BIGG READ INCOMING:
I know this is a wall of text and not everyone will be willing to read this, BUT THIS IS CONCERNING WHAT THIS THREAD IS ALL ABOUT so I really need as many people as possible to pay attention and please look over this. It's vital.
The following is a compilation of a lot of information already put forward. This is the 2nd version of the testing procedure and ban criteria list, want to see what you guys think and any changes, additions, subtractions should be made.
First off:
WALK OFF CAMPING TEST PROCEDURE
in response to this:
The lack of chain grabs does not make walk-offs viable for tournament play hahahaha dude what are you smoking
Go ahead and ask me to explain why but I shouldn't need to
I had already extensively described this situation right before you commented, but for anyone who may have missed it, "like wall infinities it's looking like it's been made completely impossible to chain grab, and it looks like grabs can't kill at early percentage so walk off camping doesn't look like a viable tactic anymore,
as it will only add more damage to the camper and more likely to backfire then benefit.* A lot of changes Sakurai has made to the game seem to be made to specifically address stalling tactics pro players have been utilizing in past games. Example: you don't get invincibility anymore for re-grabing ledges. If this much attention to detail was made to address these issues then he surely is aware of walk-off camping. If it was still possible to do then we wouldn't include SO MANY stages with them.
That's of coarse a logical, deductive way of assuring that walkoffs are still viable in this game. But on this thread, we like to go the extra mile with SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE.
So here's the breakdown, it's very similar to the wall infinite test:
To test walk off camping will be a viable tactic, it will require the tester to obtain a friend code from the forums. The "Tester" must remain anonymous about the experiment the whole time. The tester will purposely camp either off screen or just a little bit in front of off screen, or any location they think it will be possible, and remain there. The tester must get all their KO's by throwing their opponent off screen or hitting them hard enough without leaving their designated area. If the tester is constantly getting punished for this tactic and failing then Walkoff camping is not viable, but if they are then the stage in question will be "considered" ban worthy if enough evidence is presented by multiple people. Each tester must perform 3 matches on the same stage with at least 3 different people. Video Evidence is also required"
If you have a rebuttal then lets hear it.
WALL INFINITY TEST PROCEDURE
So from the sounds of it Wall infinities are impossible to do in this game, however just to be safe it wouldn't hurt to give this a test. To test wall infinities will require a friend, purposely walking both of you over to a corner where you think it's possible, and the "Attacker" will do a bunch of tilts and other attacks to see how long they can keep the "victim" inside their barrage. Meanwhile the victim has to try to escape in a reasonable amount of time. If they are successful within 5-10 seconds then the stage is still viable, anything over 20 seconds should be questionable and anything over a minute is without question ban worthy.Tester must record how long they kept their victim in the combo and their percentage when they escaped. Procedure must be repeated at least 3 times with different opponents each time.
In case of event that such a stage is presented, another test must be performed to see how easy it is to abuse this area. Players will get a friend code from the forums and challenge their respective player. They must remain anonymous about the test until all the other testers have completed their experiments. Then they must lure their opponent to the corner. If they are successful multiple times, consistently across various opponents then the stage should be banned.
Players MUST present video evidence!
CIRCLE CAMPING TEST PROCEDURE
If a stage has been claimed to be "unviable due to the ability to circle camp" then a controlled test must be performed. One person must be designated "the runner" and the other "the chaser". Both players have only 1 stock with 6min time limit, the goal of the runner is to stay alive as long as possible by staying as mobile as possible and keeping their opponent away using any & all means necessary. The goal of the Chaser is to knock out the runner as quickly as possible. If the clock times out before the runner is knocked out then the stage is "considered" ban worthy, however unanimous evidence must be presented by other testers in order to be fully pasted. The testers will try these combinations in this order:
-Both players are fast characters like Shiek (both ned to play the exact same character)
-Chaser is a slower character while runner is faster
-Chaser is slower character while runner is efficient at moving through the air (like multi jump characters, Villager's upB etc.)
-Chaser is a range heavy character while runner is faster
-Chaser is a range heavy character while runner is air efficient
-Chaser is Air efficient while runner is faster.
The reason for this many combinations is to determine if it's truly the openness of the stage that's causing it or the matchup.
STANDARD STAGE LEGALITY EVALUATION PROCEDURE & CRITERIASimply gather friend codes from the forums, once again remaining completely anonymous about the experiment. As you fight, observe the tactics of your opponent and how the stage is used.
+If you are the superior player and your consistently winning, then the stage is balanced.
+ If you're the superior player and matches are coming close to even, then the stage is questionable.
+ If you are the superior player and your losing more matches than you should be, then the stage needs to have further evaluation and inspection.
If the latter happens then here is the criteria to be considered officially ban-worthy:
First the tester must eliminate the possibility that their opponent is actually the superior player, in which case they must look at their player records on the 3DS and observe their win/lose ratio (if it's possible in 'with friends' mode') or contact them through smash boards and ask about their smash history & experience. If they are indeed the better player then the stage is balanced.
Observe what tactics they're using, if their strategy utilizing stage involves them using stage hazards or gimmicks then the strategy needs to be countered someway to be still considered viable, unless said strategy requires little effort and huge reward for the player. If the opponent is utilizing stalling tactics like walk or circle camping then a separate test must be conducted to verify. (see appropriate sections above.
If the claim is due to a particular hazard or element of the stage, then the person must provide at least 3 video clips showing the instance of the event, however more will be preferable
as long as they're legitament and not staged.
The definition of an unfair stage element is one that:
-Doesn't telegraph it's effects within 3-5 seconds or in a timely fashion to be utilized by a player
-creates a situation that instantly puts 1 player in a severely bad position and cannot be reasonably avoided or predicted
Claims that such hazards fall under theses categories MUST PROVIDE RECORDED MATCHES THAT DEMONSTRATE THIS, at least 3 times by a person whose record signifies a lower skill than the person making the claim.
So thoughts, comments, concerns? Also if anyone if willing to help me perform the tests when the game comes out, announce it in the thread or PM me, the more hands we get on this the better.
(also I got a not-chaingrab on him 
)
