Items vs. No Items: A rambling essay

[senpyou]

*beeeet!*

after pages and pages of insult and debate that i no longer have the time and patience to wade through i'm a little unsure as to what this argument it about. so, before i go any further on my opinions or anything i'd like to present a summary of what i know. correct me if i'm missing anything. oh yea, im wearing an effing tie because im about to go to work.

as i understand it, this is where the argument over items stands thus far. non-items people believe that items, while they do add another level of strategy to ssb, cause enough randomness where the better player isn't always the one who wins. they believe that this inconsistency in match results outweighs the benefits in gameplay that items provide. in otherwords, they believe that the random element (that is, the potential of being KO'd by an unavoidable item) is too game breaking. pro-items people believe that items, while they do cause some inconsistency in match results, balance gameplay. because they believe that certain characters rely heavily on items to do well competitively and that items break stalemates, they feel that the game balance that items provide outweighs the random element. in other words, they believe that no items is game breaking.

in the interest of clarity, i'm gonna try to make sure everyone agrees on what "game breaking" means. it means that the game design is flawed, that the game can not withstand the rigors of competitive play. again, i direct you bastrds to www.sirlin.net for what competitive play means and how it decides if a game lives or dies. basically there are people who will do anything to win--they will exploit every aspect of a game in their favor until a better strategy comes along or until they find an unbeatable strategy (ie, a strategy that has no counter), at which point the game breaks. once broken, the game is no longer worth playing, since the enjoyment of competitive play comes from devising counter strats to your opponent's strats (read "yomi layer 3" at sirlin.net). with that said, and ignoring certain exceptions to the definition of "game breaking" in regards to random item drop KO's, time will show everyone who is right and who is wrong. im sure you guys can imagine all the scenarios used to justify each side's arguments--just go back and read everyone's analogies and situational logic--but think of how long each style of play (items v. no-items) can last in a highly competitive environment. so, assuming that everyone is smart and plays to win, time will tell which play style will last, or even if both can prosper.

on to my opinions.

barring any future revelations i might have, i think no-items play will die. i think no-items play is broken and it's only a matter of time until someone shows this to be true. no-items play cannot last without more and more additions to the rules or "codes of honor" on the player's behalf. i imagine, in the near future, no-items tournament rules will be: no items, flat stages without walls only, DK only (haha), and no turtling. either that or timed stock which is kinda contrary to the whole no-items argument in the first place since you're now relying on random bob-omb drops to decide who's better.

long live items.

 

[Eoraptor]

Hey, this debate's actually GOING SOMEWHERE!

Recipherus- EXACTLY! That's the type of randomness I've been trying to test for. You agree that items cause the SD to increase. I agree that the player who is better with items will have their win average increase. But the SD is still high, regardless of where the mean is.
You say that 1psemet should be arguing for higher stock, and I will point out he did that before all this started. He believes 10 stock is a good number without items, so hypothetically >10 would be needed with items. The conclusion was that time constraints left TG limited to 3 or perhaps 5 stock, which is hard to argue against. So failing that, 1psemet's been trying to decrease randomness by removing items.

Bumble Bee Tuna- You should see Sean hit me with Din's fire as I recover, then aerial >A me as I fly back towards him.....
But anyway, I should be the one to explain the "5 kinds of randomness" argument, as I originally wrote it. The reason I separated the spatial, temporal and identity randomness of items into different arguments was because counter-points had been made against each. I wanted to clearly address and define these points, which works best if they are separated. If say, the items fell in exact 10 second increments, they would cause less randomness. The "fourth kind of randomness" was just the combined effect 1,2 and 3 have, while the fifth was the extreme "game-breaking" combined effect.
I agree they really are one point. But 1psemet cares dearly about that singular point (and his percieved effect on character ranking). It's not the quantity of points, it's the quality.

Scamp and others have brought up the point that items are not the only (or even the major) way tournament results can be randomized. This is certainly deserving of an in depth discussion all its own, as I have been pondering the effects of it recently. Just how accurate ARE tournaments? Should they have standardized sequences of stages? Perhaps alternate the presence of items? How about placing identical characters against each other to limit character balance problems (then have the best of each character fight each other, until the Sheik wins)? What do people think?

Senpyou- I can't speak for 1psemet, but I don't think items are game-breaking. To the contrary, the player who is better with items and general fighting will still win on average. The problem is you only get stock 3 at TG, which is low enough that the result may not correspond to the average. ****, the result isn't that representative of the average even without items in a stock 3 match.

