Item Legality Poll

[LiteralGrill]

It's a straight up 2 answer poll, what do people think? Give your reasons below!

 

[Xiivi]

As someone who rigorously tested items at Brawl's release: I don't see the fundamental issue with items being changed in a manner that would lead to them ever being legal. Brawl had stepped things up a notch with item spawn location probabilities skewed towards the losing player; and I can't see Sakurai going the two steps towards standardized item spawning necessary to make them viable in a competitive environment.

 

[LiteralGrill]

As someone who rigorously tested items at Brawl's release: I don't see the fundamental issue with items being changed in a manner that would lead to them ever being legal. Brawl had stepped things up a notch with item spawn location probabilities skewed towards the losing player; and I can't see Sakurai going the two steps towards standardized item spawning necessary to make them viable in a competitive environment.

I can;t say I'm 100% sure on this, but I remember the item spawning next to the losing player thing being debunked at some point, I'll try to find it. But the rest I understand. I really just am curious to see if anyone out there still holds interest in items and if it may be a thing of contention again.

Edit: Made sure to vote, I admit I'd like to see them looked at especially with how unsure things may be for competitive 3DS, this might be the version to give it a go so more players feel more welcomed and comfortable coming into competitive play as it feels more like how they play at home.

 

[SmashChu]

As someone who rigorously tested items at Brawl's release: I don't see the fundamental issue with items being changed in a manner that would lead to them ever being legal. Brawl had stepped things up a notch with item spawn location probabilities skewed towards the losing player; and I can't see Sakurai going the two steps towards standardized item spawning necessary to make them viable in a competitive environment.

That means you should go fight your enemy. If the items spawn close to the losing players, you have a good idea of where they are going to be. If the winning player wants to camp, he'll give up his advantage willingly. It encourages players to fight and map control becomes far more important. There is nothing inherently wrong with items. It's more the community's stubbornness.

 

[mimgrim]

I remember you asking something like this in the Smash 4 Wii-U social thread. I'll just post here what I replied to you with.

While I'm not against ISP, I don't care for most of the items in Smash games. Believe it or not I find most of them incredibly boring to use. In fact the only items I like are Mr. Saturn, Peach's Turnips, ZSS Armor Pieces, ect... Basically items whose sole reasons are meant to be thrown while the items having different properties. The reason I find only those kinds of items fun is because Imo they add a certain strategic depth that I find other items lack. So if we got more items like that I wouldn't mind SP, but otherwise I won't go near it with a ten foot pole. I'm weird.

So I can't really pick an option in that poll.

 

[Burning Boom]

Imo, some items are just way too OP versus traditional methods of attack, and some are way too OP period.

 

[LiteralGrill]

Imo, some items are just way too OP versus traditional methods of attack, and some are way too OP period.

That's why you would test them to see if they were too intrusive though.

 

[Diddy Kong]

Items will always randomly spawn, and interrupt whatever is going on in the actual fight. Faster characters also have an immediate advantage due to reaching the item faster, as do characters with reflection abilities. I say, ban immediately like we've been doing for years. The competitive scene won't ever allow them.

Casual matches are still free for everyone to enjoy though. Just don't complain that items don't make part of a ruleset that's actually focussed on fighting your opponent and beating them with skill, not random chance.

 

[Morbi]

Immediately banning something that we don't understand is clearly the more logical option.

I agree with Diddy Kong to an extent, the items can be entirely balanced and fair, yet still be banned as it further complicates the game. That is my perspective, it is a new concept, a new aspect of the game that competitive players are not going to welcome even if it is plausible. However, I do not think banning items without at least having the decency to test them is a rational notion.

 

[Burning Boom]

That's why you would test them to see if they were too intrusive though.

I honestly don't feel testing is needed. Hammer and Starman alone are enough to illustrate my point, and there are many other items that are just as, if not more intrusive in the N64 game alone, and there are only more items like this in each game. Testing couldn't HURT, but I think it would be a waste of time and effort.

 

[Morbi]

I honestly don't feel testing is needed. Hammer and Starman alone are enough to illustrate my point, and there are many other items that are just as, if not more intrusive in the N64 game alone, and there are only more items like this in each game. Testing couldn't HURT, but I think it would be a waste of time and effort.

Testing items literally just entails playing with items on... how is that waste time or effort? It would be like Injustice did, testing with interactables on for the first month or so, if players don't want to participate, they don't have to. What if Hammer and Starman aren't in the game? Not only that, but Hammer is EXTREMELY easy to counter, it even has a chance to "fail". Starman can be the exception, there will probably be an option to ban items individually, just like the previous installments.

