Official Stage Legality Discussion

[Linkshot]

I wonder if one of us should host a tourney with those 5, luls.

What would the CPs be?

 

[Luxor]

Starters:
Yoshi's Island (Brawl)
Castle Seige
Pokemon Stadium 1
Pokemon Stadium 2
Pictochat

Counterpicks:
GG's
Pirate Ship
Distant Planet
Luigi's Mansion
Norfair
PTAD
FD

Best worst stage list ever.

 

[sunshade]

In actual seriousness I think the starter list should consist of the following stages myself.

Yoshi's Island [Brawl]
Battlefield
Smashville
Final Destination
Lylat Cruise
Halberd
Pokémon Stadium 1
Pokémon Stadium 2
Castle Siege
Delfino Plaza
Frigate Orpheon

 

[Nidtendofreak]

Frigate Orpheon shouldn't ever be a neutral. The ledgeless side is simply too much of a hazard for some characters, as I mentioned last time the idea was brought up. In order to keep it an odd number, I would remove PS2 as well from the neutral list. I also believe that in the conveyor belt stage, tethers don't work, but I could be wrong. I've only used that stage once in a tournament, as a desperate/lulz CP against MK.

So that would end up with a neutral list of this:

Final Destination
Battlefield
Smashville
Yoshi's Island: Brawl
Pokemon Stadium 1
Lylat Cruise
Halbred
Castle Siege
Delfino Plaza

OR: You could add Pictochat in place of Frigate Orpheon, and keep Pokemon Stadium 2. I'd consider that stage overall more neutral than Frigate Orpheon. I can't think of anything specifically that shuts down a type of recovery, or has even a remote chance of OHKOing someone. Honestly, I'd rather have the CP list above, than one with Pictochat as neutral.

So for Neutrals/CPs:
Pictochat
Pokemon Stadium 2

For CPs you would likely have a list like this:

Frigate Orpheon
Pirate Ship
Brinstar
Norfair
Green Greens
Rainbow Cruise
Jungle Japes
Distant Planet


Maybe Rumble Falls. I'm not completely sold on it. PTAD is in the same boat.

So for CP/Banned:
Rumble Falls
PTAD

 

[AMKalmar]

I haxed my Frigate Orpheon a right ledge is it starter now?

 

[Kaffei]

I haxed my Frigate Orpheon a right ledge is it starter now?

No .

 

[sunshade]

Frigate Orpheon shouldn't ever be a neutral. The ledgeless side is simply too much of a hazard for some characters, as I mentioned last time the idea was brought up.

The right side not having a ledge is not really that huge an issue. There are 2 and 1/3 characters who only have a tether as a recovery. Those being Olimar, Zero suit Samus, and Pokemon trainer (PT being the 1/3 because he can just change pokes).

Pokemon trainer can shift to a different pokemon and is able to choose not to start out as ivysaur.

Olimar is given a strong advantage on the second transformation due to the inward arced slants and the close platform. The first transformation being a mild disadvantage balances the stage out for Olimar. The Olimar can also camp the left side during the first transformation as well.

Zero Suit Samus is probably the only character who is strongly hindered on this stage but she still has the option to simply play on the left side. If we can tell chain-grabable characters to just camp the platforms on the second transformation of castle siege than we can tell ZSS players to stay on the left side. She can also just strike the stage she will get five bans after all.

The right side not having a ledge is not really that huge an issue.

 

[T-block]

It's not an issue if we were debating its legality. Since we are discussing starter status, of course it's going to play a role. There are non-tether characters who are disadvantaged by the lack of ledge too.

I think I've convinced myself that if YI can be a starter, Pictochat can too.

Tethers do work on the electric transformation of PS2 btw.

 

[Nidtendofreak]

It doesn't just affect tethers. It can screw over a lot of other characters.

Ike hates it. Marth hates it. DK hates it. Bowser hates it. Charizard hates it if he can't make it over with just his jumps. Snake hates it to some extent (can require another C4 to make it over, thus more damage to self). Spacies hate it (hello heavy landing lag if forced to use Up B, assuming the make it up and over). Link REALLY hates it. Ganondorf hates it. Need I continue? I've got more.

It affects the battle too much: more so than a wall infinity and is an instant "can never be neutral" strike against the stage.

 

[sunshade]

I think I've convinced myself that if YI can be a starter, Pictochat can too.

I have never felt Yoshi's Island to be highly advantage giving in most matches. Which character(s) do you feel push the starter envelope?

It doesn't just affect tethers. It can screw over a lot of other characters.

