Montage's List of Stage Bans!

[Terrorcon Blot]

Heck, this is almost worth watching now just to see the hole get deeper.

 

[Overswarm]

Heck, this is almost worth watching now just to see the hole get deeper.

It's definitely more entertaining than watching brawl discussion posters coming in and saying "OMG MY FAV STAGE ISN'T BANNED! =D"

 

[SamuraiPanda]

odds are, my list iwll be the official list within a few months.

I'm not going to get in a debate with you right now since I don't feel like it. I don't agree with many of your "bans" but I just want you to realize one little thing:

You've been arguing with the people who make the rules. The people who decide these bans, Smash Back Room members, have been debating with you back and forth, all of them disagreeing with you. The official list is what the people who disagree with you are deciding.

I just thought you should keep that in mind ^_^

 

[Jihnsius]

This argument is completely irrelevant to the initial point of this topic. Whether or not he thinks something should be banned isn't the case, and neither are any of your credentials. The purpose of this topic is for people to discuss why they think a stage should be banned. Just because you don't like someone's reasoning doesn't mean you have to flame, whether or not that person is arrogant.

EDIT:

You've been arguing with the people who make the rules. The people who decide these bans, Smash Back Room members, have been debating with you back and forth, all of them disagreeing with you. The official list is what the people who disagree with you are deciding.

I was unaware Nintendo and Game Arts were arguing in this thread. MLG and SWF's "way" to play the game are hardly official, they're just widely accepted.

 

[KyUuKyUu]

I was unaware Nintendo and Game Arts were arguing in this thread. MLG and SWF's "way" to play the game are hardly official, they're just widely accepted.

And this thread (now ongoing pointless argument) is being posted for the smashers that abide by the most widely accepted rules. If people aren't playing by the "widely accepted" rules they probably wouldn't care to read this thread past the first few posts anyway.

I think Jigglypuff should be banned. I mean, come on, six jumps. SIX!? That's so broken, and if you can't see why it is broken, then you are obviously not as awesome as me and my long list of self fellatio

lmao

 

[Drephen]

I was unaware Nintendo and Game Arts were arguing in this thread. MLG and SWF's "way" to play the game are hardly official, they're just widely accepted.

Nintendo and Game Arts dont hold tournaments (at least good ones anyways)

SWF and MLG do hold tournaments

 

[Cless]

I was unaware Nintendo and Game Arts were arguing in this thread. MLG and SWF's "way" to play the game are hardly official, they're just widely accepted.

That's irrelevant. There is no way to play the game; however, in the interest of fairness for the competing parties, rules have to be setup in order to make some sense of the chaos. It's this way in anything you could ever compete in ever. You could do whatever you wanted to at a tourney as long as all parties involved that stand to lose something agree that it's fine.

 

[Jihnsius]

Irrelevance is the point of that comment. I was simply pointing out that the rules SWF decide upon are not the official way to play the game, as was previously stated.

 

[kitsuneboy_geoff]

This is a pity. I enjoy the variety in Brawl's stages, and it is a shame that we're gonna be stuck playing FD and Battlefield all the time again.

 

[Overswarm]

This is a pity. I enjoy the variety in Brawl's stages, and it is a shame that we're gonna be stuck playing FD and Battlefield all the time again.

That will be decided by tournament play. If it turns out that the hazards aren't very bad on (insert stage), or at the least are a good addition to the strategy of (insert stage), and that the stage doesn't have something horribly wrong with it (like excessive camping, stalling, hugeness, crazy hazards, glitches, insanely small, etc.), chances are it won't be that bad in tournament play. Tournament play is what decides the rules; the SBR is merely a group of individuals who follow it closely and see how those stages have affected the tournament scene.

A lot of people tried to ban things in Melee merely because they didn't like them and wanted stages like Battlefield and FD only all the time. I, and most others I've talked to (including the most competitive), don't want only a few stages. They want as large a variety as possible!

The neutral stages will more than likely be limited to stages iwthout extereme advantages or even mild hazards, but we'll see.

If you want to have an effect on the ruleset for smash, hold tournaments and post videos!