 

[SmashChu]

I honestly don't feel testing is needed. Hammer and Starman alone are enough to illustrate my point, and there are many other items that are just as, if not more intrusive in the N64 game alone, and there are only more items like this in each game. Testing couldn't HURT, but I think it would be a waste of time and effort.

Starman and Hammer are just two items. You can't base an argument on that along.

 

[Burning Boom]

Testing items literally just entails playing with items on... how is that waste time or effort? It would be like Injustice did, testing with interactables on for the first month or so, if players don't want to participate, they don't have to. What if Hammer and Starman aren't in the game? Not only that, but Hammer is EXTREMELY easy to counter, it even has a chance to "fail". Starman can be the exception, there will probably be an option to ban items individually, just like the previous installments.

First of all, those two aren't the only OP items, just the obvious examples (some more would be Bomb-omb, Poke Ball, Fan, Warp Star, Home Run Bat (moving into later than N64 now) Dragoon, Smart Bomb, Gooey Bomb, Deku Nut, the invisibility thing (don't remember the name), Golden Hammer, and many, many more). Also, I would bet hundreds of thousands of dollars that I don't have that Sakurai will keep those items (Starman and Hammer) in the game, and make no effort to balance them. It'd be like taking the Blue Shell out of Mario Kart. Sure, the game would be more based on skill, but it's there for chaos, fun, trolling, and it's iconic.

When testing something, you also have to be thinking and deliberating a good bit, and I don't think that it's worth the thought. Sakurai will never balance items, and if he ever does do it I'll run through the streets naked and upload it to Youtube.

 

[Knight Dude]

I have no issues with items, seeing as I don't play on a competitive level. And I find they can make a fight more interesting at times.

However, I do understand why they are banned for those that enjoy the competitive scene. One player could be playing as let's say....Megaman, and the other as Mario. And right as Megaman shoots with his buster, a random capsule pops up in front of him and blows up, now the guy or girl playing as Megaman has 30% damage that was caused by luck of all things. Doesn't exactly sound fair to me, granted stuff happens, and if its just a fight for fun, then it's okay.

But in competitive play, whether its a fighter, a shooter, a puzzle game, or an MMO, should rely solely on the skill of the players playing said game. So any luck based mechanic, like items, shouldn't need to be in a tournament. Which can be turned off luckily. And the only major factor that was getting in the way before was tripping. Now that's gone as well.

So, no. Don't even bother testing them honestly, they are too random for things like tournaments.

 

[Thor]

First, I'd still like no-item tournaments available (and not relegated to the side). If items legal meant they were at every tournament and no tournament had no items rules, then **** items-legal.

BUT if both are offered (or it's a TO thing, not universal) I don't see a problem with turning reasonable items on (in my opinion 5 example items are Lip's Stick, Beam Sword (I think), Bananas, Mr. Saturn, and Smoke Balls - this list is DEFINITELY not comprehensive). I know there's a thread in the Brawl forums about reasonable items and CPing vs Banning vs Neutral items - we'd definitely need that discussion (I wouldn't want to fight where my opponent gets a hammer on FD if I chose to main Ganondorf unless planking was back... and that means planking is back... which is probably not a good thing...). But tournaments with certain items on would be interesting to watch and wouldn't be bad to play in, as long as people can still do more "regular" (due to current standards) tournaments (because I have no problem with Fox no items FD or MK no items SV or Pika no items Dreamland, and the tournaments are WAY more than just those fights).

EDIT: The reason I don't shut items out fully is because they attract some people into Smash, which is good. That said, the element of randomness can still be VERY annoying (I could learn to live with it if there were separate tournaments, but I would choose no item tournaments only over item tournaments only all day every day because at the heart of the matter, it may be that a beam sword saves your *** while a smoke ball would have done nothing and the other player would have won, which means luck did come into deciding that match).

 

[LiteralGrill]

However, I do understand why they are banned for those that enjoy the competitive scene. One player could be playing as let's say....Megaman, and the other as Mario. And right as Megaman shoots with his buster, a random capsule pops up in front of him and blows up, now the guy or girl playing as Megaman has 30% damage that was caused by luck of all things. Doesn't exactly sound fair to me, granted stuff happens, and if its just a fight for fun, then it's okay.

Things like that would mostly be shut off with testing though, the main point of the poll was to see if people thought they were at least worth testing this time.

It reminds me or things like bob-ombs, I have NEVER met a pro item person who wanted them on, but everyone seems to think that items on = crazy items. I admit, that alone needs to change either way to even allow it as a proper side event.

 

[TimeSmash]

Things like that would mostly be shut off with testing though, the main point of the poll was to see if people thought they were at least worth testing this time.