Ike hates it. Marth hates it. DK hates it. Bowser hates it. Charizard hates it if he can't make it over with just his jumps. Snake hates it to some extent (can require another C4 to make it over, thus more damage to self). Spacies hate it (hello heavy landing lag if forced to use Up B, assuming the make it up and over). Link REALLY hates it. Ganondorf hates it. Need I continue? I've got more.

It affects the battle too much: more so than a wall infinity and is an instant "can never be neutral" strike against the stage.

Ike, DK, Bowser, charizard, link, and ganon have bad recoveries of every stage.

The spaceies have issues with vertical recoveries in general.

Snake getting hit by 1 extra C4 is hardly an issue when he already has an incredible recovery and heavy weight on his side.

Marth is disadvantaged much more than normal I wont deny it.

The way I see it, players can stay on the left side. If they cannot then they should make sure to DI up or simply not get gimped. If we tell players to camp the platforms on stages with walk-offs I see no issue with saying stand to the left of your opponent.

I suggested an 11 stage starter list which means you get 5 bans. The degree of influence a stage has on the match is allowed to be larger than on the typical 5 or 7 starter list.

 

[Kaffei]

Players can stay on the left side, yes, but that means they HAVE to keep on that side to have some sort of advantage, meaning they are working harder than another character who can recover a lot easier on that stage. I don't see how that is a neutral.

That's kind of like saying "to beat MK's tornado all you have to do is shield it.", IMO.

 

[Nidtendofreak]

Ike, DK, Bowser, charizard, link, and ganon have bad recoveries of every stage.

Incorrect except for Link and Ganon. DK and Bowser's recoveries are perfectly usable on most stages. FO's ledgeless side cuts quite a gap into their recovery range. Ike's recovery isn't great, but again the ledgelss side cuts quite a gap into his recovery.

Link can basically never recover on that side. Ganondorf is nearly in the same boat. And to add to the list: Peach's recovery is heavily nerfed on that side. Ness and Lucas will have some serious issues if they have to use PKT2 and will most likely get hit with a smash attack due to being forced to aim above the ledge so they can fall back onto the stage.

By the same token, characters like Kirby, MK, Rob, Pit, and other characters with strong gimping games are that much stronger on this stage. No ledge makes gimping almost anyone laughably easy. Bait an AD, punish the frames afterwards. GG. If you're playing against them, you must stay on the left side, and thus you grow predictable and take more damage than normal. That's too polarizing to be a neutral stage.

 

[Linkshot]

Starter stages used to be selected for their lack of polarisation when chosen in Random.
But now we have stage striking, so I don't see the point for dividing Legal into separate classes.

 

[#HBC | Red Ryu]

Frigates lack of a ledge is the main problem, if it started on the second transformation you could argue it's not that bad, but the fact the no grabbable ledge is there really hinders the stage from being a starter.

 

[ErikG]

Starter stages used to be selected for their lack of polarisation when chosen in Random.
But now we have stage striking, so I don't see the point for dividing Legal into separate classes.

It is mostly a time saver. Some people still take a while striking when it is only five stages.

 

[Amazing Ampharos]

It is mostly a time saver. Some people still take a while striking when it is only five stages.

I've actually never seen faster striking than at MLG Columbus. Having fewer switches back and forth in the striking order matters more than how many stages there are. MLG Columbus has 9 starters and follows a 3-4-1 order which is a real time-saver.

 

[ErikG]

I've actually never seen faster striking than at MLG Columbus. Having fewer switches back and forth in the striking order matters more than how many stages there are. MLG Columbus has 9 starters and follows a 3-4-1 order which is a real time-saver.

It once took an opponent about 20 minutes to strike a stage against me at a NE tourney; I was not pleased.

I can see how the MLG striking would be fast.

edit: I'm just saying the reason we don't strike from every single legal stage is due to time constraints

 

[Amazing Ampharos]

This also greatly depends on how many legal stages you have, but as a general rule, I think it's still on the point of switching who gets to strike takes more time. Like, let's say you had to strike from 31 stages (a very large number!), but you used some order like 9-10-10-1. I bet when you are shown a 31 stage list and told "strike 9", you'll get rid of 7-8 really fast and then maybe stop and think for a bit about the end of that. You already know for the most part what you want, and it's only anxiety over making a mistake that creeps in at the end when you cede control of the striking process. We might have other problems with our 31 stage striking, but I don't think time consumption would be one of them if we clumped the strikes into large groups.

