Hey my name is
Big Sean
. I am one of 2 Bowser's to make it out of pools at evo. I've watched the rules bowsercide rules debate get more and more nuanced and complicated. I've read every comment I can find and have considered a ton of arguments This is my attempt at the most thorough unbiased description of the current state of this rule.
This document is designed both for discussion about the rule as well as a reference for TO's to get get caught up on the discussion in case you are asked to make a ruling.
Flying Slam Introduction
Bowser's side + b is a command grab that kills opponents ~130%. It's arguably Bowser's most important kill move. In addition the move can be controlled to bring both players offstage. With some minor exceptions, the player with the lower percentage (aka the winning player) decides which direction the Flying Slam will go. How far an opponent can force the opponent offstage is directly related to the difference in percentages of the players. For instance to pull someone offstage when hugging the edge might only need a percentage difference of 15%. From center stage it might require a difference of 90%.
What makes the subject complicated is that when flying slam is pulled offstage, the winner is undefined. What exactly happens at the result screen has changed over time.
A History of Bowsercide
Historically Suicide KO's have been given to the initiator regardless of what the results screen says. This was because port priority and ganoncide inconsistincies would occasionally cause KO moves to lose in buggy ways. Since the initiator of the move actually got the read to make the suicide KO, it was believed that he deserved the win regardless of the win screen.
Since 1.04 there has been has been some interest in revisiting the rule specifically for Bowser. Some people that the move is easier to perform than ganoncide and so doesn't always deserve a win. Others believe that the rule should be changed because occassionaly characters can come back from a bowsercide (https://gfycat.com/RectangularFlusteredHummingbird.)
Regardless of the reason, most locals, regionals and nationals have unique rules. Some tournaments try to avoid the situation entirely by not issuing a rule. This is a bad idea. Even if you don't issue a ruling, you are implicitly giving a rule. Implicit rules are almost always worse than than just committing to a ruling, as I will demonstrate.
My ultimate goal is to simply have TO's and players aware of what the different kinds of rulings mean. Ideally tournaments in the future TO's will choose rules that aren't considered bad, and ideally considered good, but I'm not going to hold my breath lol.
Rules that follow the results screen
There really is only one rule that follows the results screen. If the the results screen names a winner, that person is named the winner. If it goes to sudden death, then sudden death is played. We can call this "The For Glory Rule." No TO would actually use this rule but its useful to study this rule to see how other rules compare to it.
Let's say we are in a last stock situation and both players have a perfect understanding of Bowsercide. We can do a pseudo game-theory analysis of what we expect to happen. Here we are assuming the player with the lower percentage always gets a bowsercide if they want one and the randomness of bowsercide is a tie 50% of the time.
if opponent is winning -> they won't risk losing their advantage by bowserciding. There is a 50% chance that they end up in a janky sudden death situation, whereas there chances of winning when they are ahead are greater than 50%.
if bowser is winning -> bowser won't risk losing his advantage because a bowsercide has a greater than 50% chance of losing.
end result -> because both players are avoiding bowsercide, bowsercide itself is never viable. In addition the flying slam move itself is always viable on the last stock.
Flying slam being viable on the last stock is not a property of all the rules as we will see. I consider "The For Glory Rule" jank but fair. Jank because bom-oms decide who wins. Fair because flying slam, being bowser's most useful kill move, is still intact.
Rules that ignore the results screen in the case of a tie
Bowser loses in the event of a tie (aka "bowser always loses")
Let's do the same kind of game theory analysis on this rule:
if opponent is winning -> they will always go for the bowsercide. there is nothing to lose, and the stock to gain.
if bowser is winning -> bowser should never go for the bowsercide.
end result -> flying slam will only be used by bowser when he's ahead. Bowsercide is still in play but only for the opponent.
Compared to the "For Glory Rule" baseline this is actually a nerf for bowser. It all has to do with his most important kill move being removed 50% of the time and specifically not useful in any clutch situation. A comparison can be made by saying that Nario's ZSS can only use up + b when he's already winning.
Pros
Person with lower percentage wins in the event of a tie (aka "The Implicit Rule")
This is the rule that TO's decide on, when they don't decide on a rule. When you do the game theory analysis you get the same results as Bowser loses every time. Namely Flying Slam is nerfed, and Bowsercide is only useful for the opponent. I recommend that if you use "The Implicit Rule" to actually make it explicit in your rules. There have been cases where no rule was written but the intention was something else entirely. Don't make your Sub-TO's forced to make a incorrect call based on a incomplete value judgement.
