guys, before I go on with arguing for the list we proposed (WE, it means this is a common effort, ok?), at least we proposed something. now, don't come and tell me everything about the "sheik and falco players conspiracy", this is nonsense and this is not gonna make things change. so let's have a serious debate about rules. consider we're SMASH players, not only falco or sheik players.
Now consider this : all we want is to make tournaments more about skills and less about using the rules to win.
does this mean we have to take off stages from tournament rulesets? I'm afraid so.
if we go on playing tournament matches thinking "if I lose, I don't care, I'm gonna pick that mute city stage and win". how can you assimilate skills to that kind of thinking? some would tell me "but you have to use the game ! that's normal". well, I don't agree with that. I really think we should concentrate on the skills and learning abilities we all have. if we play only on those stages during the tournament, people will have to count on thair own skills to win a set. I think this is a very good reason to limit the number of stages. but if the number is limited, it's not because we want the game to be boring. if there were more good stages, we wouldn't have that problem.
but what's the problem? the game is getting boring if you only play on 5 different stages? wtf? When you're having an intense match against a player as good as you, I don't think you can say "duh it's the 10th time today I play on FD, it's boring". to me, the "it's getting boring" argument has no value. intense matches based on skills ARE interesting. who here can tell me the BS vs Ken matches were boring? seriously, they weren't at all, but they were playing only on TWO stages. here we are with 5 stages, for everyone's tastes, and someone talks about boredom? you must be kiddin...