestly that's not what I think is important. I think they are all perfectly fine as stages as long as walk-offs are allowed, so I guess the question is whether walk-offs are fine. Here are the actual effects walk-offs had, as far as I could tell.
-Characters with good ground games buffed
-Characters with good horizontal kill moves buffed
-Racking percent up is less important, positioning and landing killing moves is more important
-Characters with strong ledge games nerfed
-Since percent is less important, stock time varies more but tends to be shorter
-Comebacks are more common due to percent mattering less

I don't think these things are necessarily bad, just different, but I guess time will tell. It definitely will make some match ups swing wildly, but that's what bans are for I suppose. I think 2 walk-off stages would be good if we are extending the stage list. I think Mario Galaxy is good due to the uniqueness of its gravity, so I suppose it comes down to WFS vs. Coliseum. I suppose Coliseum is more obtrusive, but it would be cool if all of them could be included.

Oh well. People are pretty resistant to walk-offs, but I don't think they are truly game-breaking in this game. Abusable to an extent, but that's kind of the point of an expanded stage-list.

 

[Ulevo]

So thus far, we have managed to discuss four suspect stages. The polls themselves I believe are not a completely reliable indicator since these polls cater to a very specific group of voters that frequent the Competitive Discussion, most of which I feel are very liberal in nature. That said, they are interesting to look at. Wuhu Island is clearly the favourite, with Skyloft coming in at a close second, followed by Mario Circuit. Pokemon Stadium 2 is the least favored, which I do not find very surprising.

A couple questions for people. Should we bother conducting a discussion on Windy Hill and Kalos? Is there a significant enough representation to warrant me making threads for those? I feel the issues with those stages are obvious enough to most players.

If people want to discuss individual walk off stages then I feel that is an entirely different mountain to climb. Stages like Wii Fit Studio are perfectly viable stages with no known issues excluding the walk off controversy, so it is to say that discussing Wii Fit Studio would be fruitless until more testing, discussion and pro walk-off tournaments illuminate the topic of walk offs further.

 

[Piford]

A couple questions for people. Should we bother conducting a discussion on Windy Hill and Kalos? Is there a significant enough representation to warrant me making threads for those? I feel the issues with those stages are obvious enough to most players.

If people want to discuss individual walk off stages then I feel that is an entirely different mountain to climb. Stages like Wii Fit Studio are perfectly viable stages with no known issues excluding the walk off controversy, so it is to say that discussing Wii Fit Studio would be fruitless until more testing, discussion and pro walk-off tournaments illuminate the topic of walk offs further.

Having a discussion never hurt anyone.

 

[Ulevo]

Having a discussion never hurt anyone.

What purpose is there in discussing a stage like Wii Fit Studio, when the only quality that holds it back from being legal is the walk off? Discussing Wii Fit Studio in a separate thread when its legality hinges on the acceptance of walk offs, which deserves its own discussion, is redundant and a waste of time. I also do not see a point in discussing walk off stages that could warrant debate, like Bridge of Eldin, unless we reach a juncture where walk offs are acceptable.

No point in counting the chickens before the eggs hatch.

 

[Piford]

What purpose is there in discussing a stage like Wii Fit Studio, when the only quality that holds it back from being legal is the walk off? Discussing Wii Fit Studio in a separate thread when its legality hinges on the acceptance of walk offs, which deserves its own discussion, is redundant and a waste of time. I also do not see a point in discussing walk off stages that could warrant debate, like Bridge of Eldin, unless we reach a juncture where walk offs are acceptable.

No point in counting the chickens before the eggs hatch.

I was more referring to Kalos and Windy Hill Zone as walk-offs already have there own thread.

 

[MajorMajora]

I'm all for Kalos and WHZ. We should keep talking about them.

If you guys could possibly do this, I would like it if you guys played games on Kalos and wait for the Registeel transformation. When you find it, instantly run to the sides and get to the ledge to avoid the stomp/swords. If this avoids the hazard and there's reasonable time to react then I'm all for it. Since it's focused on center stage, I believe aggression will result in getting hit by the swords, and thus aggression is probably the least optimal strategy. If it then goes to a few seconds of passiveness to avoid the hazard until the attacks stop once every 4-5 games, I see no reason for that to be enough to ban it, and all other hazards are either tame or strategic.

WHZ I'm more iffy on. It all depends on whether players can work around the springs. (Key word being can, not want to).

 

[ParanoidDrone]

I'm all for Kalos and WHZ. We should keep talking about them.