 

[BeeboW]

gosh! this is a long winded topic!!! takes ages to go through every post! but i agree with all that have been pro-items
1.) items are a part of the game, therefore they should be included when determining skill since everybody should have practiced with items if they wanna compete in melee
2.) Being part of the game, grabbing items and using them to your advantage should be part of everyone's learning experience
3.) likewise, dogding and avoiding items should also be included

what im essentially saying is that u have to incorporate randomness in ur whole game. u cannot play someone where there are perfect fighting conditions.....eg. final destination and no items because that is not using the full potential of the game
there is never a perfect situation in ur life either (this is just an analogy) u have to be prepared for anything.....any kind of randomness that occurs in ur daily life may be good or bad but u have todeal with it.....i think that its kinda ironic that im drawing similarities from the real world into a cartoon based bashing game dont you? kekeke

 

[EvilEvincar]

Ok, first I want to get a few things out of the way. We need to stop critisizing people's english. It's has become rather destracting. And I would like to change one word just for simplicity's sake. The term "game-breaking" seems like it could get too confusing being that it could have multiple meanings. Thus, I will enter a term (that is actually stolen from the Magic community) for this, "broken". This actually means the same thing as what "game-breaking" was entered for, but it is shorter and more percise.
Now onto my opinion.
BeeboW, I believe we already have discussed on "items are part of the game" deal. The game was built as a party game, not as a competative 1v1 game. Thus, we are dicussing if items are suitable for 1v1 play in tournaments.
And Senpyou, can you name any tatics in non-items play that would be considered broken. I haven't found any, so if you know something we don't, please inform us.
I shall join the anti-item camp. The reason is because of randomness. I shall only cover 2 issues the pro-item camp seems to boast.
First, the character balance issue. This I find rather rediculous. Let's say that Falcon's balance for projectiles is the Star Rod. Now just presuming there's 30 items turned on, that gives Falcon a 1/30th chance to get his balancer. And all the while, the opponent can projectile ***** Falcon to death. And that's just presuming Falcon automaticly obtains the Star Rod when it appears. Thus, items balancing character's weaknesses would be a bad method of balancing them.
And now for the second issue, "items as a stalemate-breaker". Now I contend that this is exactly the point the anti-item camp have been pointing out. Let's say two players are just throwing projectiles at each other (which makes me think that they are horrible stratagists, if not just bad players). Now, if an item appears, if both players break their stalemate, that would mean that the item is good enough to give them an advantage. There is a 50/50 chance that one player or another will obtain that item if it fell in the middle. And the statistics does change dependant on where the item fell. Now, if the item wouldn't give them an advantage, they would just keep throwing projectiles. Without items, the better player would break the stalemate and just go in for the kill. Having to rely on items to break an opponent's defence is a bad method of playing in the first place.
Now before I sign off, I would like to throw a question around. Which is it more difficult for you, items play or non-items play?
Now for this post's Magic quote.
"Gnawed to death. Bad way to go." from Squirrel Wrangler

 

[Nobie]

No, the more skilled player would wait for the other player to lose his or her patience, and exploit that weakness. Had the other player waited patiently like the more skilled player, this wouldn't have happened.


You talk as if once someone starts using items, they can't use anything else. People don't rely on items, they use them in addition to their existing tactics. It's items AND every other tactic, not one or the other.

Also, if throwing items is your best bet for winning at the moment, aren't you a good strategist in this respect? You have found the best way to obtain victory and are using it effectively. It's like saying, "Why bother to edge guard when I can just wait for the person to land and then pull off a complex combo just because it requires more 'strategy?'"

 

[Scamp]

Actually...

...broken comes from the term game-breaking. It's just as you said, a simpler term. But I don't see how using the word broken instead of game-breaking prevents multiple meanings from coming up.
And yes, items are part of the game. It doesn't matter what the designers intended. (And also, how do you know the designers intended Smash to be a party game? Perhaps they wanted a balance between 4-player and 2-player.) Us itemers feel that the items are a part of the game in both 1-on-1 and 4-player.

There are a bunch of broken tactics with the items off. A lot of them involve camping on a small ledge with a character that is exceptionally good at doing so (Link, among others) or waiting by the edge to chuck people off the side. (Especially in places like Onett or Kongo Jungle)

The characters don't balance out because of one item. It's not like each character has their own personal item that makes them unstoppable. Also, they don't balance out all the characters, which is what you seem to be implying. Some characters benefit much more from items than others.

Relying on items only needs to be done for breaking stalemates if someone is camping. Also, relying on items in general is a bad idea, IMO, but that's beside the point. Your little "stalemate" situation is a bad one since your resolution is also bad. Just break the stalemate and go in for the kill? Why would anyone projectile spam if the other player could just do this? Nobie is right.
Anyway, each items does give the wielder more advantages, but each items also gives the wielder a new set of disadvantages as well. Most important is the inability to block. Other disadvantages depend on the item, such as loss of A moves, inability to block, changing your jump, etc.

But hey, to each his own. If you don't like playing with items, then don't. HAL went to great lengths to customize this game so that everyone could play however they wanted. You could say that the entire game was poorly designed for tournaments. If you think that the game was designed to be a party game, then I don't see how you can disagree with that.

 

[raul]

I feel that items shouldnt really play that much of a role in a match unless the damage levels for the competitors are high, then i could understand if a starman falls that could make or break the match but otherwise i feel that the better opponenet more often or not will find a way to win

i also feel experience with items and without items would also obviously help in those type of situations.

 

[Bumble Bee Tuna]

Broken situations

You want a list of broken situations in no item play?