It reminds me or things like bob-ombs, I have NEVER met a pro item person who wanted them on, but everyone seems to think that items on = crazy items. I admit, that alone needs to change either way to even allow it as a proper side event.

I feel like explosives are out of the question, unless it's a Motion Sensor Bomb. I'm pro non-item but also pro-item as well; it'd be nice if they had their own separate tournaments.

There's a thread about this for Brawl, which would be good to refer to. Here's the link:
http://smashboards.com/threads/offi...-side-project-huh-p-poll-in-op.164675/page-26

 

[Morbi]

I just finished watching Injustice at Evo 2013 with interactables on, it seemed to work out fine. I really think that it is worth testing out items and spicing up the competitive scene (for at least the 3DS). This mentality that items allude to something Satanic is a big part of why I am not a part of the competitive scene. Obviously items like the Star and Smash Ball need to be turned off, but there are some not so worthy items that could really change the meta-game for the better.

The one person brought up the Hammer... I honestly see no problem with the Hammer. I have countered it on so many different occasions with so many different characters, they give you a movement penalty, there is a chance that the item will not even work. A player would be stupid to even grab the item to be honest. Anyways, I am pro-item, so clearly I am biased. However, I think it is important to at least give something a chance. If it doesn't work out? So be it. It might honestly make the tier list a little less "congested" and open up the possibility of characters that weren't viable. I am not advocating every item, but most items are over-rated (such as the Dragoon).

 

[nat pagle]

Just turn them off and there won't be any issues coming of it. If someone wins via a ridiculous item spawn, are you really going to say it's completely fine?

 

[TimeSmash]

Just turn them off and there won't be any issues coming of it. If someone wins via a ridiculous item spawn, are you really going to say it's completely fine?

Define in terms of ridiculousness. I mean if someone wins a match by getting a Motion Sensor Bomb and the other guy lands on it, can you really say it was his fault. On the other hand, if he gets knocked into it, is it his fault then? Is that what you mean.

Again, it's arguments like this as to why we should have separate tournaments for items and non-items

 

[Morbi]

Just turn them off and there won't be any issues coming of it. If someone wins via a ridiculous item spawn, are you really going to say it's completely fine?

If only the spawns were fixed, I don't really think it would be an issue then. However, I suppose you would be correct. Even if the other player was competent and had the ability to dodge said item, they would obviously blame the death on the spawn. I am not even being sarcastic. That is how it works.

 

[TimeSmash]

If only the spawns were fixed, I don't really think it would be an issue then. However, I suppose you would be correct. Even if the other player was competent and had the ability to dodge said item, they would obviously blame the death on the spawn. I am not even being sarcastic. That is how it works.

You could also definitely blame the item if it were something like a Banana Peel, spawned directly on you and caused you to trip, thereby screwing you over and allowing your opponent to nail you with an FSmash of something.

 

[Morbi]

You could also definitely blame the item if it were something like a Banana Peel, spawned directly on you and caused you to trip, thereby screwing you over and allowing your opponent to nail you with an FSmash of something.

I didn't realize Banana peels were active upon spawn. Either way, I have never tripped into any other lethal items before. Usually the trip holds you into place, in which case, yes the opponent would get a free hit/combo (not a Final Smash, those ought to be banned immediately as they are not balanced between different characters and the mechanic makes it easier for the losing party to achieve aforementioned Smash).

 

[Chibi-Chan]

As a competitive -supporter who casually plays with friend having items on I can confidently say Smash Ball (And other stuff like Bob-omb) Pretty much automatically make the match into a chaotic mess with a random winner. Didn't you people see the Brawl tournament at EVO that allowed items? That had to be some of the worst things I have seen- It wasn't even fun to watch because you could just feel the fear in the player at randomly blowing up or getting unfairly screwed over when they had an advantage.

Items have been mostly the same ones since 64, I don't think they are changing for the better.

 

[mimgrim]

Again, if we had more items like Mr. Saturn or items that were like Peach's Turnips and ZSS' Armor Pieces I don't think it would be much of a problem as those items are much more fair. Like for realz.

 

[nat pagle]

Define in terms of ridiculousness. I mean if someone wins a match by getting a Motion Sensor Bomb and the other guy lands on it, can you really say it was his fault. On the other hand, if he gets knocked into it, is it his fault then? Is that what you mean.

Again, it's arguments like this as to why we should have separate tournaments for items and non-items

If an item spawns clearly benefiting a certain player.

And yeah, why not have tournaments separate with items on? Maybe a side thing, nothing serious.