Also, 20 minutes is just unacceptable. After about 1 minute, a TO should be telling them to hurry up and imposing forced selections if they refuse to comply. Just fetch the TO in the future if people refuse to pick stuff in-between games; the TO will almost assuredly have the position of "I don't care what you pick, but you need to pick something right now".

 

[Tesh]

I see alot of reasons being tossed around about why some stages are banned, should be banned or shouldn't be banned. But is there a thread/post somewhere on this forum that actually lists why stages are starter/cp/banned in the SBR ruleset?

Just curious, is it disclosed somewhere on a public forum?

 

[Steven9wii]

i don't care what is thought up by these guys

 

[sunshade]

I see alot of reasons being tossed around about why some stages are banned, should be banned or shouldn't be banned. But is there a thread/post somewhere on this forum that actually lists why stages are starter/cp/banned in the SBR ruleset?

Just curious, is it disclosed somewhere on a public forum?

Quoting from the Backrooms recommended ruleset

------------------------------

Stages become Starter stages when it is agreed by a 2/3 majority in the SBR that each stage is overall a fair stage with only minimal advantages and disadvantages given that has an overall low number of hazards, ineffective hazards, or basic hazards that can be predicted and implemented into a strategy.

Stages become Counterpick stages when it is agreed by a 2/3 majority in the SBR that they are not an overall fair stage in that they give specific advantages and disadvantages to certain types of characters, so much so that it can influence the match directly. Or, that the stage has hazards that disrupt play to such an extent that it cannot be assumed the player can avoid them with minimal effort or the hazards have such incredible damage and knockback that they can directly influence the outcome of a match.

Stages become Banned stages when it is agreed by a 2/3 majority in the SBR that they are not a fair or competitive stage at all, in that certain characters can easily have a near 100% win rate against others at top level play or that a large majority of the cast cannot actively be played on this stage, or that the stage simply requires such a radical change in gameplay that players cannot be reasonably expected to adapt (such as the Cave of Immortality in Hyrule Temple). Hazards can also cause a stage to be banned if they are random in nature and thus directly disrupting gameplay on a consistent basis, or if they are so powerful and/or unavoidable that they directly determine the outcome of a match on a consistent basis.

i don't care what is thought up by these guys

Which guys are you referring to and why does your caring impact anything?

 

[Tesh]

I was looking for an explanation more specific to each stage. More along the lines of describing what made each stage a starter/cp/banned.

 

[Luxor]

That stuff is mostly common sense.

 

[T-block]

A list like that would be good I think... hopefully the next ruleset will come with one. Meanwhile, which stages in particular are you talking about? You can ask here.

 

[Tesh]

That stuff is mostly common sense.

Not as common as you think I suppose. Would you like to make a list for me then, since its obvious to you?

Basically I have read alot of complaints about stages being unfair for different reasons. Walkoffs, sharking, too small, too big , the stage moves, the stage sinks under lava, stage can kill you/damage you etc.

I just wanted to know what the OFFICIAL reason is from the BBR. Alot of pointless arguments arise because people don't see eye to eye on the reasoning behind each rule.

For example, I could say FD, SV and BF are all fair stages. But if I don't say why they are all fair, you could make assumptions based any on number of things they have in common. Maybe its fair because
- you can fly under the stage
-because the main platform is flat
-starting positions are equal in a 1v1(unlike frigate)
-no hazards

T-block you aren't in the BBR though are you? Any questions answered by people outside the BBR would just be speculation and assumptions.

I just want to see if everything adds up.

 

[Luxor]

Not as common as you think I suppose. Would you like to make a list for me then, since its obvious to you?

Basically I have read alot of complaints about stages being unfair for different reasons. Walkoffs, sharking, too small, too big , the stage moves, the stage sinks under lava, stage can kill you/damage you etc.

I can understand your position. Some stages are definitely candidates for more than one category, FD being a good example. It complies with "Starter" requirements for the most part, but often influences matches (think Diddy/IC's/Falco) to the extent a Counterpick would. Thus, the BBR wisely included the 2/3 supermajority rule into their criteria for a stages' placement, allowing for the "in between" categories of Starter/Counter and Counter/Banned, leaving the difficult task of deciding Rainbow Cruise's legality and the like up to the TO.

tl;dr- The BBR throws a stage into a general category where it obviously belongs but lets you, as the TO, decide for yourself whether to allow/disallow certain stages by providing your own rationale.