Character with good throw or simply someone at a very high percent waiting on the far left of Onett for a quick throw-kill.

Jungle Japes- Camp on either side platform against a character who lacks projectiles, or who simply has inneffective ones (Zelda/Sheik). Especially effective if you have projectiles of your own (Link), but not necessary.

Hyrule- Camp on the lower right platform against a projectileless character, or a character with strictly horizontal projectiles (Fox, Falco, Luigi) Also, play as someone fast against anyone slower, and just run around the central mass the whole game. Eventually you go to SD and you win or lose by the random chance of the falling Bob-ombs. Or just be annoying and make the game never end.

New Kongo Jumgle- Camp on the rock (against the same non-vertical projectile characters as in Hyrule)

Yoshi's Island N64- Camp on the far cloud against a character who can't jump back from that platform until time runs out, or on another cloud with projectiles against a character that lacks them

Flatzone- Camp with a good thrower like DK on the edges against a projectileless character.

Fourside- There are many situations where both players will want to just camp on their own respective platforms, with character matchups that can't fire projectiles. Usually occurs on the platforms on the right, with one player on the slightly higher ineer platform and one on the slightly lower outer platform.

Er....I'm getting tired of this, but I'm sure there are a few more. You get the idea. In ALL of these examples, except perhaps the run strategy on Hyrule (though that could be broken with land mines, pokeballs) items would break the stalemate in favor of the player not camping, who controls the whole stage...thus discouraging camping and stopping the broken situations.

Many of these situations HAVE happened at tournaments. At some, they were saved by items (TG) and at others the players didn't care and attacked when they had a disadvantage (you can't count on that). They WILL happen again, if you play without items.

Anyway, your stalemate situation is faulty because you assume all characters have projectiles that will stop any camper. They don't. DK, Bowser, Falcon, Ganon, on uneven platforms Fox/Falco/Luigi, Jigglypuff, just plain sucky projectiles (Zelda)...

Stalemates happen, if the players are serious. Items prevent them. Yay items.

-B

 

[NJE789]

Stalemates? Not possible.

If someone wants to play keep-away in the temple level, let them, they'll just embarass themselves, and will probably be disqualified for being a pathetic coward. As for the grab thing, there's always going to be areas in a level that give you an advantage, and no item projectile can stop a camper that has realized how to dodge and sheild, Unless the other player uses a fire flower or superscope, which has rapid-fire capabilities, then the camper still has an advantage-he can simply jump over the projectiles and attack during the lag. Items are for melees, not tournaments designed to test each player's skill compared to others and the different abilities of the characters they use.

 

[Gilgamesh]

Maybe.. they'll embarass themselves, but if they win... what do they care. And i don't think any serious tourny organizer would disqualify someone for that, after all, all the fights should have a set maximum time, so if they want to just stand there, it's allowed.

Items are for melees, not tournaments designed to test each player's skill compared to others and the different abilities of the characters they use.

Actually, there are characters that benefit more from items than others... (see C.Falco, Pichu, all the fast guys, to some extent mewtwo-but not from clobbering items-) so items do play a significant role in character skill. If you ask me though, they seem to help the already good characters even more, then again maybe not. I'm always open for no items play, but if i'm in a serious fight or tourny, i would definitely turn all of them on.

 

[Bumble Bee Tuna]

the point.

The point is not that most items will do well to knock the camper out. The point is that the camper has no way of attacking the other guy, but the other guy can get a pokeman, open it near him, and hope for a legendary. With items, you CAN end a stalemate. Always. Without items, you can NEVER end a stalemate without putting yourself at a disadvantage.

Honor does not exist in tournaments. You play to win. That includes camping when camping benefits you. Don't be naive. Play to win. (See www.sirlin.net at the section "playing to win")

-B

 

[Eoraptor]

Nice list BBT. I think part of the reason I don't value the "anti-camping" argument for using items is that I use Pikachu. None of the situations you listed would be a problem for the electric rat, with his versatile thunderjolt. Thus, camping is almost always a bad choice against me. The exception of course is reflecting characters, but they could reflect items just as easily.
I'd like to note that though I do feel items make the results less accurate, I do not normally play itemless matches, and actually perform better with them on.

 

[NJE789]

No, really?

People play dirty in tournaments? C'mon, who didn't know that? I've played with cheapshots before, and you guys apparantly haven't. Items help dishonorable fighting, far more than discourage it. Most of them make great chunking objects, and the fight just turns into people avoiding each other, and just chunking items 'til one gets lucky and can follow up with a combo, or one of them gets a really powerful item like the starman. The randomness is so much greater with items that you might as well have the players draw straws to decide the tournament champion. There's nothing wrong with someone using a little stradegy in a tournament. They usually don't start at an advantage point, and it's your own fault if you let them get to one.