If you guys could possibly do this, I would like it if you guys played games on Kalos and wait for the Registeel transformation. When you find it, instantly run to the sides and get to the ledge to avoid the stomp/swords. If this avoids the hazard and there's reasonable time to react then I'm all for it. Since it's focused on center stage, I believe aggression will result in getting hit by the swords, and thus aggression is probably the least optimal strategy. If it then goes to a few seconds of passiveness to avoid the hazard until the attacks stop once every 4-5 games, I see no reason for that to be enough to ban it, and all other hazards are either tame or strategic.

WHZ I'm more iffy on. It all depends on whether players can work around the springs. (Key word being can, not want to).

To be clear, do you mean standing at the ledge or grabbing it to take advantage of invulnerability frames?

Update: Standing on the ledge puts you out of range of the swords, but Registeel's Stomp still covers the entire ground and will bury you for 15%. The swords also seem to do 30% and not 15% as I thought, the AI dummy took a single 30% hit. Will try hanging on to the ledge next.

Update 2: Hanging on to the ledge does NOT protect you, but you also don't get spiked like you may expect. The knockback was vertical. Ledge invulnerability would presumably work in a pinch but it requires good timing. AI dummy this time took a 2-hit combo for 30% despite not moving. I'm now super confused WRT sword damage when Registeel stomps.

Update 3: The sword blades seem to do 30% damage at the moment they pop out and 15% after. I'm willing to assume that the 30% hitbox is only a single frame and thus susceptible to minute animation posture changes or somesuch. Registeel also waits about 12-14 seconds from the moment it appears to the moment it stomps, in addition to making a weird sort of noise a second or so in advance. I've updated the Kalos Pokemon League thread with these tidbits.

 

[MajorMajora]

To be clear, do you mean standing at the ledge or grabbing it to take advantage of invulnerability frames?

Update: Standing on the ledge puts you out of range of the swords, but Registeel's Stomp still covers the entire ground and will bury you for 15%. The swords also seem to do 30% and not 15% as I thought, the AI dummy took a single 30% hit. Will try hanging on to the ledge next.

Update 2: Hanging on to the ledge does NOT protect you, but you also don't get spiked like you may expect. The knockback was vertical. Ledge invulnerability would presumably work in a pinch but it requires good timing. AI dummy this time took a 2-hit combo for 30% despite not moving. I'm now super confused WRT sword damage when Registeel stomps.

Update 3: The sword blades seem to do 30% damage at the moment they pop out and 15% after. I'm willing to assume that the 30% hitbox is only a single frame and thus susceptible to minute animation posture changes or somesuch. Registeel also waits about 12-14 seconds from the moment it appears to the moment it stomps, in addition to making a weird sort of noise a second or so in advance. I've updated the Kalos Pokemon League thread with these tidbits.

If you're in the air, does it still hit you? if not, then avoiding it should be relatively trivial.

 

[ParanoidDrone]

If you're in the air, does it still hit you? if not, then avoiding it should be relatively trivial.

The stomp, no, you're safe from that in the air. The swords are another matter entirely since they're sort of big.

 

[MajorMajora]

The stomp, no, you're safe from that in the air. The swords are another matter entirely since they're sort of big.

Still, I feel like it's an incredibly simple endeavor. Jump away and up from the stage to avoid the stomp/ swords, and if the swords are still spinning, just grab the ledge or something. I suppose that if the other person wants to be aggressive and chase they can, but since their back is to the swords they are at a sever disadvantage.

 

[evmaxy54]

Eww Kalos. So many stage hazards & nearly all transformations (outside the starting transformation) degenerate fighting in some form, either through said hazards or how the Fire & Steel platforms work

 

[Omegaphoenix]

Eww Kalos. So many stage hazards & nearly all transformations (outside the starting transformation) degenerate fighting in some form, either through said hazards or how the Fire & Steel platforms work

Okay, what exactly do you mean by "degenerates fighting in some form." I believe 'degenerate fighting' only occurs when the stage becomes the largest player in the matchup, or when the stage promotes a certain strategy excessively. On Kalos, none of the hazards are truly both deadly and non telegraphed. The only one who could be considered both is Registeel because of his heavy damage stomp, but IIRC he gives out a cry about a second before he stomps. Also, because the game cycles through each of the chambers fairly quickly, 30 on each transform, 10 in champions room IIRC, it never truly promotes degenerate strategy, as the next transform forces you to deal with a different style you can't just spam on.

Also rising platforms and bridge can kill you, but T&C has them too, so let's not complain about those. Besides, if you get footstool killed on a rising platform or bridge, that's called a combination of bad positioning and git gud.