 

[Drephen]

Irrelevance is the point of that comment. I was simply pointing out that the rules SWF decide upon are not the official way to play the game, as was previously stated.

ever been to a melee tournament? Yeah the rules were made by people on SWF and MLG. You can play the game how ever the **** you want to. But when you go to a real tournament you have to follow those rules

you can say "WELL IM GONNA MAKE MY OWN TOURNAMENT AND MAKE ME OWN RULES CAUSE THATS THE WAY I THINK THE GAME SHOULD BE PLAYED"

but your tournament will suck and no one will go to it

 

[Overswarm]

ever been to a melee tournament? Yeah the rules were made by people on SWF and MLG. You can play the game how ever the **** you want to. But when you go to a real tournament you have to follow those rules

you can say "WELL IM GONNA MAKE MY OWN TOURNAMENT AND MAKE ME OWN RULES CAUSE THATS THE WAY I THINK THE GAME SHOULD BE PLAYED"

but your tournament will suck and no one will go to it

I'd go.


But I wouldn't play.

I'd frown discontently at both the ruleset and my irresponsible waste of time.

 

[dmbrandon]

I'm not going to get in a debate with you right now since I don't feel like it. I don't agree with many of your "bans" but I just want you to realize one little thing:

You've been arguing with the people who make the rules. The people who decide these bans, Smash Back Room members, have been debating with you back and forth, all of them disagreeing with you. The official list is what the people who disagree with you are deciding.

I just thought you should keep that in mind ^_^

I know. You know I'm not new here, I understand my grounds. The fact is, the major argument is walls! Walls are truly broken. I am a terrible Fox player. Always have been. And If I can catch extremely good players in an infinite with 30 seconds, the IMO the stage should be banned.

ever been to a melee tournament? Yeah the rules were made by people on SWF and MLG. You can play the game how ever the **** you want to. But when you go to a real tournament you have to follow those rules

you can say "WELL IM GONNA MAKE MY OWN TOURNAMENT AND MAKE ME OWN RULES CAUSE THATS THE WAY I THINK THE GAME SHOULD BE PLAYED"

but your tournament will suck and no one will go to it

Well I have 30 confirmed for this saturday, Drephen. You should come too.

 

[Overswarm]

Well I have 30 confirmed for this saturday, Drephen. You should come too.

I'm sure they're coming for your ruleset, and not the fact that the game isn't released in America yet.

I know. You know I'm not new here, I understand my grounds. The fact is, the major argument is walls! Walls are truly broken.

This I do not believe to be something you could know.

I am a terrible Fox player. Always have been.

This is something I can believe.

 

[Terrorcon Blot]

*snerk*

But seriously, hey, it's a good list for speculating, I guess. Even through this thread I've been making guesses on what will and will not be "tourney legal". So who knows how it will go!

 

[dmbrandon]

I'm sure they're coming for your ruleset, and not the fact that the game isn't released in America yet.



This I do not believe to be something you could know.



This is something I can believe.

Clever posting. +5 points. ^_^

Seriously. If anything, why would I leave something that COULD alter the tourn in? If you guys are so bent of testing it, I should let the SBR test it, and myself run a cleaner tournament?

 

[ComradeSAL]

Diem, I think it would strengthen your arguments considerably if you posted some competitive videos of fox on walled stages.

 

[dmbrandon]

Diem, I think it would strengthen your arguments considerably if you posted some competitive videos of fox on walled stages.

That's a good idea.

 

[Overswarm]

With wavedashing and lightning fast Foxes like Cunning Kitsune, I was rarely, if ever, caught by an infinite shine. If you didn't see it coming or were goaded into it... they deserved it, really. It is powerful, sure, but it's a lot more transparent than Bowser's f-smash and we don't have trouble dodging that.

 

[Fonz]

If shine infinites are such a broken tactic wouldn't it be wiser to simply ban the tactic? It could be the next wobbles! It makes sense to me to ban a broken tactic before banning a half a dozen excellent walled stages. Walls add an extra dimension to game play allowing for entirely new combos and teching opportunities.

 

[Zenjamin]

With wavedashing and lightning fast Foxes like Cunning Kitsune, I was rarely, if ever, caught by an infinite shine. If you didn't see it coming or were goaded into it... they deserved it, really. It is powerful, sure, but it's a lot more transparent than Bowser's f-sma

stop.
dont be stupid.

 

[matthewmilad]

bah

dmbrandon, you do not have Green Hill Zone on your list.

Please refer to this video:

PBody Brawl tournament - Nes (Peach) vs. Lucky (Sonic)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=05oROcchaTY

This is fine. You should know it does that.

 

[Overswarm]

stop.
dont be stupid.