 

[EvilEvincar]

Time for me to respond to many people.
The camping issue seems to be everyone's proponent for items. First, I believe I found a thread some time ago that was about camping. And in that thread, it seemed like everyone (or at least most people) said that camping was a bad idea to employ. Also, I believe camping can be beaten without items, even with platforms like the ones in Jungle Japes. Finding a way around a person's defences should be a skill that ,even with items on, every good SSB player has. Camping just won't work. Quite often, I find that it completly backfires.
Now onto specific post responces.
BBT: I know that in any tourny scene that honor rarely exist amongst all players. And your comment on the pokeball gives a point to the randomness argument. As for the non-item comment, I believe that any great (sometimes just good) player can pull stunts that look dangerous or disavanatagous, and still come out up in his score. Anyway, in any game of competition, a person will have to take chances anyway. Even if you projectile spam, you take a chance that the opponent will take advantage of your lag time.
BBT (again): I'm just going off of different posts here. As I said before, most situations you state rely on camping, which I state just doesn't work. And all the other situations you state actually need the opponent to be at a fairly high damage anyway. It's no more easier to kill in these situations then it is to kill with each character's best kill attack.
Gilgamesh: You have just helped another point for no-items play. You state that certain characters gain an advantage with items on. And you even state that some of those characters even don't need that advantage.
raul: There are times in which items kill even at low damage (most the Bat), and of course there's that erant bomb that randomly appears in front of you just before you pulled off the attack. More often though items deal unearned damage, which can make it so you go from a safe health level to near death.
Scamp: I chose broken because Game-Breaking can easily shortened to break, which doesn't translate to Game-Breaking or broken all the time. Just look at raul's post. And also, the situation I gave was actually a responce to another post earlier given (I couldn't find the post again). By the way, items usually give the holder an advantage just because it gives them more options. And what disadvantages do items give. Just the increased amount of options ofset the disadvatages. By the way, can you list on which characters gain the benifit of items. Because if a high tier character gains this benifit, it will throw off the SD.
Nobie: Stratagy isn't nessisarily "the most effective technique". If you need to take some damage so you can get a better position might not be the most effective since you did take damage. You just seem to oversimplify the term stratagy. Stratagy is not just about the moment, but the moment or two ahead. By the way, all the situations given may just be a moment in battles, not the entire fight. I just said people who rely on items to win is a bad idea.
Now to sign off, a Magic quote.
Wizards fought over the stone to exploit its power. Goblins fight over it because it's shiny. From Brightstone Ritual

 

[Nobie]

No one disagrees with the idea that it's not good to rely solely on items to win battles.

Okay, so strategy is "thinking ahead" as well. Well, what if you think ahead, and after thinking ahead, realize the best thing to do in this situation is spam with items? If it isn't an overpowering tactic, and if it's easily countered, then what's the problem?

Also, I think effectiveness with items is part of what makes characters and must be incorporated into their strategy. It's like telling a Fox player he can't Fox Illusion or a Jigglypuff player to not use Rest. They don't necessarily rely on it as they have better, more reliable options, but it's still what makes a character.

 

[Bumble Bee Tuna]

Don't make unfounded statements

If I wade through it, your post can be broken down into 2 main points. You didn't back up either one. You will have to do that to be convincing. Allow me to demonstrate.

1. The camping situations won't work.
Please, tell me how these situations won't work. Look at each situation I posted and tell me how you would make them not work...WITHOUT ITEMS. Camping doesn't make somebody invincible...but if they are good, they will have a huge advantage over you, in which case they will almost certainly win. You talk about Magic. In that game, you might not even get a 'broken" card, but they are broken nonetheless. In this game, your camping might not instantly make you win, but it gives you enough advantage to consider it broken. Your opponent will know it's useless to attack you because they will be at a disadvantage (WHY would anyone attack at a disadvantage if they don't have to?). You know it's useless to stop camping because you will be at a disadvantage. How can this stalemate end? Only by an outside influence, items.

2. Items usually deal "unearned" damage.
How is the damage unearned? It's not hard to dodge items. It definitely takes skill to hit someone with an item. So how is it unearned? You needed skill to GET the item. How is that unearned?

-B

 

[Mattdeezie]

Ug

This thread should die...i think its gone on waaay too long. Vien did a good job of summing everything up. Its apparent that time is going to determine the life of certain aspects of play. You are always going to have people that dont understand the game, and eventually they will have to find out the hard way.

I agree with Vien that the no item community will die out, 1. because they will hate the game once they are put up against someone with a strong camping game. or 2. Rules will be either have a "code of honor" like vien said, which says you cant turtle. (which is cr@p, cause you should never tell someone how to play the game.) or its going to end up being no items played on the following stages. (FD, Battlefeild, Fountain, dreamland, old congo jungle, new yoshis island, and the moving stages.) No item play does work (aka is not broken) on these stages, I just still believe that the game isnt nearly as good as if you play it to its full potential.

Im done with this thread, and I think it should die. It was about to have a peaceful rest, and now we have effing Mr. Camping doesnt work, and Mr Items are just for throwing, yet Im pretty sure neither have even tasted any sort of tournament level competition.