 

[Tesh]

I don't see ANYONE providing a reason though. Not anyone who runs tournaments or is in the BBR though. The only reasons I see are from people not in the BBR and not tournament hosts. I just wanted to know if anyone that controls or organizes anything had reasons to share.

 

[Linkshot]

When it comes to tournaments, the biggest reason is "The majority of people won't show up if A is legal and/or B is not legal."

 

[T-block]

Yeah I am, Tesh. The current ruleset was designed before I was admitted though, so I don't know how much help I'll be. I do have a good idea of the ban criteria we follow, so I'll try my best.

Your request is legitimate though - whenever the next ruleset comes out, I'm gonna push to have the reasons exposed.

 

[Amazing Ampharos]

Yeah, I am in the BBR too (and have been for longer than T-block!), but I wasn't in for the last stage list. Whenever the BBR puts out another stage list, I'll be sure there's some good stuff in this forum for the general public. I'll probably lock this thread and make a new one at such a time.

I will say that I think the MLG has made a lot of people do some more thinking about stages and opened some minds a bit. The culture is definitely different recently than it had been for a while.

I'll also say that "fair" is subjective in a lot of ways, and most people in the BBR do realize this. This is why very few stages in the last list had unanimous votes for their placement, mostly only pretty extreme stages (like Temple was a unanimous ban and probably only needs explaining to the rawest of beginners in competitive smash). While there's definitely going to be as great of an effort as reasonably possible to give the public information about reasoning, it's very important to understand anything the BBR puts out is the result of conflicting opinions coming together. So a stage may be banned, you may say "factor X makes play on this stage reasonable!", some of us may agree actually, but it may be that more of us thought factor Y was just too bad to allow the stage. The fact that the BBR's stuff represents an overall consensus moreso than the individual opinions of a single person makes explaining reasoning tough...

I'd also point out, as per TOs, there's even more dissent. You may notice region to region that the rules are wildly inconsistent. Hopefully this can change eventually since it's really not good for the community, but as for now, it's the reality of the situation. Each TO could very well have something totally different to say from the others!

 

[san.]

After playing through all these weird stages and noticing people's acceptance/disapproval of Norfair, Pictochat, Green Greens, etc..

Can anyone from a past discussion summarize the arguments against Pirate Ship? Just want to ease my curiosity in the midst of these other controversial stages, in case there was something (like an exploit) I was unaware of.

There are certain characteristics to the stage similar to Delfino, including water, wall, and slanted ground (although the rest is flat), in addition to a few stage obstacles. I believe just these are enough to definitely put it well into counterpick range.

However, the obstacles give much warning before they begin to pose a threat, and you can tell the trajectory of the bomb 3-4 seconds before it even hits. The dangerous obstacles take up MUCH less of the stage than some other stages, like the metroid levels. All of the other obstacles are tiny gimmicks that can easily be ignored. The transformations are all temporary, and I believe not many people have any problems competitively with the actual ship part.

If someone tries to camp in the water, if the other person does not wish to approach, then he can wait for stage transformations such as bombs and the ship flying in the air to cause the other person to move around again. In addition, not many characters have many good options in the water, especially against the regularly used characters.

If one misses an attack in the water, they can get punished themselves, which isn't an uncommon thing, since movement is greatly hindered for characters without many jumps and good aerials. From my point of view, it doesn't look much worse than the camping on PS1, with the exception that it may last for a slightly longer duration, and the person camping usually have much worse options to deal with (can't shield in water, must use jump+double jump for any real movement, etc)

Thoughts? I couldn't care less about Pirate Ship's legality, because it will never be legal in my region. Was just wondering what the old arguments were and if perceptions of stages have changed because of MLG.

 

[RESET Vao]

That stuff is mostly common sense.

This.

I do question why stages like Green Greens and Pirate Ship have ever been considered legal.
And I use common sense in order to question.

Green Greens... the wind, the blocks, the apples, the low blast zones... It's wack but watching Ook beat MikeHAZE's D3 on Green Greens did show that it's not THAT bad, but the stage got the final KO in so I'm pretty doubtful about it.

Pirate Ship however... Wtf. The potential gay play on that stage is unreal, but in the defense of this stage/MK haters, the bombs most likely hit a Meta Knight out of Tornado.

Then again, Ganon stands more of a chance on these daft stages than fair ones so maybe I should keep my trap shut.

Edit: Seen alot of talk about Pictochat legality and would just like to state that since the week of this game's *** release (when I got it) I have been fighting for that stage's legality. It might be a little bit weird but my god... I-I-It's beautiful :'D

 

[Linkshot]

Pictochat is definitely legal.

