Why is everyone so opposed to having Smash Balls in competitive play?

[Magnacor]

First of all I would like to appaud the OP for not making a complete **** of himself and posting his facts in a logical way. I again applaud him on not throwing the phrase Melee 2.0 or competive elitist in there. Everything you put was really well thought out. I almost wish I didn't disagree with you. Now I am not competitive in any way. Compared to the pros I suck. I even fought for Smash Balls when the debate started. But when I was testing out the characters and trying to find a good main, against Marth with Smash Balls on I had second thoughts. I experienced the frustration of wanting a do-over because of a cheap kill by Marth. had i not been able to get a do-over at a tourney I'd likely be cussing all the way home on how I would have beat that noob I faced if he hadn't gotten lucky. I pick B by the way.

 

[DragonBlade]

You forgot the poster who chooses to make it known that he thinks the thread is pointless and stupid, instead of actually contributing to the discussion, or skipping over the thread entirely.

Now guess which one you are.

Criticizing my post won't change the fact that this thread was utterly pointless in the first place. Learn to search, kthx.

 

[sakuraZaKi]

Tripping can't be controlled, Smash Balls can.


Yeah, the difference is that all people will be doing is picking Snake, Marth, or Sonic and running away waiting for a Smash Ball to appear if they have a good Final Smash.

Smash Balls are items, just like home-run bats or hammers. They appear randomly, are unbalanced, and have no place in a competitive scene. The only reason anyone wants them is because they're cool looking special moves for the character.

and don't forget those **** stickers that randomly pop out.

"Should I get it, or not?" o_O

 

[EternalCrusade]

turning smash balls on only creates a lot MORE randomness

and by your logic we should turn cracker barrels (sp?) on too

1. cracker barrels are random
well get over it, you can trip *_*

2. cracker barrels cause an unbalance
well accually they dont, since all the players can use this item the same way

ok, so lets just turn on smash balls and cracker barrels...but wait! by that logic we should also turn on maximum tomatoes! accually, by your logic, we should turn on EVERY item.....

all items (including smash balls) only have a place in casual play and friendly matches, that just how it is, I dont understand how this debate about smash balls in tournaments ever even started, I mean, its a very unique item but its no different from any of the other items in terms of fairness (accually it can be even more unfair)

 

[AlAxe]

Well said EternalCrusade.

Also smash balls are way too random and final smashes are way too unbalanced. Sonic would be by far the best character and other characters, such as ZSS, would be at a huge disadvatage. I'm not saying that smash balls aren't fun, they're just not good if you want a fair competitive match.

 

[Nicktendo]

Their broken and unbalanced as hell, that's why.

Lucas can just snipe it with his up b, Ikes breaks it in like one hit compared to alot of characters having to work for it, Falco's is unavoidable, Marth is too good already and his is a one hit KO

Play with them on for fun. Not in tournaments.

 

[Tony_]

Your down one stock and just got respawned. Your opponent grabs the smash ball again just as it appears. He KO's you with it again. Now your down two stocks for no effort other than grabbing the smash ball.

This is why its off. It gives advantage for little to reason at all.

 

[lengeta]

The purpose of competitive gameplay is to eliminate any random factor and limit the game to player skill. Old thread is old. Play a Sonic main with Smashballs on, do some testing, THEN bring up valid points. Competitive gameplay isn't about fun (although it is fun for some of us), its about competing with others in terms of skill on an equal playing field. Smashballs make that field uneven, and are thus generally frowned upon by competitive players.

I'd also like to point out that SmashBrawlRankings allows ranked matches with the SmashBall turned on. Stop being ignorant. If you don't want competitive players telling you how to play, don't tell them how to play.

 

[SiegKnight]

I agree smashballs are stupid when abused. Homerun bats and hammers though? Yeah, not posting here again. Ledgeclinging all day, projectiles, vertical approaches for the latter as well as general evasion for the former laugh at the ****ing scrub orgy in here.

 

[Arturito_Burrito]

why does every1 use the example about the smash ball appearing in certain areas or at certain times that have it out of ur reach could just happen in ur favor and u wouldn't be complaining then. some1 who wants to use smash balls probably under stands that

i think there should be tournaments where u can use smash balls cause luck should be involved sometimes.

 

[bnestman]

That is exactly the point...it would be random! So rather than having one person happy they got the smash ball and the other person extremly upset just eliminate the situation altogether by turning them off. They are better suited to casual games amongst friends.