 

[CORY]

rice fairy

nje, you're an idiot. plain and simple. you keep referring back to the starman example of a strong item. the starman is not endall nor game breaking. it makes you invincible but that doesn't matter unless your opponent is an idiot and doesn't understand the concept of run away and dodge. on all levels it's possible to evade an invincible foe so that they get only one or two small hits in and that's only if they can read your movements really good. the starman is not gamebreaking in anyway.

also, you say a game with items on turns into a throwing match in the end. what level do you turn your items to? very high? high? it has to be one of those because even in medium items don't appear enough to warrant an all out chunking match. and i don't think i've seen a reputable tourney held with items up past medium.

 

[raul]

I agree with the point that tournaments are the based on the whose the best with their character and ill agree with cory that they items dont appear to often but i still think that they don't play that much of a factor. So what if the best player loses to another underdog player? If video games are anyhting like sports, any player can beat any player anyday. Items arent cheap way to win either because they are part of the game

 

[NJE789]

We'll just see who the idiot here is.

Cory, you're the one that can't even read one paragragh without getting confused over REAL simple statements. What's worse, is you do this repeatedly. Making half-thought-out replies doesn't help my opinion of you, either.
Apparantly you must only play with slow characters, that could just be avoided, though even a Bowser could still get a hit in unless it was the temple stage. It's obvious that the starman could easily turn the tide in any fight.
Just run up and grab them after getting the starman, then they won't be able to stop you from repeated attacks while they're stunned from a down throw.
Some items can be thrown repeatedly, not to mention they can be caught, which makes the chunking war last that much longer.
It doesn't need to be on a high appearance setting.
Camping does give the player a serious advantage,
just because you will have to fight them in the air, where they can simply sheild themselves or dodge the attack and retaliate on your lag time, not to mention you can't avoid their attacks, unless you think you can quickly hit the ground with an aerial dodge, or use something with more priority. This doesn't make it impossible for the other player to come out on top, just about 95% less. Why don't all of you non-item people just give up? There really is nothing you can argue about here against campers. I can't say I'm surprised to find out real tournaments are like this. I'll just play with my honorable friends, forget all you cheapshots. I already know I'm better than everyone that has to resort to those tactics.

 

[Gilgamesh]

I'll just play with my honorable friends, forget all you cheapshots. I already know I'm better than everyone that has to resort to those tactics.

Hoho, this sounded like a self-hypnosis trick for losers... Let me traslate this for you:

I'll just play with my honorable (stupid) friends, forget all you cheapshots (yeah, if someone beats me, he MUST be a cheapshot). I already know I'm better(even after you wiped the floor with my arse, i'm still better than you, huh?) than everyone that has to resort to those tactics.(Meaning, everyone who understands the game and can play it at a good level)

haha, these are the argument-ending words of the all-time scrubs and losers.

You beat me, but only because you're cheap. I could have been cheap too, but i'm too honorable and i prefer to lose. So, that is undeniable evidence that proves i'm still better than U, even if you humiliate me in a fight. Um, yeah.

 

[CORY]

rice fairy

first thing's first: gilgy, you're my hero, right after vien.

now onto business. nje, you're the idiot who comes up with half thought opinions based on cpu's. i don't think i've ever seen you make a true argument that had anything really backing it up. you always refer to your friends (lol!) and cpus without anything for a basis. no one here knows how you play, how your friends play, what your normal settings are, nothing. all you do is state your opinion and then say something to the effect of, "I'm always right and there's nothing that can be said or done to change that. Ever." how is that backing up your half *** opinions.

you seem to think i'm just some idiotic no0b who posts for no reason with no backing (much like you.) what you don't seem to realize is that while i may not be one of the best people around, i am one of the better people on the boards. this means that i tend to know what i'm talking about. and on top of that, when i make a statement, i try not to make it a definitive end all say all statement unless i must. you only make end all say all statements. you said you could beat all of us? come to tg4. you'll meet me and about ten or so other board members here. if you can somehow manage to beat all of us, then we'll shut up and accept it. if you can't beat us (or don't go) then you have nothing because your arguments are completely insipid(?).

now, onto your post. you say i get confused over simple statements? the way i understood it you say that a starman basically ends the game for the opposing player. maybe in you simple little cpu controlled world but not in a game where the other player knows how to run, jump, and dodge. plain and simple. i play marth as my current main and i've had to chase down other marths while i was invincible. the most you can get in is one or two small hits if you're lucky. and i've been on the running end as well. the most the opposition has gotten in is one or two small hits. does that make the star the end all for items? does that mean that if my opponent gets the star i should just set my controller on the floor and give up? hrmmm... nope. one or two small hits isn't anything game breaking.

onto your item opinion. what you're saying is that even on low or medium you and your crew(?) will sit around and wait for an item to appear to start throwing it? that's what it sounds like to me and probably most other people reading this. most people i know (from tx and cali) who play items tend to stick to one or two of their preferred stock and only use that if it appears. they don't sit around and wait for an item to appear so they can throw it and hope for an opening. not saying if we have an item we won't throw it if the opprotunity arises, but unlike your crew (apparently) we don't wait for an item to create the opening for us.