Considering being hit by a Fox infinite wasn't even really common at high level play, I don't think we have much to worry about.

 

[HyugaRicdeau]

Look, here's the bottom line.

Nobody is going to stop you from making your tournament rules whatever you want. Hell they may even end up being very close to the ones that major tourneys use. Even if they aren't you can still have a successful tourney. So go nuts with your ideas at your tourneys.

But your playtesting is simply not sufficient evidence for the rest of us to simply take your word at it, which is what you're asking us to do. You must understand that there are as many opinions of what "broken" and "balanced" are as there are members on SWF. Two pros even can look at the exact same tactic and come to disagreeing opinions on its legitimacy. Not to mention that in labelling something "broken" there is an implicit idea of what tourney play "should be" which again there are as many opinions about that as there are tourney players.

So why are we getting upset? Because you talk like your assessment is the word of God, you somehow seem to think that your ability to beat someone in a MM justifies your claims, you don't seem to realize that testing in a tournament setting is ALWAYS necessary. Always. And your sig exhorts people to "Support Montage's List of Stage Bans!" I just hope that the people that read this thread are smart enough to form their own opinions and not just copy/paste the words of someone who happened to get Brawl early, play it a lot, and be as omnipresent as possible on the Brawl discussion boards regarding his opinion of the game.

You clearly are trying very hard to be a part of this community this time around. If you want to have success with that beyond your legacy of being "the guy who played the most Brawl before it was released in America," I would think it would benefit you to learn what it means to have conclusive evidence (anecdotal evidence is acceptable 0% of the time), and respect people that disagree with you instead of shoving a challenge at them.

 

[JhMS]

Look, here's the bottom line.

Nobody is going to stop you from making your tournament rules whatever you want. Hell they may even end up being very close to the ones that major tourneys use. Even if they aren't you can still have a successful tourney. So go nuts with your ideas at your tourneys.

But your playtesting is simply not sufficient evidence for the rest of us to simply take your word at it, which is what you're asking us to do. You must understand that there are as many opinions of what "broken" and "balanced" are as there are members on SWF. Two pros even can look at the exact same tactic and come to disagreeing opinions on its legitimacy. Not to mention that in labelling something "broken" there is an implicit idea of what tourney play "should be" which again there are as many opinions about that as there are tourney players.

So why are we getting upset? Because you talk like your assessment is the word of God, you somehow seem to think that your ability to beat someone in a MM justifies your claims, you don't seem to realize that testing in a tournament setting is ALWAYS necessary. Always. And your sig exhorts people to "Support Montage's List of Stage Bans!" I just hope that the people that read this thread are smart enough to form their own opinions and not just copy/paste the words of someone who happened to get Brawl early, play it a lot, and be as omnipresent as possible on the Brawl discussion boards regarding his opinion of the game.

You clearly are trying very hard to be a part of this community this time around. If you want to have success with that beyond your legacy of being "the guy who played the most Brawl before it was released in America," I would think it would benefit you to learn what it means to have conclusive evidence (anecdotal evidence is acceptable 0% of the time), and respect people that disagree with you instead of shoving a challenge at them.

QFT!Seriously,I agree with this guy.
We should wait a bit before taking a final decision about stage bans.

 

[Endless Nightmares]

I'd just like to say, about the money match part...

I don't think he was challenging anyone to a money match, he was asking if you'd be willing to encounter a situation like a broken stage or easy wall infinite in a match where money was on the line.

But still, even if people are going a little overboard, this thread is a great read and is good for the community.

 

[peachori]

you can kick and scream all you want, but the fact of the matter is that the SBR will likely perform extensive testing and then publish a list of stage bans. as soon as they stop arguing about green greens, haha.

 

[ComradeSAL]

I'd just like to say, about the money match part...

I don't think he was challenging anyone to a money match, he was asking if you'd be willing to encounter a situation like a broken stage or easy wall infinite in a match where money was on the line.

But still, even if people are going a little overboard, this thread is a great read and is good for the community.

Agreed. Useful information delivered by an arrogant person is still useful information. I think a lot of people here don't understand that.

 

[Darkpaladin of Chaos]

Hyrule Temple:
Same old crap. Running away for 7 minutes. The tried and true cowards way to first place. Still banned.

I don't play competitively, so I'm wondering: Why would people run away?

 

[Milln]

I don't play competitively, so I'm wondering: Why would people run away?