 

[orintemple]

Here are what I think are the two most common arguments:

1. "Smash Balls are random"
Well there are a lot of random elements in this game. I don't see how anyone can complain about randomness in Brawl when any character can trip at any time, for no reason at all. Not to mention some characters have inherently random attacks.

2. "Final Smashes are too unbalancing"
It's true that some character's FSs are stronger than others, but it's also true that some characters in general are better than others. And we don't automatically ban the strongest characters because they are the strongest; we find ways to beat them.

.

1. There is no reason for us to add MORE random elements on top of the unavoidable ones we already have.

2.They are not balanced by character. Falco is arguably destined for high tier and he has a LANDMASTER!, arguably the best Final Smash in the game.

DK is only a mid level character at best, and he has the worst PoS Final Smash ever.

Good characters with good FS
Marth(arguable)
Pit(that thing 1v1 is crazy)
Olimar(unavoidable damage and possible kill at end)
Falco(LANDMASTAH)
Wolf(slightly worse LANDMASTAH)
Fox(LANDMASTAH again)

I could probably go on but this is good enough.

 

[Newuser12345215]

Tournaments try to eliminate the randomness as much as possible. They do not allow items or stages with significant random events. They undoubtedly would take out tripping if this was possible and many players are upset at its randomness.



Characters that are stronger are often weaker in other ways, such as lacking speed or a good B-Up. The smash balls are obviously unbalanced. Compare Olimar's to someone like zamus. With zamus, it is arguable that getting back to the suit is the reward, but I actually much prefer zamus, so my final smash can do 25% max if the opponent is right there.

Agreed. Characters are slightly stronger but weaker in different areas. Some characters may be faster or stronger than others but weaker or stronger in attacks, etc.

Final Smash Balls is just one attack but it's COMPLETELY unbalanced compared to other characters.

Not to mention there are so many Final Smashes that can easily KO (Landmaster and any of the other controllable Final Smashes like Wario-man or Gigabowser).

Remember in most cases, this will be 1v1.

Final Smashes that attack more groups of enemies but doesn't really KO until high percentages include things like Kirby's FS, Pit's FS, etc.

Pit's and Kirby's FS(for example), do not KO until high percentages while Landmaster or Wario-man, etc is an guaranteed KO when you use it, even of the opponent has 0% damage.

Final Smashes are completely unbalanced.

If we let items in, it should be Dragoon, since Dragoon is like a Final Smash but it's EQUALLY balanced for everyone(because it does the same thing for every character), not to mention you have to collect 3 Dragoon parts which itself makes it a little more balanced than most items.

 

[Magmar's Wrath]

Any tournament that tries to eliminate as much stuff as possible is just looking to strip Smash Brothers for the gem it is.

I suppose we should ban King Dedede, Luigi, G&W, Peach, and Olimar because they have randomly powerful abilities.

If you're not skilled enough to be able to fight someone with Smash Balls in the game, you're not worthy to be in a 'professional' tournament. And the bull about it always being around your opponent... have you people even TRIED them? Smash Balls take a great deal of effort to unlock, since they're always bouncing away from you!

 

[Yuna]

The following is directed at the majority of brawl players

Marth can cancel his FS by pressing B.


WHY DO PEOPLE STILL NOT KNOW THIS!

I discovered this on my own this past weekend. I didn't mention it because if they can't wrap their heads around "Don't spam it in the air", they won't know what a "cancel" is.

Falco's can get 3 KOs on the same character though so...Falco for best FS.

Not unless the opponent is an idiot. Yes, it's a guaranteed KO, pretty much. So you just try to survive for as long as you can (unless you're Jiggz, Meta-Knight or Pit, then you can or might be able to survive it all). Once you die, you don't get off the platform. You wait for it to disappear and then run and hog the edge when your invincibility ends.

This way, he'll at most take off 1 stock + maybe get in a bit of damage. If you're reaaaally unlucky, he'll take off two, but it will never be 3.

Yeah, and some Final Smashes render the person INVINCIBLE. There is no semblance of fairness in that.

All Final Smashes render people invincible. All except Pit's render them invincible during the entire time the FS:s hitbox is out (bad!).

 

[-Zangetsu-]

Smash Ball appears
Both chase after it
One gets it
Now it's a race of getting away from that person.