and then you say camping won't work. have you ever played a smart camper? have you ever played a link (non cpu) that knows what he's doing on jungle japes in one on one? if he feels like it he could just sit up on one of the platforms and throw projectiles at you until you have to attack and when you get near him, just up b you away. simple, yet effective. even more so with no items against a projectileless character. the most they can do is hope his finger slips and he hits up b a moment too soon or too early. otherwise they'll have to just hope for the best. but i'm sure you and your friends wouldn't resort to such a cheap shot tactic.

so, how about this. say a doc on fd plays a run away pill/down smash game. in other words, he pills you from afar and waits for you to get closer. you'll be taking a few hits from the pills if you decide to just all out rush him which gives him a good sixteen or so points of damage on you. then, when you get close, he down smashes to send you away and start over again. that's the basis for a very effective doc style. ask anyone at tg3 about vien. that's his style all boiled down and simplified and he took third. (of course he didn't only use fd, but that's a pretty decent doc stage.)

so, either get with the rest of the educated populace here and make good arguments not based on your cpu experiences or just get out of here and play with your friends.

 

[NJE789]

Whoa- take it easy there.

Didn't expect that, gilgamesh. You can live in your own little world, but in the one I live in(It's called Earth), cheapshots ruin the game. As for your points Cory, first, what's so cheap about that Doc fighting style? Second, Link isn't invincible on one of those platforms. Hey, why are you even saying this? I agreed in my last post that campers have a serious advantage, and items are needed because of that.
Oh, I see your still getting confused.. I'm not going to waste my time explaining things to people that get confused every time they read a post. Items aren't the only way to stop stalemates, though, a simple rule or two can also do it, and not add the randomness to the game the items do, which defeats the only purpose of the tournament left, since they aren't going to be fun with all you cheapshots. You people need to stop flaming, the moderators don't exactly encourage it.

 

[Gilgamesh]

Direct from my little world, it's me!

Las time i checked in "Gilgy's little world", i didn't see any TG participants argue or complain after one, and tah tourny is full of "cheap" people.

As for your points Cory, first, what's so cheap about that Doc fighting style?

That, is it, it isn't cheap, just as anything in this game is...

Second, Link isn't invincible on one of those platforms

Maybe, but he nearly is. And agin NJE, where's the backup on this thought? CORY explained why he thought like this. You on the other half, just said it isn't true and end of story.

I agreed in my last post that campers have a serious advantage, and items are needed because of that.

Uum.. right... so? why are you arguing then? What side are you on?

Oh, I see your still getting confused.. I'm not going to waste my time explaining things to people that get confused every time they read a post.

NJE: BOO HOO, YOU KEEP RUINING MY ARGUMENTS, BUT I'M STILL SMARTER THAN YOU... YOU JUST DON'T UNDERSTAND MY REALLY-WELL HIDDEN POINTS, YEAH IT MUST BE THAT, SO I'LL END THE DISCUSSION CHEAPLY NOT ACCEPTING THAT I LOST.

Items aren't the only way to stop stalemates, though, a simple rule or two can also do it,

Rules, rules, rules. one rule leads to another. They finally become too hard to enforce, both sides trying to prove they did/did not break the rules. What to do? use a cronometer to measure camping time??? The best rule is: no rules.

and not add the randomness to the game the items do, which defeats the only purpose of the tournament left, since they aren't going to be fun with all you cheapshots

This is precious. Tournaments aren't made for scrubs, they're made for us cheap b1tches. And people have great fun in them. Try to go to TG4 and get your arse served to you there.

You people need to stop flaming, the moderators don't exactly encourage it.

On the contrary, Mods looove when we flame YOU. In fact, i got a certified permission to double post, spam whenever i like, and flame idiots like you. How's that.

 

[Bumble Bee Tuna]

Required reading-

Read This.

Read the whole "Playing to Win" series. This is how games are played. Everyone on this board that is worth a **** at this game has realized this. You live in the world of a scrub. We live in the world of a gamer.

If you have a tournament with "honor", it won't measure who is the best. It will measure who can push the boundaries of that honor without actually getting called out for it. It's not who's the best at the game, it's who's the best at your own made up version of the game. (Nobody else plays this imaginary version of the game that you do.)

You suck at this game. You shouldn't post again.

-B

 

[Mattdeezie]

Re: Whoa- take it easy there.

Originally posted by NJE789
You people need to stop flaming, the moderators don't exactly encourage it.

Originally posted by BBT
You suck at this game. You shouldn't post again.

heh heh...

 

[NJE789]

Huh?!

In fact, i got a certified permission to double post, spam whenever i like, and flame idiots like you. How's that.

Is he serious about that last part? How'd you get that? Man, I swear, this site is so messed up. They ban people that spam, and at the same time, give other people the right to spam all they want. It's bad enough they don't let people even read the melee back room posts that aren't deemed qualified to post in there, or the fact that it needs all these pop-up ads to stay up. I'd think you're just lying, but you probably should have been banned from all the flaming you've done. I'm going to go and pm the mods now..