Fox tags you with his laser, giving you some percent. He then proceeds to run away for the entire duration of the match. Time Up rules are: Whoever has most stock/kos wins. If both players have equal stock, it goes to whoever has the least percentage is granted the win. If both players have equal percent, it goes to Sudden Death.

But Fox hit you with his laser, giving you some percent. Fox, being fast, cannot be caught on Hyrule Temple (or really any large stage) to give percentage back if he's focused on running away, giving him the win.

(Did I get that right? I'm new to the competitive scene, too. I'm working hard, for Brawl, though!)

 

[Darkpaladin of Chaos]

Fox tags you with his laser, giving you some percent. He then proceeds to run away for the entire duration of the match. Time Up rules are: Whoever has most stock/kos wins. If both players have equal stock, it goes to whoever has the least percentage is granted the win. If both players have equal percent, it goes to Sudden Death.

But Fox hit you with his laser, giving you some percent. Fox, being fast, cannot be caught on Hyrule Temple (or really any large stage) to give percentage back if he's focused on running away, giving him the win.

(Did I get that right? I'm new to the competitive scene, too. I'm working hard, for Brawl, though!)

Well gee, am the only one thinking that maybe the solution would be to remove time limits for stock matches? I don't see their use. And without them, who would run away?

 

[G-X]

Well gee, am the only one thinking that maybe the solution would be to remove time limits for stock matches? I don't see their use. And without them, who would run away?

You run away until 5:30 the next morning.

 

[Darkpaladin of Chaos]

You run away until 5:30 the next morning.

And the point of that would be...?

No one in their right mind is going to spend $50 on a fighting game just to run away, when they could play Pac-Man online for free and do that to win. If there is no time limit, there is no point in running. I guarantee you that there is not a single person who plays Smash for the "running away" appeal, be it competitively or casually. If anyone does that, their opponent will just look at them five hours later, slap them, and they'll be in the same position they were when they started. What did the runner acomplish? Nothing. Great, why is he even playing then... They may as well have started the match, set down their controllers and watched the moss grow.

To me the situation with Fox and the Temple is similar to this. Two robots are programmed to fight by beating each other with their artificial arms. They are programmed only to fight that way. Now you set up arenas for them to fight in, and in one you leave a sledgehammer. You introduce a robot that is programmed to fight using a hammer if it has access to it, but without it the robot would fight like the others. Obviously using the hammer will give it an unfair advantage. And obviously the simplest solution would be to remove the hammer. But banning Temple is like banning that arena because it offers one competitor an unfair advantage because of something external that is given to it. It just seems ********. Without that hammer, the robot will not try to use its hammer-wielding techniques. Without a time limit, Fox users will not run away.

Really, why has no one seen this?

 

[dmbrandon]

And the point of that would be...?

No one in their right mind is going to spend $50 on a fighting game just to run away, when they could play Pac-Man online for free and do that to win. If there is no time limit, there is no point in running. I guarantee you that there is not a single person who plays Smash for the "running away" appeal, be it competitively or casually. If anyone does that, their opponent will just look at them five hours later, slap them, and they'll be in the same position they were when they started. What did the runner acomplish? Nothing. Great, why is he even playing then... They may as well have started the match, set down their controllers and watched the moss grow.

To me the situation with Fox and the Temple is similar to this. Two robots are programmed to fight by beating each other with their artificial arms. They are programmed only to fight that way. Now you set up arenas for them to fight in, and in one you leave a sledgehammer. You introduce a robot that is programmed to fight using a hammer if it has access to it, but without it the robot would fight like the others. Obviously using the hammer will give it an unfair advantage. And obviously the simplest solution would be to remove the hammer. But banning Temple is like banning that arena because it offers one competitor an unfair advantage because of something external that is given to it. It just seems ********. Without that hammer, the robot will not try to use its hammer-wielding techniques. Without a time limit, Fox users will not run away.

Really, why has no one seen this?

Welcome to competitive Smash. You must be new here, let me show you around.

Now, think about it. Do you HONESTLY believe you're the first person to think like this? If so, why weren't you here 5 years ago? Sheesh!

Seriously, that's not how life is.

Edit: What did the runner accomplish? Are you daft? They're accomplishing bill paying, and they're winning money from this.

If I told you, you could win 1,000 dollars, just for running in a circle, I'm cancered heart serious that you'd jump on that faster than a fat kid on Jessica Alba.