Same reasons tourney's dont have items ON in General.
Charge F-smash
Bomb appears
hits said bomb
x.x

 

[Yuna]

Well you guys make a lot of good points, even though it looks like none of you are even willing to give it a try

Did you even read my post outlining exactly why we could never in a million years give it a try in competitive play?!

a) All the final smashes remain unchanged, but a marker would indicate where and when the Smash Ball would appear. The marker would stay right in the middle of both players until the moment the Smash Ball appeared, then it would stay stationary. Then the first person who hit it, with any attack, would get the FS. In other words, both players would have an equal chance to get their FS.

You obviously didn't read my post (go, read it now!) since the FS:es would still remain broken and unbalanced. And, that would promote even more camping. People would fight to camp that spot and not actually go for each other.

b) The Smash Ball mechanics remain unchanged, but all the Final Smashes are balanced (somehow) so that they are all moderately effective and nothing more, I.E. none of them would be guaranteed kills and all of them would be capable of killing with proper usage. Forget the specifics, just in terms of overall capability they would all be the same, and none of them overpowered.

1) Still random.
2) Invincibility frames.
3) Promotes camping.

And the fact remains: These changse aren't going to be made so this discussion is meaningless.

In other words, is it the Final Smashes or the Smash Balls themselves that turn you off to this idea? Most of you are speaking as if they're the same thing, but there's a subtle difference that I want to make sure you're aware of. And I understand that it doesn't matter either way, I'm just curious to know.

Both, but mostly the way Final Smashes work. By default, Smash Balls are items and thus random and must be off. Even if we somehow fixed that, there's still the fact that they're imbalanced and totally broken.

Read my first post in this thread on page 2 (I think), please. It's important.

There have been several threads about this. Its really not necessary for every noob to have a new thread for expressing their ignorance of the game. All of these threads go like:

noob1: [same old generic arguements noobs have, which have been responded to time and time again]
antinoob1: [typical logical counter example which has also been used the last time someone brought it up]
Yuna: [classic Yuna post with flawless logic assessing every point in the main argument]
noob2: [nearly cliche response agreeing with noob1, while completely ignoring the above two]

It just degrades the quality of the forums, imo.

Why thank you.

You forgot the poster who chooses to make it known that he thinks the thread is pointless and stupid, instead of actually contributing to the discussion, or skipping over the thread entirely.

Now guess which one you are.

And the fact that you somehow fall into the category of both noob1 and noob2. You completely ignored my post despite it addressing every single point in your original post.

turning smash balls on only creates a lot MORE randomness

and by your logic we should turn cracker barrels (sp?) on too

1. cracker barrels are random
well get over it, you can trip *_*

2. cracker barrels cause an unbalance
well accually they dont, since all the players can use this item the same way

ok, so lets just turn on smash balls and cracker barrels...but wait! by that logic we should also turn on maximum tomatoes! accually, by your logic, we should turn on EVERY item.....

all items (including smash balls) only have a place in casual play and friendly matches, that just how it is, I dont understand how this debate about smash balls in tournaments ever even started, I mean, its a very unique item but its no different from any of the other items in terms of fairness (accually it can be even more unfair)

Hush! Don't give them any ideas! In fact, people have used that logic to argue all items be turned on before.

why does every1 use the example about the smash ball appearing in certain areas or at certain times that have it out of ur reach could just happen in ur favor and u wouldn't be complaining then. some1 who wants to use smash balls probably under stands that

i think there should be tournaments where u can use smash balls cause luck should be involved sometimes.

Because it's unfair. Just because I happened to be on the long end of the stick in a certain situation doesn't make it any less unfair to my opponent.

 

[EternalCrusade]

Hush! Don't give them any ideas! In fact, people have used that logic to argue all items be turned on before.

Wow really? Im sorry but thats effed up XD

 

[-Zangetsu-]

I've always felt that items Were for just fun matches

While no items is for the more competitive players since it is actually a matter of skill. NOT a matter of chance. Same reasons some stages were banned from MLG us, doesnt necessarily mean they are not fun, but you can't really fight skillfully on a stage like rainbow cruise.

 

[slickmasterizzy]

LANDMASTER

 

[SFJake]

All Final Smashes render people invincible. All except Pit's render them invincible during the entire time the FS:s hitbox is out (bad!).

Bowser too. He still takes damage when transformed.

 

[Yuna]

Bowser too. He still takes damage when transformed.

O RLY? I haven't really tested his FS much since, well, Bowser still sucks. I'll make a note of this. Knockback should be greatly reduced and because of non-existent hitstun, he'll probably still be able to whack you silly even on hit.