 

[BJN39]

I think we can go ahead and test them first, but I'm not gonna hold my breath about them being legal unless we make a special item ruleset, or ban over powered/over luck based items. But with the latter, we'd really have to ban all the items, because even an item with a power level of peach's normal turnips can sway a match if used or appeared at the right time.

That doesn't mean I don't wanna see a separate item legal ruleset.

 

[LiteralGrill]

You could also definitely blame the item if it were something like a Banana Peel, spawned directly on you and caused you to trip, thereby screwing you over and allowing your opponent to nail you with an FSmash of something.

I didn't realize Banana peels were active upon spawn. Either way, I have never tripped into any other lethal items before. .

Just to be sure it's well known, ISP has NO items on that can mess you up on spawn by hitting them or something, they have to be conciously activated by the player which I figure should be a standard if they are tested for sm4sh.

I think we can go ahead and test them first, but I'm not gonna hold my breath about them being legal unless we make a special item ruleset, or ban over powered/over luck based items. But with the latter, we'd really have to ban all the items, because even an item with a power level of peach's normal turnips can sway a match if used or appeared at the right time.

That doesn't mean I don't wanna see a separate item legal ruleset.

Pretty much that would be it, ISP for Sm4sh as a ruleset that hopefully wont get the hate for it being even a side event this time.

 

[Camsterchief]

It's a straight up 2 answer poll, what do people think? Give your reasons below!

I like the idea of limited items. such as crates, swords, food, and a couple others.
Explosives should be completely off because then capsules and such will have a chance of being extremely deadly. too random

But only set on low appearance.

 

[TimeSmash]

Bumpworthy thread gets bumped.

Let's talk about some items from past Smash games. By discussing them, we will have a clearer idea as to what would be acceptable in ISP and what wouldn't be. Things like the SSB Ray Gun which could carry a foe right off the stage if the player knew what they were doing.

 

[Amazing Ampharos]

My rationale is as such. I find it extremely improbable that the default item settings, which are historically all items on to medium spawn rate, are going to be fair. If we are going to use non-default settings, I don't really think it's "worse" to just turn them all off as opposed to turning some off or playing with the spawn rate etc.. It's not something you pick like a character or even a stage; it's a game mode setting. The advantage of all off, in addition to almost certainly being the better game, is that it's simple and easily lends itself to international uniformity. I don't think ISP in Brawl was an unfair ruleset, but it sure was a lot more complicated and, if mainstream, would have only expanded the difficulties of ruleset policy as people would have started to debate in earnest the merits of the million borderline situations on which items should be on and such.

This is going to come off as cynical maybe, but I'm also thinking about the politics. Realistically, most people in the competitive community aren't going to give items a chance regardless of their actual merits unless something radical changes (in which case, by all means let's test it out). The time people who are inclined to want to test various things in the game spend fighting the losing battle of items is time wasted that could be spent on things like stages that are actually winnable. Even beyond the odds of things I personally favor winning, focusing on clearly losing battles just puts walls in the way of building a consensus, and a consensus on rules is what this community needs as a whole. If early on in smash 4 we develop an internationally accepted unity ruleset (at least North America, Europe, and Australia), we'll be so much healthier as a community..

 

[Pazzo.]

I'd like to see the Banana peel, the Smoke ball, Lip's Stick, the Hothead, and a few others make a return. It will never happen, but my dream is to have two kinds of Smash competitive;
Items and No Items.

 

[Johnknight1]

Right on this topic:

If you don't play in tournaments or plan on playing in tournaments, your opinion does not matter to TO's, and quite frankly they are right.

Basically, unless you plan on becoming a competitive player who enters tournaments, you can state your opinion, but it doesn't carry weight. Your opinions don't impact the decision at the end of the day because it doesn't concern you. Think of it like how only American citizens living in America can vote in American elections.

As someone who rigorously tested items at Brawl's release: I don't see the fundamental issue with items being changed in a manner that would lead to them ever being legal. Brawl had stepped things up a notch with item spawn location probabilities skewed towards the losing player; and I can't see Sakurai going the two steps towards standardized item spawning necessary to make them viable in a competitive environment.

The problem is the items in Brawl were way stronger than in any past smash games.

Also, that the Ice Climbers can do combos that make Smash 64 Pikachu look balanced in Melee and Brawl, as well as the fact the faster characters are inherently the best characters usually, and giving them items just makes them stronger.

