What would removing FD fix though for majority of MU's? The impact seems minimal in character first, where you can't hold opponent bans hostage to multiple or secret threats as per stage first.
Its not fixing MUs. Its putting a stage that will get banned less often on the list instead.
For example, if we remove FD, we can put DS, Norfair, and Skyworld on a list. DS takes the big, Norfair takes the flat, and Skyworld takes the open space juggling. But DS has plats to offset the big (and gives us a big blastzone stage that isnt DL), Norfair has plats to occasionally offset its FD-ness, and Skyworld is really small but has big blastzones (which offsets PS2).
Now your CPs are WL, SW, NF, DS instead of WL, uh crap we have no medium, FD, uh DS is like FD so lets use super huge DL
I mean if FD was to go, I'd be fine with DS for sure. But I just do not see that happening.
I can't think of too many reasons to ban SV in almost any matchup outside of preference. Open space? FD/PS2/DL/BC are all more open, at least as far as our current definition of open space goes (which is a conversation for another time, cause my break is not nearly long enough lol). Wide stage length? Again, the above stages are moreso. It's simply just not a polarizing stage unless you really don't like moving platforms. I pair it with GHZ because I have found that the combination of open air space and not having a lot of ground to cover actually can pose a problem in some matchups to the point of warranting a ban. In this case, SV somewhat has the same deal, and both stages have a moving platform as well, so *shrug*
TL;DR: Looking at all attributes and how they play, I find SV to be much more like GHZ than like FD.
Yes, I was suggesting open space. And I agree that SV plays more like GHZ than FD. They are both small enough that the openness isnt too extreme, and the occasional platform breaks up the constant advantage, so you don't need to outright ban the stage so often.
The fact that nothing is quite like FD is exactly why its a problem. It doesnt share enough attributes with other stages to keep the ban-2-of-3 paradigm going for all attribute spectrums. Putting FD on the list means all the other stages have to adapt, and then no matter what we do we end up with the list being too big, too open, or too small.
If you don't have FD, you can slightly change all the other stages.
GHZ, FoD, SV, BF, PS2
WL/YS, SW, NF, DS(or DL if you insist) and voila.
You have 3 smalls (GHZ+FoD, WL/YS, SW, with only 1 extremely small)
You have 3 bigs (NF, PS2, DS/DL, with only 1 extremely big)
You have 3 small ceilings (WL/YS, PS2, BF+SW from their plats if you can ladder combo)
You have 3 big ceilings (GHZ, FoD, DS/DL)
You have 4 small sides (GHZ, FoD, WL/YS, PS2)
You have 3 big sides (SW, DS/DL, NF+BF)
You have 3 cramped (WL/YS, FoD+SW, BF)
You have 3 open (NF+SW+FoD, GHZ, SV)
and most importantly, none of those lists are identical. Few even share 2 stages, if you aren't counting the I-sorta-fit-in-this-category that I used the +s for.
But when you have FD, you have a stage that is so extreme that it throws everything else off. Its open and big, with big sides and a low ceiling.
Ok so as soon as you put in FD, you already have your 3 open stages (GHZ, SV, FD) which means you can't use SW or NF. Well if you don't have SW or NF with FD, you can't have 3 big sides (DS/DL, FD, ?). If you have FD, people don't want to use DS. Now you have to use DL, which would qualify as open (so now you have 4...) and also has a preposterously huge ceiling. Now you can't balance that huge ceiling with PS2 + FD + WL/YS. Its just tooooo huge, but w/e. Lets say its fine. You have 4 open stages now, so you need 4 cramped stages (or at least 3). Well we only have WL/YS and BF, because FoD swaps between cramped and open. So its 2.5 to 4. And FD is REALLY open.
Swap things around. Try to find something that works with FD. Even if I wasn't making the argument that FD is a satanic stage, it just makes the whole list impossible to work with.