Pirate Ship...I have to say it's not. You can camp under the rudder, and I did a bit of research and only a handful of characters can't hurt or otherwise approach opponents that camp there, making it even more controversial and better off just banned.

It's not the hazards. They're all avoidable. It's the god**** rudder.

 

[Tesh]

This.

I do question why stages like Green Greens and Pirate Ship have ever been considered legal.
And I use common sense in order to question.

Green Greens... the wind, the blocks, the apples, the low blast zones... It's wack but watching Ook beat MikeHAZE's D3 on Green Greens did show that it's not THAT bad, but the stage got the final KO in so I'm pretty doubtful about it.

Pirate Ship however... Wtf. The potential gay play on that stage is unreal, but in the defense of this stage/MK haters, the bombs most likely hit a Meta Knight out of Tornado.

Then again, Ganon stands more of a chance on these daft stages than fair ones so maybe I should keep my trap shut.

Edit: Seen alot of talk about Pictochat legality and would just like to state that since the week of this game's *** release (when I got it) I have been fighting for that stage's legality. It might be a little bit weird but my god... I-I-It's beautiful :'D

I don't see why wind, apples and blast zones would be a reason to ban the stage. Thats just 2 obvious hazards with fair warning and blast zones that size shouldn't be an issue. The only real problem I see with Green Greens is that the camera can zoom in too close making it impossible to see what kind of blocks have dropped behind you (you can just play this stage in fixed camera mode). There is also the bomb wall glitch, which would make a camper's paradise (until its deactivated).

Its just a small stage with destructible walls/ceilings and hazards with a fair bit of warning. The random elements are similar to YI or Frigate (people can randomly be saved/hurt but only in certain areas of the stage).


Honestly though, could someone just give a quick rundown of why each banned/cp stage isn't legal(just to clarify).

 

[T-block]

Can you list which stages you're talking about?

 

[Tesh]

Yoshi's Island [Brawl] (37-0-0)
Battlefield (47-0-1)
Smashville (24-0-1)
Final Destination (26-2-1)


Starter/Counter

Lylat Cruise (16-9-0)
Halberd (18-16-0)
Pokémon Stadium 1 (16-14-2)
Castle Siege (5-9-0)


Counter

Delfino Plaza (6-20-0)
Brinstar (1-20-0)
Frigate Orpheon (1-29-0)
Rainbow Cruise (0-30-1)
Jungle Japes (0-14-1)
Pirate Ship (0-15-3)
PictoChat (0-25-9)
Pokémon Stadium 2 (0-24-11)


Counter/Banned

Norfair (0-16-10)
Luigi's Mansion (0-11-8)
Distant Planet (0-15-11)
Green Greens (0-6-9)
Yoshi's Island [Melee] (0-10-19)
Port Town Aero Dive (0-12-23)


Banned

Hanenbow (0-5-16)
Mario Circuit (0-5-19)
Onett (0-3-14)
Corneria (0-3-15)
Big Blue (0-3-17)
75m (2-2-24)
Green Hill Zone (0-3-19)
New Pork City (2-1-20)
Rumble Falls (0-3-21)
Shadow Moses Island (1-1-20)
Summit (0-2-20)
Mario Bros. (2-0-22)
Flat Zone 2 (1-1-22)
Bridge of Eldin (0-2-25)
WarioWare Inc. (0-2-33)
Spear Pillar (1-0-31)
Skyworld (0-0-16)
Temple (0-0-16)
Mushroomy Kingdom 1-1 (0-0-19)
Mushroomy Kingdom 1-2 (0-0-21)

All of them. I just want to know what the official reasons are, just for reference.

 

[Nidtendofreak]

@Pirate Ship comments: Rudder stalling is banned for well, being stalling. So that isn't an issue.

 

[T-block]

Err...okay well there are three main criteria I use.

• The stage is overcentralizing, such that one character or a small subset of characters has a near 100% win rate on said stage.
• The stage introduces and encourages degenerate strategies, the most notable of which is circle camping (ties into the first criterion)
• The stage introduces non-negligible variance in the outcome of matches played on it, such that player skill is marginalized (with adaptation to the stage being considered a player skill, of course)

Bridge of Eldin is a stage that breaks the first criterion. Dedede will beat the majority of the cast here. Hanenbow, Summit are stages that break the second - both stages allow running away indefinitely, so the faster character will win just by running the loop; this is considered degenerate gameplay. WarioWare breaks the third - since the rewards are random (your opponent could get invincibility while you become giant, even though you both succeeded in the minigame), the outcome of the match could be decided entirely by luck, regardless of player skill.