 

[rove]

Most competitive players are wanting to show there skill in battle.
Smash balls just totally screw that for them.
Thats what seperates the competative players from the casuals.

 

[Eternal Neo]

If smash balls were used competitively nobody would use any character but lucas. Not only is he good anyway, but he can chase and break the smash ball easier than any other character from a long distance with pk thunder, which then leads into his final smash that is nearly impossible to dodge on neutral stages.

 

[Prominent]

it throws off the point of competitive play completely, and increases the luck factor more...

fs + tourney = waste

 

[Pikachu'sBlueWizardHat]

Did you even read my post outlining exactly why we could never in a million years give it a try in competitive play?!

I read the entire thing. Just because I didn't specifically quote YOU and disect every single word YOU said doesn't mean I didn't read the entire thread. Although I'm doing it now because that's the only way to get it through to you that I'm actually listening to what everyone has to say.

And the point I was trying to make was that theorycraft is one thing (theorysmash?), but actually trying it out is something else.

You obviously didn't read my post (go, read it now!) since the FS:es would still remain broken and unbalanced. And, that would promote even more camping. People would fight to camp that spot and not actually go for each other.

Again, I did read your post, so stop jumping to conclusions. But I suppose it would make the game more campy, which is exactly what you guys don't want, right?

1) Still random.
2) Invincibility frames.
3) Promotes camping.

And the fact remains: These changse aren't going to be made so this discussion is meaningless.

Doesn't mean we can't just talk about it. And you don't know that it will never happen.

Both, but mostly the way Final Smashes work. By default, Smash Balls are items and thus random and must be off. Even if we somehow fixed that, there's still the fact that they're imbalanced and totally broken.

Read my first post in this thread on page 2 (I think), please. It's important.

So it's more the "unbalanced Final Smashes" aspect and less the "random items" aspect. That's all I wanted to know. And stop accusing me of not reading your post. It's getting really obnoxious.

And the fact that you somehow fall into the category of both noob1 and noob2. You completely ignored my post despite it addressing every single point in your original post.

You have some ego on you, you know that? I DIDN'T IGNORE YOUR POST. Did it ever occur to you maybe, that I didn't feel like quoting every single paragraph of every single post in this thread just to say "good point" to every one? That's why I said "you guys" (plural) made a lot of good points; you know you're one of them, so why do you need my confirmation on it?

I'm trying to be civil here. I didn't come here to tell you that you have to change your way of playing. I came here to have an open, intelligent discussion. I proposed an alternate way of looking at things and I asked your opinions on it. And I am thankful that you guys (that includes you too) have responded in an intelligent way.

But PLEASE stop insulting me by accusing me of ignoring you and being a noob. I won't insult you if you don't insult me.

O RLY? I haven't really tested his FS much since, well, Bowser still sucks. I'll make a note of this. Knockback should be greatly reduced and because of non-existent hitstun, he'll probably still be able to whack you silly even on hit.

He still takes damage but he doesn't flinch from anything, like Ike during his Aether. So trying to hurt him is still not a very good idea.

 

[dj_pwn1423]

I play without smash balls because I want to. I think it is more fun.

I dont like how people generalize the competetive community(though its perfectly acceptable)

I mean I dont want to be told that I should allow SBs when I host a tourney just because you think its
better/more fun. I dont want to get 3 stocked by some luckwhore, even if it seems totally legit to you.

 

[Yuna]

I read the entire thing. Just because I didn't specifically quote YOU and disect every single word YOU said doesn't mean I didn't read the entire thread. Although I'm doing it now because that's the only way to get it through to you that I'm actually listening to what everyone has to say.

If you did, why did you ignore certain parts of what I said, not bothering to reply to it and then repeat the same stuff you've already said that I refuted in my post?

That's ignoring my post with arguments against yours and then re-using them as if no one had refuted them/argued against them.

And the point I was trying to make was that theorycraft is one thing (theorysmash?), but actually trying it out is something else.

Theory fighter is important when talking about potential. The highest point of Brawl will like this and this and this. We can predict this by looking at the currently known metagame. The fact that at this very moment, very few people can take Brawl to that level is irrelevant.

Again, I did read your post, so stop jumping to conclusions. But I suppose it would make the game more campy, which is exactly what you guys don't want, right?

It's about that it "could". It's about that it "does".

Doesn't mean we can't just talk about it. And you don't know that it will never happen.