 

[Bumble Bee Tuna]

Heh.

I AM a mod. Super-mod, even.

People are perfectly free to tell you you're stupid when you are. You are. Or at least, what you're saying is stupid, so we can only logically deduce that you are stupid as well. You don't know how to play the game but you're arrogant enough to think that you do.
You ain't gettin' no sympathy from this mod...

-B

 

[NJE789]

I decided to read that "play to win series".

Just as I thought Bbt, it sounds like what you've done is take this game to an unhealthy level, in which only a few others have also done. You and the rest of these people are losers that fill in those empty gaps in your life with rigorous training for videogame tournaments, or whatever other hooby you might have (I'm guessing someone like you may have several, being as your exceessive flaming I've seen suggests you're not just any loser, you're a "super loser, even") whoa- I had more to say, but this will do.. I'll just save it for my reply to your inevitable one, I'll sure it will come, being as your a mod, and a hipocritical flamming mod (if you guys ever decide if you're for or against flaming, let me know).
As for Gilgamesh(you're probably one these losers) and when I say loser, don't try to defend your pathetic egos saying you have a girlfriend or whatever, we'll all just assume it's an ugly one. To the point- I asked a mod about this certitication you claim to have, and I got two things, a "no", and the words "such a claim is severly punishable". Flamer count: 1. I'm sure I'll rid this site of the plague the aforementioned flaming losers bring to it sooner or later at this rate, not that I really care since I'm already getting bored of this site.

 

[Nobie]

And here you are, going on and on about how you're talking to a bunch of losers who spend too much time with a video game while on a specific Messageboard devoted to video games.

 

[Bumble Bee Tuna]

Questions NJE can't answer

If video games is a bad habit or something that only "losers" do, why is NJE on an internet forum dedicated to one?

What makes playing video games competitively any worse than doing anything else competitively? Is Garry Kasparov a loser for taking Chess seriously and being a Grandmaster? Is Michael Jordan a loser for taking the game of basketball seriously?

Do you understand what sarcasm is? What about humor? Gilgy's certification comment was a sarcastic joke (though I will admit it was a poor one).

What the **** does having a girlfriend have to do with ANYTHING that we're talking about? I've seen the "girlfriend" argument come up so many times, and it has never made sense. Ironically, of course, that half the guys I've seen making the argument didn't have girlfriends themselves...

The rules here are simple.

If someone says something stupid or unfounded, they will get their argument ripped apart (flamed), and we won't care.

If someone says something that isn't stupid, but people insult them anyway, then that is real flaming that we do not tolerate.

 

[NJE789]

Hey- I thought it could be a possible reward for a donation, not to far-fetched.

The difference? They get paid, Michael does(millions, by the way), anyway, not sure about the other guy, don't care. I can't believe you're comparing hobbies to careers. I'm done here, you can say what you want, this flaming is getting old.

 

[Mattdeezie]

a call for help

Originally posted by NJE789
Just as I thought Bbt, it sounds like what you've done is take this game to an unhealthy level, in which only a few others have also done. You and the rest of these people are losers that fill in those empty gaps in your life with rigorous training for videogame tournaments, or whatever other hooby you might have (I'm guessing someone like you may have several, being as your exceessive flaming I've seen suggests you're not just any loser, you're a "super loser, even") whoa- I had more to say, but this will do.. I'll just save it for my reply to your inevitable one, I'll sure it will come, being as your a mod, and a hipocritical flamming mod (if you guys ever decide if you're for or against flaming, let me know).
As for Gilgamesh(you're probably one these losers) and when I say loser, don't try to defend your pathetic egos saying you have a girlfriend or whatever, we'll all just assume it's an ugly one. To the point- I asked a mod about this certitication you claim to have, and I got two things, a "no", and the words "such a claim is severly punishable". Flamer count: 1. I'm sure I'll rid this site of the plague the aforementioned flaming losers bring to it sooner or later at this rate, not that I really care since I'm already getting bored of this site.

First off, let me say I feel sorry for you. Second off, if you need someone to talk to, feel free to IM me, you sound like you are having problems. Why?

1. FIrst off you debate about a subject, which is video games. Therefore if you took the time to find out a place, and post around 80 times about it, you must take it at least semi seriously.

2. You lost an argument, so therefore you go to blatent insults which in return insult yourself.

This means that you probably have a self esteem problem. You just filled your time in by just putting people down for no reason. People who have done nothing to you except disagree with your statements. The only reason people put other people down is to make themselves feel bigger.

My guess is that you probably like videogames, but then want to stray away from it because the sterotype of a gamer is negative. Therefore when you realize that you dont like the person that you are, you have to put the other people down around you to make yourself feel somewhat significant.

In my case, everything you said is pretty much geared towards me. I play competitve video games, and I enjoy it. I find it intellectually stimulating, and I have found out things about my character that I didnt know existed before.