Hopefully that answers most of your questions - if you still have doubts about any of the stages feel free to bring them up. I don't really feel like going through all the stages ._.

 

[Xona]

Err...okay well there are three main criteria I use.

• The stage is overcentralizing, such that one character or a small subset of characters has a near 100% win rate on said stage.
• The stage introduces and encourages degenerate strategies, the most notable of which is circle camping (ties into the first criterion)
• The stage introduces non-negligible variance in the outcome of matches played on it, such that player skill is marginalized (with adaptation to the stage being considered a player skill, of course)

Bridge of Eldin is a stage that breaks the first criterion. Dedede will beat the majority of the cast here. Hanenbow, Summit are stages that break the second - both stages allow running away indefinitely, so the faster character will win just by running the loop; this is considered degenerate gameplay. WarioWare breaks the third - since the rewards are random (your opponent could get invincibility while you become giant, even though you both succeeded in the minigame), the outcome of the match could be decided entirely by luck, regardless of player skill.

Hopefully that answers most of your questions - if you still have doubts about any of the stages feel free to bring them up. I don't really feel like going through all the stages ._.

On the first criterion: Dedede is broken on bridge of eldin (Why the heck am I defending a final destination clone? This is easily one of my least favorite stages alongside final destination and Warioware Inc.) because of an infinite combo, right? Then why not ban Dedede's infinite chain-grab. It is not like it doesn't work on non walls and non walk-offs. Bowser vs Dedede is just as unwinnable on final destination as it is on bridge of eldin. DK vs Dedede same story. It's just now Dedede creates more unwinnable match-ups than before. Why is it an infinite working on more characters an auto-ban on a stage when it still creates unwinnable match-ups on all stages that don't have enough hazards or movement to break it (most of which are banned).

The truth is that I am not defending bridge of eldin, it's just that I think that banning stages because of infinites is strange because infinite combos are considered by most people to be bad game design so banning stages instead of infinite combos is kind of silly. I am also slightly attacking final destination, but I do not think that Dedede's infinite still working on that stage is enough to ban it because the tactic can and probably should be banned. That being said, when people lobby to erase stages from the starter list, why is final destination not one of the main ones. In reality, stage-striking works better with a more diverse list to strike from.

And on the issue of circle camping, many of the stages that were banned for that reason never really got a fair test of whether or not they truly are broken. Hanenbrow was banned too soon. And isn't circle camping stalling?

Finally on the issue of randomness. What is too random to allow? Where is the line? Warioware inc. is DEFINITELY on the ban side of the line, but what about Big Blue? What about Rumble Falls, what about items? Peach's turnips, Game and Watch's side-B, Luigi's side-b, Dedede's side-b are all moves that have random elements, some of which are very strong. And there is also tripping. My oppinion is any stage that is not worse (and by worse, I mean more decisive and/or less adaptable to) than Peach's turnips or Game and Watch's side-B or tripping should not be banned unless the randomness of those things are removed first.

 

[PK-ow!]

By the way, for anyone interested, I have replays proving that the rewards on WarioWare are truly random random - as in, whether or not you receive a buff is not logically related to whether you won or lost the minigame. I've proven it can happen when you lose the minigame, and we know it may not happen if you win.
So yeah. Extra fail there. There's no doubt about the anti-competitiveness of that stage.


T-block, though, are you sure by your first criterion you don't mean

The stage is overcentralizing, such that all but one character or a small subset of characters has a near 0% win rate on the stage if one of the privileged subset is involved.

?

Also, this one must have "at the level of Theory Fighter" added to it, but it makes me ask if that must be attached to the other two. It seems it goes into the second one, but it makes a difference if it's part of the third one.
It would be the difference between "Amateurs may experience random variation here that marginalizes their skill," and saying "Skill is marginalized."


EDIT: @Xona: "Infinite combos" across the board can only be banned in this game if Ice Climbers the character is banned, OR a painfully labyrinthine procedure requiring a vigilant 3rd party is used to determine if anything an IC does in a match counts as a loop or not.

Someone will spell out the other reasons. Just remember that outside a walk-off, there are characters that can beat Dedede. There are a lot of characters that can beat D3. The existence of unwinnable MUs is a flaw of other characters and a boon of D3's (as a result of a flaw in game development, I'll give you that).
The difference isn't "more", it's "some" vs. "almost none"... as T-block is going to explain in reply to my question.