Yes I can. Because Smash Balls are broken on one gazillion levels. I've already told you why. Invicibility, comboability, strength, imbalance, take your pick. Stop ignoring those things.

From a competitive fighting gamer's standpoint, allowing FS:es in tournaments would be disastrous. You're not a competitive fighting game player. Why are you arguing as if you were against someone (actually, a lot of people) who are? Are you going to attend tournaments?

So it's more the "unbalanced Final Smashes" aspect and less the "random items" aspect. That's all I wanted to know. And stop accusing me of not reading your post. It's getting really obnoxious.

Could it be because you kept categorically ignoring huge chunks of it? You didn't even reply to it!

You have some ego on you, you know that? I DIDN'T IGNORE YOUR POST. Did it ever occur to you maybe, that I didn't feel like quoting every single paragraph of every single post in this thread just to say "good point" to every one? That's why I said "you guys" (plural) made a lot of good points; you know you're one of them, so why do you need my confirmation on it?

The point, as I've already had to say, here is not that you didn't quote me or reply to me. It's that you brought up a bunch of things that had already been refuted in my post. So either you felt my post are too stupid to even reply to or you thought you'd get away with it.

I'm trying to be civil here. I didn't come here to tell you that you have to change your way of playing. I came here to have an open, intelligent discussion. I proposed an alternate way of looking at things and I asked your opinions on it. And I am thankful that you guys (that includes you too) have responded in an intelligent way.

FS:es can never be turned on in tournaments. I have already told you why. You still seem to think that they could and should be on. If so, then you're most probably a casual gamer (n00b or not). One with very little insight into competitive fighting games in general and Smashing in particular.

Having FS:es on for Casual Play = Fun (for some) and chaotic (=fun for some).
Having FS:es on for competitive play (i.e. tournaments) = Disastrous!

This is an old topic. We've debated it to death over and over. And each time, it ends with no one being able to actually beat at least 75% of my arguments (the most important ones). The fact that you brought it up against shows that you're either new and didn't know about the previous discussions or you thought it was due time for yet another one (without actually bringing anything new to the table.

And it's a often-used strategy here on Smashboards by newer users who just don't know how to argue properly to categorically ignore posts which destroy their arguments. The fact that you seemed to be doing it made me think you were one of these people, can you see why I rode you so hard?

He still takes damage but he doesn't flinch from anything, like Ike during his Aether. So trying to hurt him is still not a very good idea.

In other words, he's got constant Super Armor? Great thinking, Sakurai!

 

[Twin Dreams]

I play without smash balls because I want to. I think it is more fun.

I dont like how people generalize the competetive community(though its perfectly acceptable)

I mean I dont want to be told that I should allow SBs when I host a tourney just because you think its
better/more fun. I dont want to get 3 stocked by some luckwhore, even if it seems totally legit to you.

Stereotypes are stereotypes because they are true.



MOST competitive smash players will not play with items on. Therefore, it is appropriate to say "the competitive smash community will not play with items."

Note: Just because you say you are a competitive player, and you come to this board, doesn't make you a competitive player.

 

[Reno>]

random(in when and where they pop up) Smash Balls make Final Smashes possible...

What is a "Final Smash" ?

a "Smash" attack is a powerful melee move used to rack up good damage to an opponent and can be punished if missed

so how can a smash be a "Final" smash?

 

[metaXzero]

After Yuna's post, this thread should have ended (why am I seeing that name so much).

 

[SothE700k]

Well metaXzero, if you ever see someone challenge the nature of Competitive Smash, you'll see Yuna running our way.

 

[Bocom]

I see myself as a competitive casual player:

I like playing for fun, with SBs, Dragoon, items and all that crap turned on.
BUT! I also like playing more seriously, WITHOUT items, SBs and Dragoons.

I know that items unbalance the game when turned on in tournaments, as Yuna has pointed out in several posts (Many which I agree with. There are some posts I disagree about), because I've experienced play with and without items. And I prefer the statement I made above.

The first tournament (currently the only) I played in (coincidently hosted by Yuna) played with items off. This was for Melee in '04, and the same rules apply to Brawl. I love Brawl to bits, as much as I love Melee and 64, but I know that SBs and Dragoons, heck, items in general, need to be banned because, as stated before, it adds to much randomness to the match. And winning a competitive match with items turned on (lol what?) isn't as satisfying as winning a competitive match with items turned off (****** my half-competitive friends with Mario. ).

That's simply how it is. Brawl or not, keep items out of competitive playing in Super Smash Brothers. If you want to play casually, like I do sometimes, then sure, put on items. But not when playing competitively.

I've gone on too long. I just wanted this said, unnecessary or not.

 

[EternalCrusade]

Stereotypes are stereotypes because they are true.

No, you dont know anything about stereostypes

 

[dj_pwn1423]

Stereotypes are stereotypes because they are true.



MOST competitive smash players will not play with items on. Therefore, it is appropriate to say "the competitive smash community will not play with items."

Note: Just because you say you are a competitive player, and you come to this board, doesn't make you a competitive player.

no but I think going frequently to tourneys makes me one...

and wtf Jesus was technically asian, that doesn't mean he looked like this guy:

http://photobucket.com/image/asian/meterfairy1/chuckandlarry_robschneider.jpg?o=67

 

[Dsparil]

I guess people are against it because it would turn Sonic into a high tier character.

 

[Raikage]

The only way to settle this will be to have a few tourneys with smash balls on really. I see a lot of stupid theorycrafting about this and that and all it amounts to is:

"I shoot you in the head!"

"Nuh uh! I shoot you first!"

Get the picture. You can paint scenarios all you want saying this and that, but the only way to find out is to actually see it in action. It's silly that so many people think that you can settle this just by saying "Well, uh, what if *something that has a ridiculously low probability of happening in any high level game* happens! What then!" settles an argument. Come on kids, grow up.

 

[Jennifer Stogner]

I guess I can see your points, but still, you could justify any item by saying that as long as a player is good enough, it shouldn't matter that the item is there, as well as stages.
The SB is better for some characters than others, just like some stages work well with certain characters (not to mention those characters smashes).
If you allow smash balls it's like allowing any stage or item on justification that if the player is good enough he/she can cope.

My only real problem with it is that snowball effect and the fact that some smashes are useless on some stages, like Fox's on Hyrule Temple.

 

[Yuna]

The only way to settle this will be to have a few tourneys with smash balls on really. I see a lot of stupid theorycrafting about this and that and all it amounts to is:

No we don't. Not everything needs to be tested out in tournaments first. Especially not if it's entirely obvious it wouldn't work.

Or should we host at least 100 tournaments with all stages on random first?

"I shoot you in the head!"

"Nuh uh! I shoot you first!"

We say plenty more than that. The fact that you can comprehend it is not our fault.

Get the picture. You can paint scenarios all you want saying this and that, but the only way to find out is to actually see it in action. It's silly that so many people think that you can settle this just by saying "Well, uh, what if *something that has a ridiculously low probability of happening in any high level game* happens! What then!" settles an argument. Come on kids, grow up.

How is this about something with a ridiculously low probability of happening? Final Smashes are inherently broken because of how they're programmed. They will be broken every single time they're used.

Now accept that 200 dollar Dragoon moneymatch already.

I guess I can see your points, but still, you could justify any item by saying that as long as a player is good enough, it shouldn't matter that the item is there, as well as stages.
The SB is better for some characters than others, just like some stages work well with certain characters (not to mention those characters smashes).
If you allow smash balls it's like allowing any stage or item on justification that if the player is good enough he/she can cope.

The two people in a hypotethical battle involving said items and/or stages would not be far off in skill. It would not be Ken vs. someone random n00b (hence, Ken should still win unless the n00b's got all the luck in the world on his side).

We're assuming the two people fighting are of equal skill. A Small Ball appears, whoever gets it first wins. Go deep competitive fighting!

My only real problem with it is that snowball effect and the fact that some smashes are useless on some stages, like Fox's on Hyrule Temple.

Hyrule Temple is banned.

 

[.:DRAKE:.]

I guess I can see your points, but still, you could justify any item by saying that as long as a player is good enough, it shouldn't matter that the item is there, as well as stages.
The SB is better for some characters than others, just like some stages work well with certain characters (not to mention those characters smashes).
If you allow smash balls it's like allowing any stage or item on justification that if the player is good enough he/she can cope.

My only real problem with it is that snowball effect and the fact that some smashes are useless on some stages, like Fox's on Hyrule Temple.

Well... in a tournament, nobody would be playing on Hyrule Temple to begin with...

But you do have a point: on certain stages, some FS's are so useless they're almost detrimental. Like how Marth will readily Critical Hit himself off the stage and into a SD on particularly small stages.

Including Smash Balls in tournament play would only make characters more unbalanced.