Pros
Cons
Replay as 1 stock 3 minutes
This is the modern version of "The For Glory Rule." The game theory analysis is identical, but it feels less jank since bom oms aren't involved.
Pros
Neutral
Cons
Bowser wins in the event of a tie
This has the same game theory analysis as "The For Glory Rule" but makes it even more unlikely that the opponent will go for a Bowsercide.
Pros
Neutral
Cons
Rules that ignore the results screen every time:
The sketchy thing about these rules is that occassionally the results screen will say one person wins, but the ruling says another. The positive part of this though is that you get consistent rulings outside of buginess and RNG. I think in general people prefer rulings where there is no RNG. After all there is a reason we are moving away from Halberd in the stage strike list. There is also a reason why we don't use the bomb-omb sudden death mode, and I think a lot of it has to do with random jank rulings.
I think it's important to note the past 4 rules I enumerated also ignored the results screen. The difference was that instead of ignoring wins, we ignored ties. If you are able to overcome the dissonance of ignoring wins, then these next rules might be for you.
Lower percentage wins regardless of the results screen
The game theory analysis is interesting. It nerfs flying slam like some of the other options we saw before. However this is the only rule that makes Bowsercide useful for both the opponent and for Bowser. This is actually a really interesting rule. Overall I think it's a nerf to Bowser, but it is a consistent no rng-ruling that keeps around some of the interesting play of Bowsercide for Bowser.
Pros
Neutral
Cons
Bowser wins regardless of the results screen
This is true to the rule nintendo had before the magicant bug fix. You can make an argument that this was Nintendo's intended rule and everything else after that was a bug. This version also appeals to the player believe that the initiator deserves the win. The game theory analysis again is unique. In a last stock situation, it is never in the opponent's favor to suicide. Bowsercide is a threat for the initiator, just like lower percentage wins. Also flying slam even if it doesn't result in a bowsercide is constantly a useful tool, even in clutch situations.
Pros
Neutral
Cons
The match always goes to a 1 stock 3 minute match regardless of the results screen
This rule makes about as much sense as Bowser Always Loses from a "Nintendo's Intent" perspective. It doesn't fall into the pitfall of arbitrarily nerfing Flying Slam however. If you are looking for a consistent ruling that stays close to the behavior of the game, this is as close as it comes.
Pros
Neutral
Cons
Conclusions
Overall there is no perfect rule. You'll have to decide what kinds of values you personally care about and go from there. The things you want to consider are:
Addendum
My super biased ruling tier list
This document is designed both for discussion about the rule as well as a reference for TO's to get get caught up on the discussion in case you are asked to make a ruling.
Flying Slam Introduction
Bowser's side + b is a command grab that kills opponents ~130%. It's arguably Bowser's most important kill move. In addition the move can be controlled to bring both players offstage. With some minor exceptions, the player with the lower percentage (aka the winning player) decides which direction the Flying Slam will go. How far an opponent can force the opponent offstage is directly related to the difference in percentages of the players. For instance to pull someone offstage when hugging the edge might only need a percentage difference of 15%. From center stage it might require a difference of 90%.
What makes the subject complicated is that when flying slam is pulled offstage, the winner is undefined. What exactly happens at the result screen has changed over time.
A History of Bowsercide
Bowsercide RulingsPre 1.04 - Bowser won every time. At equal percentages players had equal control. There was a bug involving magicant where Bowser would fall forever: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=llwSOCOhJ_8
1.04 - Magicant bug was fixed. Now Bowser either loses or ties depending on the stage. On the stages he loses, some characters with high vertical recoveries can recover back to the stage. About half the omegas cause a loss and half cause a tie. Many stages with platforms have Bowser winning on the main stage but losing if starting from the air or a platform
1.06 - Bowser was given significantly more control over flying slam.
1.1.1 - When Bowser dies or ties or ties is now entirely random. Stages Bowser use to lose every time now allow him to tie. Stages where Bowser used to tie every time now allow him to occasionally lose. Platforms don’t seem to affect this behavior.
New Random Behavior: http://gfycat.com/MeagerSkinnyAnteater
Historically Suicide KO's have been given to the initiator regardless of what the results screen says. This was because port priority and ganoncide inconsistincies would occasionally cause KO moves to lose in buggy ways. Since the initiator of the move actually got the read to make the suicide KO, it was believed that he deserved the win regardless of the win screen.