 

[Endless Nightmares]

Well gee, am the only one thinking that maybe the solution would be to remove time limits for stock matches? I don't see their use. And without them, who would run away?

It's a lot like the NBA before the shot clock was introduced. Before there was a shot clock, players would sometimes run around for several minutes dribbling and passing without taking a shot. Scores were sometimes as low as 21-18. As dumb as it sounds, yes it did happen.

We don't want that to happen again, do we?

 

[technomancer]

Am I the only one that likes Rumble Falls (not 'Rapid Falls')? I saw some videos of it, and the background visuals are pretty amazing.

On another note, I'm glad I'm not that competitive. The reasons for banning some stages are...dumb.

Consider this: Finals of a melee tournament that you paid $20 to attend, Hyrule is unbanned. You beat two people, and Joe donkey, who came from the street fighter tournament, picks Fox, and shoots you with one laser, and then runs away due to his natural character speed and fast straight line recoveries for 8 minutes.

This A) Wastes a ****load of time
B) Wastes your $20
C) Allows a player that couldn't have beaten anyone else in the tournament to elicit automatic match wins
D) Forces any player that wants to compete to be better at spamming lasers than that player in order to win.

Imagine in chess if you didn't even have to learn how to move a rook, all you had to do was pick the right chessboard and move your first pawn into checkmate? The game would be stupid and unfun. Solutions are to ban the pawn move (hard to enforce, TDs don't have time to watch every match, etc...) and to just ban the crappy chessboard.



In response to the time limit concept, the concept that "you have to attack while you're behind or you will lose" gives incentive to stimulate action all throughout the match, much like the blinds in poker. Without a time limit camping is just as bad. Consider a situation where it was always to your benefit to attack. Then the nature of the game would be to always attack, and every player would be constantly jumping at the other player and attacking, because it would be dumb to defend when it's much better to attack. The game would be silly, coming down to who attacks more and picks the better move. Therefore most games give a natural edge to a defensive player. Remember, defensive players can NEVER WIN a match, but if they play their cards perfectly, they won't lose much either. So you present the players with a choice: play defensive, and you won't win. Play too aggressively, and you'll fall into all of the defensive player's traps; the end result is strategy and a fun game. A no time limit match encourages overly defensive play when winning (running away, roll spam, doing silly grab and throw off the edge repeat tricks) and makes the strategy less interesting.

The major issue that forces the time limit, however, is that the finals match would last for 5 ****ing hours if there wasn't one because one player would get down 2 stocks and to high percent and just start running because $300 is on the line, and we simply don't have that much time to devote to a tournament. Not to mention, again, there is no fun involved in someone beating you because you side-b'd off the level 20 minutes after the match was "over" because you didn't feel like being there all day chasing around this noob Olimar and his 1-pikmin-an-hour strategy anymore. (and Jigglypuff dittos are stupid too)




All of this gets down to the theory of the fun tournament. It's fun to goof around on the goofy stages and laugh about all the fun things that happen, right? But that's contradictory to the "tournament" nature of tournaments, whose function is to decide who is the best at a particular thing. What many people don't understand is that in tournaments of all kinds, there's a whole different kind of fun involved. "Easy fun," where relaxing, easy laughs and goofy stages all become stressful when they result in one player being knocked out of a competitive event. The other kind of fun is a sense of satisfaction that comes from performing, doing your best, and proving yourself in a social environment. The Italians call it "fiero", which translates to a swelling of pride, or something similar.

Take breakdancing for example. Dancing in itself is tons of fun, it's a release, and when you're at a club, you take a shot and go jam and do whatever. As long as you don't hit anyone, and you have a good time, it doesn't matter how good you are, and who knows you may pull some crazy stunts or some goofy sexy hip shake and make everyone laugh, but when it's time to battle, the two crews both have a great time by performing the most technical moves, keeping the other crew out of the center with fancy footwork, not messing up your routines, and proving yourself and your crew. In a battle, it doesn't matter that one crew is better than another, both crews have a great time battling because they showed up, gave their best, and earned respect doing something that they have fun doing.