Items randomness also hurts. Randomness is inherently anti-competitive. Look at all competitive sports: they are set on pre-determined and set locations with even balance for everyone to where what determines a match is the competitors/athletes and how good they are and how well they perform

We don't have the FIFA World Cup played on fields that move or, with refs that literally join one team or another (aka Pokéballs and Assist Trophies are essentially that). We don't have football players legally bulking up on steroids on the sidelines (see: power up items, specifically Smash balls) as a way to "even the score" or to get an advantage (comebacks happen organically, and they are more entertaining for it). We don't have baseball games consistently deal with randomly falling objects or dodging potentially match wrecking hazards.

That is because all of this is anti-competition, unless we want to change the competition from "Who is the best Smash player/player of *insert sport here* in a fair location?" to "Who is the best Smash player/player of *insert sport here* in a wacky environment that makes no sense*

Essentially, it would be more like pro wrestling than actually competition.

We want to see players win based on their skill, not some bullcrap item win a match for them, similarly to how we want to see the World Series won by one team hitting, pitching, fielding, base running, and catching better than the other team, not because a guy tripped on a banana peel.

Basically, items are random (which thus is anti-competitive; if you want to play it casually, then fine.), items don't add anything, items cause enhanced camping, items make standard attacks typically obsolete, items cause matches to become needlessly longer more often than not, and items almost always make the rich richer and the poor poorer.

If an item spawns clearly benefiting a certain player.

And yeah, why not have tournaments separate with items on? Maybe a side thing, nothing serious.

This is what some communities have done. There's nothing wrong with side tournaments with items, but items legal at any major tournament... just... no!!!

I find it funny, because almost everyone pushing for that isn't a competitive player... like at all.

And if they are competitive players who enter tournaments, it's usually local tournaments in some area with no quality players.

 

[link and ike lover]

What items im confused. i hate items and thats not the right way to play ssb4 so i choose

Immediatly ban items, testing is not needed.

 

[lobotheduck21]

I've got a story to tell on this, but it's pretty long and I don't feel like typing it

 

[Johnknight1]

I've got a story to tell on this, but it's pretty long and I don't feel like typing it

Just sum it up by saying: items in a competitive environment make no sense, especially with non-competitive players promotion it for tournament-attending competitive players.

Now if those non-competitive players want a non-competitive tournament or smashfest, by all means, do it. No one is telling you we can't.

But telling competitive tournament-going players that items need to be tested or tried out after 3 failed attempts in competitive play is stupid.

Competitive tournaments don't involve you if that's the case. Similarly, non-competitive tournaments or smashfests (if those are indeed a thing) don't involve competitive tournament-goers.

This is especially so since items continue to get less and less balanced and more and more overpowered to the point now where nearly every item is game breaking balance-wise.

 

[TheFirstPoppyBro]

I'm a very casual player. I play with items on all the time. But the luck factor would ruin tournaments.

Take Poke Balls, for instance. One player could get a useless Goldeen while their opponent gets a legendary Pokemon. I've seen it happen before.

Assist Trophies also fall under this group. Compare Knuckle Joe, the strongest Assist Trophy if all hits connect, to Hammer Bro or Lakitu, whose limited attacks make them useless.

 

[lobotheduck21]

meh, I'll tell it

you can test and balance all the items you want, but with RANDOM placement, it creates an unfair advantage towards a player. Take this example

I was playing Event 51 on melee, I managed to kill Giga Bowser and Ganondorf, but I had 70% on my last stock against a 25-50% mewtwo. He had hit me off the stage with an attack and he was charging his shadow ball, when all of a sudden, a bomb-omb had spawned right above his shadow ball, landed on it, and caused it to explode.

Without that item, I wouldn't have won
(and that ends uncle lobo's story time)

If you want to make this your own tournament fine, but I wouldn't suggest making it for money or prizes

 

[Camsterchief]

Just sum it up by saying: items in a competitive environment make no sense, especially with non-competitive players promotion it for tournament-attending competitive players.

Now if those non-competitive players want a non-competitive tournament or smashfest, by all means, do it. No one is telling you we can't.

But telling competitive tournament-going players that items need to be tested or tried out after 3 failed attempts in competitive play is stupid.

Competitive tournaments don't involve you if that's the case. Similarly, non-competitive tournaments or smashfests (if those are indeed a thing) don't involve competitive tournament-goers.

This is especially so since items continue to get less and less balanced and more and more overpowered to the point now where nearly every item is game breaking balance-wise.

You forget that this is for the 3DS, which will most likely never see competitive play.
I think if they showed a little worm hole of where the item is about to appear it would add an engaging King of the Hill type of control and reward the person to take control.
I think food could be an interesting twist as it doesn't heal you too much.

Also, items would be set to low appearance.

 

[lobotheduck21]

You forget that this is for the 3DS, which will most likely never see competitive play..

How do you know this?