Since 1.04 there has been has been some interest in revisiting the rule specifically for Bowser. Some people that the move is easier to perform than ganoncide and so doesn't always deserve a win. Others believe that the rule should be changed because occassionaly characters can come back from a bowsercide (https://gfycat.com/RectangularFlusteredHummingbird.)
Regardless of the reason, most locals, regionals and nationals have unique rules. Some tournaments try to avoid the situation entirely by not issuing a rule. This is a bad idea. Even if you don't issue a ruling, you are implicitly giving a rule. Implicit rules are almost always worse than than just committing to a ruling, as I will demonstrate.
My ultimate goal is to simply have TO's and players aware of what the different kinds of rulings mean. Ideally tournaments in the future TO's will choose rules that aren't considered bad, and ideally considered good, but I'm not going to hold my breath lol.
Rules that follow the results screen
There really is only one rule that follows the results screen. If the the results screen names a winner, that person is named the winner. If it goes to sudden death, then sudden death is played. We can call this "The For Glory Rule." No TO would actually use this rule but its useful to study this rule to see how other rules compare to it.
Let's say we are in a last stock situation and both players have a perfect understanding of Bowsercide. We can do a pseudo game-theory analysis of what we expect to happen. Here we are assuming the player with the lower percentage always gets a bowsercide if they want one and the randomness of bowsercide is a tie 50% of the time.
if opponent is winning -> they won't risk losing their advantage by bowserciding. There is a 50% chance that they end up in a janky sudden death situation, whereas there chances of winning when they are ahead are greater than 50%.
if bowser is winning -> bowser won't risk losing his advantage because a bowsercide has a greater than 50% chance of losing.
end result -> because both players are avoiding bowsercide, bowsercide itself is never viable. In addition the flying slam move itself is always viable on the last stock.
Flying slam being viable on the last stock is not a property of all the rules as we will see. I consider "The For Glory Rule" jank but fair. Jank because bom-oms decide who wins. Fair because flying slam, being bowser's most useful kill move, is still intact.
Rules that ignore the results screen in the case of a tie
Bowser loses in the event of a tie (aka "bowser always loses")
Let's do the same kind of game theory analysis on this rule:
if opponent is winning -> they will always go for the bowsercide. there is nothing to lose, and the stock to gain.
if bowser is winning -> bowser should never go for the bowsercide.
end result -> flying slam will only be used by bowser when he's ahead. Bowsercide is still in play but only for the opponent.
Compared to the "For Glory Rule" baseline this is actually a nerf for bowser. It all has to do with his most important kill move being removed 50% of the time and specifically not useful in any clutch situation. A comparison can be made by saying that Nario's ZSS can only use up + b when he's already winning.
Pros
- There is a pure consistent ruling. Instead of a random number generator deciding the match, both players can have a game plan at all times and know what will happen when they make a decision. Compared to the "For Glory Rule" it's like moving from the last transformation of Halberd to omega Halberd. Most people, but not everyone, prefer RNG jank-less rules.
- Some people believe that instead of the current bowsercide behavior being a big bug, the behavior of bowsercide hints that maybe nintendo intended for the balance of bowsercide to be Bowser always loses. Maybe just the sudden death is a bug? People who believe this may prefer this ruling since it would mean that this rule is as close to what nintendo ended as possible.
- Arbitrarily nerfs Bowser more than the "For Glory Rule" baseline.
Person with lower percentage wins in the event of a tie (aka "The Implicit Rule")
This is the rule that TO's decide on, when they don't decide on a rule. When you do the game theory analysis you get the same results as Bowser loses every time. Namely Flying Slam is nerfed, and Bowsercide is only useful for the opponent. I recommend that if you use "The Implicit Rule" to actually make it explicit in your rules. There have been cases where no rule was written but the intention was something else entirely. Don't make your Sub-TO's forced to make a incorrect call based on a incomplete value judgement.
Pros
- Can be seen as fair since the rules are the rules that anyone else uses for every other case in the tournament.
Cons
- RNG decides the results
- Unnecessary nerf to Flying Slam.
Replay as 1 stock 3 minutes
This is the modern version of "The For Glory Rule." The game theory analysis is identical, but it feels less jank since bom oms aren't involved.