The theory is that to create a fun competitive environment, you must have a skill based activity (an activity that is not easy, but can be learned) that has a central win condition that players have to compete with each other to achieve, that can be achieved successfully in a variety of ways. This rewards creativity, and allows the establishment of strategy. Of course, creativity that doesn't lead to success is cool to watch but generally not adopted, and successful creative acts, like Chu's chainthrows and Fox's shine combos, are more prevalent, and players can play the odds and develop strategies that work well against those other players, creating a metagame. Since everyone is involved in the design and testing process of the meta game, everyone is, at least in a small part involved in the social network of the game, and gets enjoyment from playing the game and being a part of the group, which is why even losing players come to tournaments week after week. Add in a good motivator to succeed (monies, womenz, exalted status among smashboards noobs through videos), and the game develops, and the more developed a game is, the more exiting it is to learn it's facets, and the more fun it is to be a part of its environment.

The idea of the stage ban is that if an activity occurs that creates an extremely high percentage win condition, like 75% or better, and you have to make it through 5 rounds of brackets to hit the finals and win money, then your odds of winning by not using that activity go down to less that 1%, not to mention pools etc. If this activity doesn't encourage creativity (see: Wobbling. Works on every character), and doesn't take a lot of skill to learn (firing lasers on Hyrule Temple and running away) then the tournament scene loses it's major points of development. I didn't show up to do what everyone else does, I showed up to do what I do and beat everyone else with it, and if that's not going to get rewarded by allowing me to hang out with my friends and have a shot at the prizes, I'll go somewhere where it is. See? Therefore, if pressing A repeatedly to wall-kick-stall out for 8 minutes beats me no matter how hard I try to avoid the wall, I'll roll out because there is no sense applying myself to a game when that's all there is to do. It's the same reason people don't take candy from little kids or steal multivitamins from the health food store, because nobody gives a crap if you can press A for 8 minutes, even though candy is rewarding, and multivitamins are healthy, there just isn't any social reinforcement and no sense of satisfaction.

Additionally, the argument that "people would rather play for fun than do gay **** at tournaments" has been entirely disproven by every tournament ever held and is in fact completely ********, because "gay ****" in a competitive environment is fun due to the feeling of fiero and improves your social status. See Mew2King. Games where the gay **** is just not fun turn into lame games like Pong, where it's impossible to lose if you just go to the middle after you hit the dot and guess where the ball is going to go every time it hits a paddle, unless you **** up, which is frustrating because you just lost at a dumb game.

tl;dr: Ban Hyrule, stfu guy that doesn't play competitively and wants to change the rules for competative play. Trust me we've heard all this **** 1000 times.

 

[mogwaimon]

Honestly, there's nothing stopping anyone from playing these stages outside of a tournament, or even during a friendly match at a tournament during downtime. Only time you have to adhere to tournament bans is when you're at a tourney, and even then the rules at each tournament differ from the others. (Although most tend to go by the standard ruleset created here, right?) Worst case scenario, you and your opponent both consent to a 'banned' stage during a tournament and play it anyways, right?

 

[mindlesstom]

Honestly, there's nothing stopping anyone from playing these stages outside of a tournament, or even during a friendly match at a tournament during downtime. Only time you have to adhere to tournament bans is when you're at a tourney, and even then the rules at each tournament differ from the others. (Although most tend to go by the standard ruleset created here, right?) Worst case scenario, you and your opponent both consent to a 'banned' stage during a tournament and play it anyways, right?

ding ding, you ARE correct! ^_^

 

[technomancer]

Oooh wow a whole silly thread!

Here's Techno's rules of banning stages.

1) If the stage changes the game completely in such a way that we'd have to relearn everything we know just for that stage, then ban it and save the hassle.
2) If there are obvious random events that effect the outcome of the match then ban it.
3) If the stage makes the game so stupid that nobody can have a good match on it then ban it.
4) If there's something obviously glitchy that would interrupt a good match then ban it.
5) Otherwise play ball

 

[king_neeso]

Oooh wow a whole silly thread!

Here's Techno's rules of banning stages.

1) If the stage changes the game completely in such a way that we'd have to relearn everything we know just for that stage, then ban it and save the hassle.
2) If there are obvious random events that effect the outcome of the match then ban it.
3) If the stage makes the game so stupid that nobody can have a good match on it then ban it.
4) If there's something obviously glitchy that would interrupt a good match then ban it.
5) Otherwise play ball

lol
6. if a level isnt final destination or a flat level its banned
7 . if a level has more than 2 platforms its banned

im tired of hearing stage bans it makes me never want to be in a tourny. smash brothers best moments i have experianced are the random moments. if you want a plain fighing game get old school mortal kombat or street fighter if you want fun easy going random moments play a game where snake can shoot a pikachu with a rocket launcher. enough said