This post will contain summaries for some of the more controversial stages - more will come over time. Credit to AmazingAmpharos for several of these.
Vote counts reflect number of votes from the entire revision process.
<hr />
Luigi's Mansion
Counterpick Group Three
Vote: (0-24-28)
There were several issues raised over the legality of Luigi's Mansion. One was the claim that Olimar and Meta Knight are overpowered here. Meta Knight was brought up as being too strong, with Mach Tornado being the claimed overpowered move. Olimar's strength was also raised with heightened camping ability and u-smash chains. Another was that the solid ceilings created a cave-of-life effect, shifting the reason for death from "being hit by a KO move" to "failing to tech a KO move", which tends to lead to variance in results. Lastly, it was argued that running the timer is too easy on Luigi's Mansion. The layout of the mansion is such that faster characters could easily avoid combat while it is standing, and when it is destroyed, the runner needs to avoid combat for only twenty seconds before it respawns.
In response to all of these concerns, strategic breaking of the mansion was raised. Both the cave-of-life and the path for running away become less effective as the mansion is destroyed. While some claimed that attempting to attack the pillars left you unfairly open to attack, it was generally agreed that each player's interactions with the house with respect to the most desirable state for each player led to very strategic gameplay, rather than degenerate gameplay. The player who wants the cave-of-life, or who wants to run away naturally wants the house to stay standing. By destroying the house, the other player can either force a response, or remove the feature that enables the opponent's strategy in the first place. It should also be noted that it is not obvious that Mach Tornado and Olimar's u-smash are overpowered on Luigi's Mansion. Through smart use of teching and get-up options, many claimed that it was very possible to escape any sort of attempt to chain these moves into themselves.
<hr />
Pokemon Stadium 2
Counterpick Group Two
Vote: (7-26-18)
We feel that Pokemon Stadium 2 was banned in many regions without being given a fair chance. The votecount clearly shows that we do not think this stage should be banned.
The most common issue brought up with this stage is that it forces players to deal with changes in the game's physics, such as icy floors or low gravity. However, the majority consensus was that these changes do not degrade play, but instead open up new options that can be used to the advantage of the player that takes the time to become familiar with the stage.
The tendency for transformations to lead to stalling was raised as a concern, as several characters can stall the entire duration of Flying transformation, and both Electric and Ground transformations tend to discourage approach. For this we look at the precedent set by Pokemon Stadium 1, for which there are no qualms about its legality. As Rock and Fire transformations also have a tendency to halt battle, it is clear that the 30 second intervals of ceasefire is not a banworthy quality for Pokemon Stadium 2.
A strong point for its legality lies in the fact that no characters seem to consider this stage a strong counterpick, and no characters seem to consider this one of their worst stages. This leads us to believe that this is a very fair stage overall. In fact, with no characters currently considering Pokemon Stadium 2 as a strong counterpick, there was a movement to allow Pokemon Stadium 2 to be considered as a Starter stage.
<hr />
Port Town Aero Dive
Counterpick Group 3
Vote: (0-24-34)
One concern raised for Port Town Aero Dive was the power of the cars. Despite the fact that every stop has at least one, and often two zones that are safe (
http://www.smashboards.com/showthread.php?t=217615), it was argued that killing many characters at ~60% is too powerful of a hazard for competitive play. However, it ultimately decided that they would not be a reason to ban the stage, as the existence of safe zones is enough to ensure that smart play on this stage would see very few car kills not resulting from one player outplaying another. Experience backs this up; many confirmed through testing the stage that avoiding the cars is a reasonable expectation. The opportunity for one player to force the other into the cars' path changes the risk-reward balance slightly, but the consensus was that it is not a banworthy change. In fact, some even said that the power of the cars could be seen as a counterpick quality for characters such as Samus, who have trouble killing in general.
The other concern is the lack of ledges on the main platform, and the implication for characters with poor recoveries, and tether recoveries in particular. Ultimately, we decided to label the lack of ledges as a strong counterpick quality instead of a cause for a ban. The justification for this is aided by the fact that the track is present for the majority of the course. It is reasonable to expect characters with poor recoveries to save their double jump and instead use the track to bounce themselves back towards the stage, especially when you consider that it is not uncommon for some characters to take upwards of 30% trying to recover against an edgeguarder even on static stages. Again, testing has shown that the lack of ledges is not as detrimental to balance as one might first think.
<hr />
Distant Planet
Counterpick Group 3
Vote: (0-20-25)
We feel Distant Planet is another stage that was banned without proper justification.
The Bulborb was brought up as a ban reason because it instantly kills players regardless of percent. However, it was generally agreed that the lethal zone is too far removed from the main area to affect play to any significant degree. The creature is more likely to influence the match by providing a platform to recover than by taking a stock from a player.
Another concern was the presence of the walkoff. Although it is a sloped walkoff, some characters such as King Dedede and Pikachu can still use it to score early kills, but we deem it reasonable to expect the player to avoid such situations when playing against these characters, since taking your opponent to the blast zone generally has to be initiated facing the near blast zone while on the slope; this is a very specific situation that can reasonably be avoided.
It was also argued that the stage promotes camping strategies too heavily, with a very strong defensive position at the bottom of the slope and two ledges between which most characters can travel easily. In response, it was noted that the stage itself helps to combat abuse of such features. The rain flushes players out from the bottom of the slope, and the pellets provide even characters without projectiles with a means to combat camping. All in all, when considering that this stage was never given much of a chance to show that camping tactics are indeed overpowered, it was decided that Distant Planet should not be banned.
<hr />
Green Greens
Counterpick Group 3
Vote: (0-23-26)
We recognize this stage has been controversial in the past, and after considering the merits and problems with this stage, we concluded it was overall an acceptable counterpick.
The single most dominating aspect of the debate was the randomness issue; Green Greens has three random aspects. The first is that blocks randomly fall into incomplete columns and may or may not be bombs, the second is that apples occasionally fall and may randomly be throwable items, healing items, or self-detonating explosives, and the third is that the wind event occurs randomly. The consensus on the blocks was that, while they do contain a significant random element, it is small when players understand the rules governing the stage and play correctly to minimize risk. It is further limited as a problem by the fact that good DI prevents deaths to the bomb blocks except at fairly high damage so getting hit into a randomly falling bomb block should very seldom be fatal. The apples were agreed to be somewhat harder to predict, but apples fall rarely with the most deadly aspect (exploding apples) being the rarest issue of all. Again, very rare misfortune may occur, but the vast majority of problems randomness in apples cause can be avoided by all players using smart play. The third random aspect, the wind, was not raised as a significant point and therefore is likely considered irrelevant to the stage's legality by the majority of the BBR. While some BBR members did feel the randomness was significant enough to warrant a ban, the majority did not feel it was especially significant when informed players approached the stage.
The potential for wall infintes was another concern for this stage, but it was ultimately decided by the majority to be acceptable. The breakable nature of the blocks does much to limit the power of wall infinites on this stage.
The closeness of blast zones was another concern, but the majority dismissed this concern. Some feel that blast zone proximity should not be a large concern when deciding counterpick status at all, and others were quick to point out that Green Greens is not as extreme as it initially seems. The main ground on Green Greens is actually slightly further from the upper blast zone than the deck of the Halberd, and play on Green Greens is usually based around the center stage which is reasonably distant from the side blast zones.
The stalling potential of this stage with under the stage antics and ledge stalling was considered but ultimately dismissed. The majority felt that, while this was a potential concern, it was not significantly more dangerous than it is on Smashville, an uncontroversial legal stage.
Matchup balance was the last point considered, but no consensus was reached on how powerful this stage was for characters such as Meta Knight. The fact that few seemed sure of the character balance on this stage was highlighted by what a rare pick this stage was at both MLG events. This uncertainty led us to conclude that this stage should not be banned on that basis.
<hr />
Jungle Japes
Counterpick Group 2
Vote: (0-28-18)
In place where this stage was banned, Falco's performance was sometimes cited as a reason. However, there was a strong consensus that his strength here was overestimated, and is certainly no reason to ban the stage.
The Klap Trap was raised as a concern, but we decided it was a non-issue. Although it kills at low percents, it occupies space away from the main part of the stage. Combined with the fact that the timing of its appearance is completely predictable, this makes the Klap Trap a stage feature that can be incorporated into a strategy, rather than a hazard that interferes with gameplay.
The greater concern was for the stalling potential on the stage. The multiple ledges and the constant presence of water make running away significantly easier than on most other stages. Wario and Meta Knight in particular are two characters who could use these features effectively. While many of us acknowledge that this could be problematic, the fact that this stage has been legal in many regions, with no such strategy being proven to be overpowered or degenerate, is enough to allow this stage to remain legal until it is more conclusively shown that these stalling tactics are broken.
<hr />
Pirate Ship
Counterpick Group 3
Vote: (0-22-28)
Pirate Ship was one of the most controversial stages discussed, and due to the tie in the votecount we have placed it in the Counter/Banned category.
Some felt the bombs were too strong of a hazard, with the potential to deal over 50% damage and KO at lower percents than most hazards, and that their trajectory was too difficult to follow. Others claimed that it was reasonable to expect the players to avoid the bombs, and that following the trajectory was just a matter of practice, and did not think the bombs were an issue despite the severe punishment inflicted when they connect.
Other minor concerns raised for this stage were the catapult and the period of low gravity while falling from the whirlwind. However, it was generally agreed that the catapult is not an issue as characters will only be killed by it with poor DI, and that low gravity is a tolerable change in physics that does not degrade gameplay.
The most controversial aspect of this stage, however, was the camping enabled by the presence of water, and in particular swimming under the rudder, or "rudder camping". Because not all characters have a way of forcing the opponent out from under the rudder, many matchups can see the game decided as soon as a stock lead is obtained. 31.7% of all matchups in the game see rudder camping as a problem. Some felt that rudder camping should be banned under stalling to allow the stage to be legal, while others felt that it should be Pirate Ship that is banned rather than rudder camping. Still others felt that even with rudder camping the stage should be legal. We have decided to leave the issue of whether swimming under the rudder should be labelled as stalling to the discretion of the TO. The TO's decision on the matter will likely be a major factor in placing the stage into the Counterpick or the Banned category.
<hr />