Pros
- This is a common tiebreaking rule just like "The Implicit Rule" but this time doesn't unnecessarily nerf flying slam.
Neutral
- Removes bowsercide from smart play, which presumably means nobody will bug the TO about what to do if it happens.
Cons
- RNG decides the results
Bowser wins in the event of a tie
This has the same game theory analysis as "The For Glory Rule" but makes it even more unlikely that the opponent will go for a Bowsercide.
Pros
- If you believe the initiator deserves the win, but aren't quite willing to say that he deserves the win even when the screen says he lost, this might be the rule to use.
Neutral
- Bowsercide is out of the equation for ideal play.
Cons
- RNG decides the results.
Rules that ignore the results screen every time:
The sketchy thing about these rules is that occassionally the results screen will say one person wins, but the ruling says another. The positive part of this though is that you get consistent rulings outside of buginess and RNG. I think in general people prefer rulings where there is no RNG. After all there is a reason we are moving away from Halberd in the stage strike list. There is also a reason why we don't use the bomb-omb sudden death mode, and I think a lot of it has to do with random jank rulings.
I think it's important to note the past 4 rules I enumerated also ignored the results screen. The difference was that instead of ignoring wins, we ignored ties. If you are able to overcome the dissonance of ignoring wins, then these next rules might be for you.
Lower percentage wins regardless of the results screen
The game theory analysis is interesting. It nerfs flying slam like some of the other options we saw before. However this is the only rule that makes Bowsercide useful for both the opponent and for Bowser. This is actually a really interesting rule. Overall I think it's a nerf to Bowser, but it is a consistent no rng-ruling that keeps around some of the interesting play of Bowsercide for Bowser.
Pros
- No RNG/Consistent Rules.
Neutral
- Bowserciding is a viable option for both competitors.
Cons
- Flying Slam is unnecessarily nerfed.
Bowser wins regardless of the results screen
This is true to the rule nintendo had before the magicant bug fix. You can make an argument that this was Nintendo's intended rule and everything else after that was a bug. This version also appeals to the player believe that the initiator deserves the win. The game theory analysis again is unique. In a last stock situation, it is never in the opponent's favor to suicide. Bowsercide is a threat for the initiator, just like lower percentage wins. Also flying slam even if it doesn't result in a bowsercide is constantly a useful tool, even in clutch situations.
Pros
- No RNG/Consistent Rules.
- Flying Slam is not unnecessarily nerfed.
Neutral
- Bowserciding is back but only for the initiator
Cons
- Many people consider Bowser undeserving of the win when the screen says he lost.
The match always goes to a 1 stock 3 minute match regardless of the results screen
This rule makes about as much sense as Bowser Always Loses from a "Nintendo's Intent" perspective. It doesn't fall into the pitfall of arbitrarily nerfing Flying Slam however. If you are looking for a consistent ruling that stays close to the behavior of the game, this is as close as it comes.
Pros
- No RNG/Consistent Rules.
- Flying Slam is not unnecessarily nerfed.
Neutral
- Bowserciding is out of the meta. This could be seen as a pro because it means that regardless of how you feel about Bowsercide, you will never actually see it happen if the Bowser is smart.
Cons
- May extend the runtime of a tournament. This isn't a huge concern because if both players are playing optimally a Bowsercide should never occur.
Conclusions
Overall there is no perfect rule. You'll have to decide what kinds of values you personally care about and go from there. The things you want to consider are:
- Do you prefer a rule that allows competitors to consistently know their options regardless of RNG?
- Do you prefer a rule that respects the results screen when the game declares a winner?
- Is it ok that Flying Slam is artifically nerfed by the ruling?
- Does the initiator of the suicide KO deserve the win?
- Is it ok that Suicide KO's are a part of the meta?
- Is it ok that only Bowser can benefit from a suicide KO in a last stock scenario?
- Is it ok that only Bowser's opponent can benefit from a suicide KO in a last stock scenario?
Addendum
My super biased ruling tier list
S+ Tier:
A Tier:
- Initiator Wins. Ignore results screen.
B Tier:
- All matches go to a 1 stock 3 minute match. Ignore results screen.
- Initiator Wins in the event of a tie.
B- Tier:
- In the event of a tie play a 3 minute 1 stock match.
- Lower % wins. Ignore results screen.
Trash Tier:
- In the event of a tie lower % wins
- In the event of a tie, initiator loses.
Last edited: