Forum:Banned Stages

Forums: Index → Brawl Talk → Banned Stages

Rumble Falls should be banned since it is almost identical to Icicle Mountain, 75m should be banned due to the ledges that cannot be ducked through, New Pork City should also be b& due to Temple like hugeness and under story, The micro games in WarioWare are fun for causal play but really break the action in competition, Mario Bros. shouldn't even really be considered a smash bros stage let alone Tourney legal Knifeblade 00:00, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

you're right. besides, the mario bros stage actually makes items! PeetzaLink 19:04, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Pictochat could be considered fair or unfair. It's kind of like Pokemon Stadium in the way that it changes.

The Pirate Ship would be fine, if it wasn't for the cannon fire from the other pirates.

The Bridge of Eldin is a walk-off stage. The bomb that King Bulbin lays, and the giant hole in the stage after it explodes could also be factors.

Flat Zone 2 is just like Flat Zone 1 --Posted by Pikamander2 (Talk) at 20:24, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

I'm not completely sure yet, but I worry that Mario Circuit will just produce excessive camping, much like Great Bay did in Melee. Also, Spear Pillar is just way to crazy with the random crap that can happen and Mushroomy Kingdom is just Rumble Falls going side to side. Clarinet Hawk 06:20, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

I vote no banning. Thanos6 17:04, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

I vote no banning too. Some people might be better on moving stages. Its unfair on them if they are removed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.11.131.108 (talk • contribs) 18:58, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

No that's dum.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.131.77.96 (talk • contribs) 02:23, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Some stages should be banned due to their inherently chaotic nature. The goal of a tournament is to reward the best player(s) for their skill, not reward the guy who got lucky on on Summit because the fish ate his opponent three times in a row. Whether the stage moves is only a single factor in considering banishment. It can be good, because moving stages require the players adapt constantly, thus, a display of skill. That kind of stage is good. Take then, a stage like Pictochat were practically unpredictable events can tip the balance in a closely contested game. That is bad, because the stage decides the victor, which is a result not derived by skill, which, by extension, is impairing of the goal. For whatever reason, the stages in brawl appear to be far more sympathetic to the random rather than the calculated, so a large number of stages must be banned, including Spear Pillar, Mushroomy Kingdom, 75m, Flat Zone 2, Mario Bros, New Pork City, PictoChat, Rumble Falls, and WarioWare, to name a few and excluding the returning Melee stages. It may be necessary to develop standard stages via the stage editor and require their transmission to all participants in a ladder or tournament, much like is done with other stage/map driven e-sports like Starcraft. Additionally, balance must be considered. Certain stages favor certain movesets and thereby characters. Fox v Marth in Melee on Final Destination, for example, strongly favors Fox because his moves complement flat, long stages. Battlefield, probably the most balanced stage in the game, still favors Marth because of it keeps its players air-born. This usually won't decide a match, but in a close game, it can make the difference. This is the reason Great Bay was banned, because of its disposition toward game-breaking camping, which strongly favored the movesets of characters with whom camping is natural. To keep the game competitive is why stages are banned, and to eliminate wildly unfair advantages or silly random events.Semicolon 03:46, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

I vote for no Banning to, its SUPER SMASH BROS not Street Fighter and nothing is fair anymore. Dark Overlord 04:04, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

The whole POINT of Smash Bros. is to be pure chaos. You aren't supposed to follow the same rigid strategies like in other fighting games, you're supposed to be able to adapt on the fly to whatever happens. Thanos6 04:24, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Pure chaos is for casual games. For tournaments and serious games, where the object is to determine the better player, the stage needs to be controlled.Semicolon 05:11, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

I'm with my crewmate (semicolon) on this; tournaments can't be decide on randomness. Trust me, our crew loves to play crazy games with the smash balls turned on high ("The Octopus and the Motorcycle", anyone?), but when we play in serious matches, we don't want some random crap messing things up. Again, I'm only talking high level ranked play here. When you play for fun, do just that: have fun. If you don't find the competitive side of Smash Bros. enjoyable, you're in the majority. But for those of us who enjoy occasionally seeing who really is the best, we need some kind of measuring stick to prevent the "best" from just being the luckiest. Clarinet Hawk 05:48, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

I have played in tournaments, actually. Did just a week ago or so at a local college. I made it to the second round with items turned off but there was no fun in it, no wonderful mad chaos. Thank God they at least let all stages (save for Custom) be up for grabs. And I still say that going with the chaos and turning it to your advantage is a skill in itself, not luck. Thanos6 06:56, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