I actually did something kindof the same a while ago. I always liked videogames, but I was very interested in being accepted in school groups. However, I was never really "accepted" so I pretty much was lost. I hated myself, and I vented my frustration on others. I got into drugs, and basically was just miserable. (I actually did an outburst of pretty much the same thing towards one of my now best friends Vien freshman year in high school.) Then Senior year, I realized I just didnt care what people thought of me anymore. I did the things that I enjoy, and because of it became a happy person. I hung out with people who enjoyed the same things as me, and made friendships that last a lifetime.

I dont have a girlfriend. Im not a "popular" person. However I do know who I am, and I am a happy person. I am put down all the time for playing games. It doesnt bother me.

So I suggest you look at your own life, before you go around insulting peoples lifestyles. The problem doesnt usually lie in the people you insult, it lies in your own life.

 

[raul]

Must we continue this pointless debate on NJE, let him live what he feels is his "perfect" live and less debate our "loser" (extreme sarcasm) video game and "never" (more extreme sarcasm) get any girls (mother of all sarcasm).

In other words....Screw NJE, lets continue this debate.

 

[Nobie]

Actually, here's a question.

Would the anti-items side ban Mr. Game & Watch's Forward B from a tournament? It's a move that works randomly (or standard deviation or whatever), and if G&W gets one or more Judgement 9's, he could very well turn around a match he has been losing. Heck, if he gets lucky he could very well win the match despite being at a serious disadvantage.

 

[NJE789]

I'm not going to flame anyone, but then again, Bbt made it clear what flaming is..

This is not flaming, for these people have some serious mental problems. Responding to Matt's post:
First, I didn't say playing videogames are for losers, I said taking it to an unhealthy level was, oh, and no, I don't like videogames, or any videogame site. Not at all. Yes, no one has insulted me in any of these posts,..OH! I see, you must take words like "idiot" as a compliment, and I would too if I was that mentally ill.
...I don't feel like finishing this, I think my banner's ready, and there really is no point in posting this, anyone with any kind of intelligence should be able to see what's wrong with those posts, and replying to them is probably just going to result in more of these moronic postings with points made by turning things into something else.

 

[SSB:M Rules]

NJE shut the **** up

Anyway , back to the topic. Nobie , I don't exactly understand your question. What does items have to do with G&W's forw. B ? Maybe it's just me , I didn't reas all replies in this post , but please make your question a little bit more clear.

EDIT : hmm... a new feature on this forum. between 'the' and 'up' I typed a 'wrong' word , but now there are four stars , instead of the word f u c k. cool feature.

 

[Gilgamesh]

Um.. the boards always censure those words, it isn't anything new.

Nobie: No, thy don't ban G&W's Judgement move. The chance of it appearing is rather low, almost comparable to hitting someone with Ganondorf's axe kick or Roy's fully charged flareblade. Besides, G&W isn't very high in the tiers, so a killer move like that is welcome on him.

There is not much chances of Judgement turning the tide in a battle, and even if it happened, i wouldn't think it was "cheap".. just lucky- VERY lucky.

NJE: Now you've done it again. You lost another fine chance of not saying anything. If you dislike this place so much, then leave! Do you really think you will change mods' and veteran's minds? If not, either peacefully post trying to follow the stream (which doesn't imply agreeing with everyone) or leave.

Oh, and in case you didn't notice, i'll write this so even you could understand:

NJE, when i said i had a certified permission to double post, spam, and flame idiots like you, it was a BAD JOKE. You cannot get this kind of permission. It was not true. It was false. Got it? Goooooood, now have a cookie.

Well, actually, i CAN flame idiots like you, without any kind of permission.

 

[EvilEvincar]

Let's hope the flaming argument is over. I really do suggest to people not to respond to flamers. It's exactly what they want. Plus, it's like telling a TK'er to stop because it's lowering the team's score. It just won't help at all. If for some reason people still need to argue about this, post a thread in the pool room. Stop taking this thread's time.
Now for camping. It really seems like people do have problems with this stratagy, even with items on. I have yet to play a good Link camper, but Pikachu should be close. And having played against that, I have found that there is always one flaw made, usually in some delay time between attacks. Then it is simple plan to figure out how to exploit that down time. Doesn't take me too much time to figure out how to decamp the camper. But that might be just me. So in short for those who skip paragraphs, camping is not broken, it's just another tatic you have to adapt to.
By the way, from what people are making camping, how are items supposed to help. Maybe the random Star helps, but most other items seems just to harrass the camper. If anyone wants to make a broken situation, at least make it so it works only items on/off, depending on the side your on.
And also, nobody I know have been able to make a broken situation. And that is say alot being my friend is the cheapest ******* in the world (you should know him, he's in the backroom).
Well, I'm out of time, so signing off.
"I said 'pick his brain,' not 'tear off his head.'"-Riptide Project reasearcher From Discombobulate

 

[Gilgamesh]

Well, there's the occasional star, but pokeballs, bob-ombs and trip mines help too. Thy're just a good way of getting rid of campers. Just imagine how it'd be without items, since camping is allowed by most serious gamers.