A controlled stage(Final Destination, Smashville, etc.) determines only that you are good as a light post but no good under pressure or at different situations (Pictochat, WarioWare, etc.). I don't see anything random (unless its Spear Pillar)crap from most stages. You must adapt to the changes on the battlefield, if you stay like a sitting duck or won't change, you are as good as dead. Some stages that I think need the "axed" are:

• Final Destination: The stage is smaller and no other platform is present.Turtling characters are perfect and almost untouchable if the routine is executed perfectly(a la Arcana Heart's combos, try to get unstuck from those...), and fights can take even 10 min if both players are shield dodging. The fight tends to goes to the first one who gets the opportunity to juggle since no other platform is present to help you. I called this stage the Noob Pratice Stage since its the perfect to practice with any character.
• New Pork City: Too big and awful in Point Matches. The target tends to run away when the odds are in his favor.In this lineup also falls Temple and 75m.
• Rumble Falls: Heavy characters can't move at the same pace as the stage. Try going up all the way with Ganondorf.
• Skyworld: Same problem as in the Zelda stage, the Harbor in Melee.
• Flatzone 2: Stage is too little.
• Hanenbow: The battle goes to the "platformers":Mario,Pit,Metaknight,etc. Too much jumping around.
• Mario Bros.:The stage's items can smash players way too early, at 25-30%, a shell can have a very devastating knockout...just watch how the CPU plays. Maybe a laugh when playing Point Matches, in a 3 min fight you can rack up to 10 pts if the other players aren't using them.
• Spear Pillar: A pokémon that will change the stage can stay there up to 3 minutes. Slow, Confusion(controls), gravity, boomerang attack, lasers,etc, using this for an early elimination in Stock Matches. Very good at Point Matches since the stage isn't too big and the pokemons can be used to your advantage to rack some lost pts or to steal them from someone.

Basically I have this stages removed from the random lineup. I have the custom stages turned on, some of those stages are great, I mean classic stages from the past like the Mushroom Kingdom stage from N64.--CyberDarkEdge 12:50, 22 April 2008 (UTC) I vote no banning, this is Smash Bros. if I want "legal" rules, then I do a Street Fighter tornament, because Smash Bros. "legal" tournaments are really boring and limited. You're thinking about the best, but this is a multiplayer, this isn't for win or lose, this is for haqve fun and see how are your skills, and if you want dominate the Smash World, you have to dominate all the stages --Jigglypuff is God 13:59, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Subjective opinion about what is 'fun' and what isn't does not constitute tournament policy. If you don't think it's fun, don't play in other peoples' tournaments. For the other part, some stages have challenges that require adaptation, and thus those should be retained, but a large number of stages have properties that affect gameplay and are either unpredictable, deadly, or otherwise extremely detrimental to competitive play. In addition, there seems to be some confusion here about the exact meaning of 'ban'. The proposed bans are not on your casual play, so anecdotal opinions about casual play are irrelevant for this discussion. The proposed bans are in respect to high level serious tournament play. In some of the stages, it is possible to be the dominate player in every aspect of the game and still lose because of the stage. I've seen it happen many, many times, and it has absolutely nothing to do with skill level. This is what is avoided by banning stages.Semicolon 15:59, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

NO BANNING!!! omg... a tournament is to decide who is the best player of the game from all the participants, right? alright well lets say someone is playing samus against a team of mario and sonic on the temple stage which has alot of controversy over banning. mario picks up a bob-omb and sonic picks up a super scope, sonic charges the super scope and fires at the same time mario jumps above samus and throws the bob-omb downward, so it looks like this

*=bob-omb  -- or |=floor or wall 0=fully charged super scope shot 

==================================================
mario
*
samus                0          sonic
==================================================

now if samus were able to wall jump off the stand next to her and hit mario in some way and then use one of her long range attacks to still hit sonic does that not make that player a good player? or if she had dodged both of those and then sonic had thrown the super scope itself at her, hitting her, giving mario a chance to take her out, doesnt that make them good players too? use of items and stage elements can be what proves how good of a player you are not just what combos you can manage to pull off on a totally flat stage with no items.i am completely against banning... anything... whether it be stages items and ESPECIALLY CHARACTERS!!! WTF IS THAT?! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.227.25.86 (talk • contribs) 21:34, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

You know, you might be more convincing if you got off cocaine. Also:

• No tournaments have items.
• No 2 on 1.
• No one bans characters, silly boy.
  

Runer5h 14:58, 8 May 2008 (UTC)Runer5h

It's true on how hazards can become a problem, but think, a player who can attack and has good skill is fighting a character who is exceptional at dodging said hazards (tactics). Now, whenever the stage changes, it almost always turns out to be a bad thing for the first player, now, who would win? The second player, as the hazards would prove that the first player only has one tactic, beat them to the ground at all times. Now it's also true on how large stages can be a problem when the winning player is running, trying to wait until the time expires. So I really don't like that, but again tactics, think, a stage like temple might be bad, but a stage like New Pork town has the Ultimate Chimera, so if they are evading you, and they are where the Ultimate Chimera would be, they must think now. That Chimera is blocking their path, so now, you can get them, so think, a large stage like Temple has no hazards to make them change their tactics, but New Pork City does, plus one occasional moving platform (the limo seen near the bottom of the stage and in the background). 75M has more hazards, and is smaller, so you must constatly change tactics. The Summit has the fish, but some new strageties, one, jump at the right time, two, learn how not to stumble, and three, learn to use the extra platforms. I'll add more points later. Learner4 23:35, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

As much as i agree that some stages are unfair for tournaments, i find it pretty sad that people are trying to take all the fun out of the game! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.13.100.161 (talk • contribs) 22:55, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

I think that these stages should definitely be legal:

• Final Destination
• Battlefield
• Smashville
• Lylat Cruise (I call it Pleiades)
• Pokemon Stadium 1 and 2
• Yoshi's Island Brawl
  

Others are up for grabs. However, a tournament I play at has different rules: Battlefield, unless both players can agree on somewhere else. I like that better. Runer5h 15:45, 12 May 2008 (UTC)Runer5h

Battlefield? Doesn't really favor the likes of Samus, Olly, etc., now does it?75.132.241.196 23:25, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Well, in other tourneys it may be another stage (Final Destination, most likely), but the point is that you can play at any stage so long as both players agree. Oh, and why does Battlefield not favor Olimar and Samus? It really wouldn't favor people like Yoshi and Toon Link, who are so short that they can't hit people on the platforms above them. However, that's besides the point. Runer5h 19:33, 13 May 2008 (UTC)Runer5h

Well, there is one thing short characters can do. They can short hop and then hit the opponent with an aerial. This will gain them enough height to camp under a platform while avoiding enemy attacks all at the same time. Basically, I don't think Battlefield favors or disfavors anybody. In my opinion, it's the fairest stage in the game. Battlefield should definitely not be banned, along with Final Destination. I'm in favor of the agreement rule: any stage can be played on as long as both competitors agree on it. - GalaxiaD 20:49, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

While I do like the idea of the agreement rule in principal, as a tournament organizer it can be a nightmare. I recently ran a doubles tournament with a mutual veto rule when picking random stages (if both teams agree, the stage is re-picked). This created some situations where one team would move to veto, and the other team would not veto simply because they knew their opponents hated the stage. Then I had to deal with the other team whining to me for the rest of the tournament about the stage and the veto rule. I've found that limiting stages (and banning items) ultimately makes the most people happy because it removes any complaints about "random" things killing people (even if it wasn't random). Trust me, I love ridiculous games as much as the next person, but when I'm hosting a tournament I don't want to listen to people complain (and trust, me they do). Finally, when people are playing for money, as is often the case in tournaments, I want it to be a test of skill, not a luck of the draw type event. At all of my tournaments we keep at least one system going for free play with whatever people want in the games. Lots of people come just to play there. But in the serious matches, we need some way to prevent random outcomes. Clarinet Hawk 23:42, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Well, we don't randomize stages, we just let both players see if they can decide at the outset, and if not, you go to a predetermined stage. But I see what you mean - maybe there should be a minute-long time limit for mutual decisions. And if someone don't like the stage that they themselves picked, then too damn bad for them. But yeah, items should under no circumstances be allowed. Runer5h 15:12, 15 May 2008 (UTC)Runer5h

Items really should be allowed, but taking out explosives removes that luck factor, so containers, regular hammers, bombs, gooey bombs, smart bombs, etc, should be removed, final smashes MUST be allowed, as this is where this game gets Brawl. Most characters need their final smashes to be even. Think, Olimar is a poor character, but his final smash gets him up in higher teirs. Think about those weaker characters, Bowswer is too slow, so Giga Bowser must kill them (MUAHAHAHA Time to DIE!). Items are useful, and I think they shouldn't be banned, only the exploding one are to be removed. Learner4 17:30, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

With only Smash Balls turned on, even at tiem frequency=low, a Smash Ball pops up once a minute. If the game could be hacked to make them appear once a match or something, all well and good, but otherwise, no Smash Balls. In my opinion, the other items shouldn't be allowed in any case. Runer5h (talk) 14:58, 27 May 2008 (UTC)Runer5h

Stages that I'm fine with:

• Final Destination
• Battlefield
• Delfino Plaza
• Mushroomy Kingdom 1-1 (not as chaotic as Rumble Falls and doesn't have annoying spikes)
• Lylat Cruise
• Pokemon Stadium 2
• Yoshi Island (Brawl)
• Frigate Orpheon
• Smashville
• Pokemon Stadium

I wouldn't mind the rest of the stages getting banned, because ten is already a lot of stages to choose from. --TStick (talk) 03:08, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Final Smashes aren't needed to make most of the characters even. Bowser now runs as fast as Mario, and Olimar isn't THAT bad. Maybe Sonic, but he can already hold well enough without his Final Smash. If Final Smashes were on, then it would be all about getting the Smash Ball before your opponent does, since they are overpowered. --TStick (talk) 23:06, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Created Stages

So, what would you say the rule is on these? The "mutual agreement" thing again? Runer5h (talk) 15:06, 27 May 2008 (UTC)Runer5h

I'd say that created stages shouldn't be allowed under any circumstances. A created stage is one that favors the creator. Therefore, it would follow that the creator would have more experience and knowledge of the stage, giving him an unfair advantage over his or her opponent. The opponent would not have as much experience or knowledge. Statistically speaking, the opponent would lose more often than the creator, unless the opponent has a quick learning curve. Long story short: NO CREATED STAGES! - GalaxiaD (talk) 17:24, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

Your reasoning is in the wrong order. And what makes you think that the creator of a stage is favored on it? I main Olimar, and one of my favorite stages - which I made - has no ledges. Or what if the creator wasn't playing in the match? Runer5h (talk) 19:07, 27 May 2008 (UTC)Runer5h

If the creator's not playing in the match, then I suppose it changes some things. Other than that, though, created stages still can't be trusted. The reason for this being that you won't know what it looks like until you select it for a match. What if it's a crazy stage with insane obstacles? Stages like that wouldn't be allowed for tournament play. Granted, if one made a stage that was not too big, had no traps, and was simple in design, then it may be considered for fights. But in all honesty, the Stage Builder feature was put in Brawl so that one could unleash their creativity and build as crazy of a stage as one wished. Building a boring and generic stage takes all the fun out of it, rendering it pointless. Also, a created stage can favor the creator if he or she knows of some secret trick that only the creator can perform, since the opponent would not have played on it and therefore would not know of this trick prior to the match. There are several ways in which a created stage can be deceptive, and this is why they should be banned. - GalaxiaD (talk) 00:31, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

I think created stages are okay if they are made to look like previously playable stages (fourside, yoshi island 64, princess peaches castle, ect.) - Cree318 27 April 208 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cree318 (talk • contribs) 02:13, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

As long as both competitors have access to the stage beforehand the stage can't really be deceptive. 68.203.163.24 08:42, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

I think that there should be universally accepted created stages, everyone has them and knows them. For example, a stage is created, after much consideration, that does not favor any characters, and all the tournaments have the exact same stage. Maxiscool (talk) 01:19, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

why is Shadow Moses Island banned? DRTJR (talk) 01:42, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

If you look at the Banned stage article, you can see reasons for why stages are banned. The reason given for Shadow Moses Island is: "Removes three of the four blast lines; walls allow infinites". This refers to two features of the stage: firstly, that there is no lower blast line, so spiking is not possible; secondly the two towers on either side prevent any KOs other than Star KOs (unless they are destroyed, which wouldn't normally happen in a tournament as you've got to actively attack them to destroy them, and professionals don't have the time to do that) and the towers act as walls, and a lot of infinites are made possible by the presence of a wall, and infinites don't make for good competitive play, they make for boring repetitive play. For the above reasons, Shadow Moses Island has been completely banned in all major competitions. PenguinofDeath 08:30, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

I say they need to unban mushroomy kingdom because they didnt ban poke float and the reason they ban it is its side scrolling

I say custom stages shouldn't be allowed. You cannot turn specific stages off in the random select options, and only one of the players knows about it. Plus there are a ton of goofy stages out there. Solar flute (talk)