DarkDragoon
Smash Champion
THIS IS NOT AN ANNOUNCEMENT REGARDING A COMPLETED VOTE OR RULESET CHANGE ON CONTROLLER LEGALITY
Since the Melee Competition Committee started voting on ruleset amendment submissions a few weeks ago, one (of several) questions that has been on many people’s minds were those rules surrounding Box/Alternatively-styled controllers. As the ruleset presently stands, those styles of controllers would not be allowed, and the Competition Committee is very much aware of the popular opinion against that ruling. As such, we have received a couple proposals for rule changes for Section 3.1.11, and the discussion on those rules are starting up again.
The Competition Committee is indeed working towards a vote on Custom Controllers.
Used as the “starting point” for the discussion is the very well written amendment proposal authored by Squibble & NFreak whose ruleset change would be as follows:
Main Concerns:
These concerns have already been shared with the B0XX and SmashBox teams to get their feedback, but due to the homebrew nature of many custom controllers we wanted to make sure the people also had some idea of what is going on at the moment and if you have any feedback or suggestions, please feel free to discuss it in this thread for maximum visibility to the Competition Committee, or submit it formally as an amendment if you think it covers everything!
Since the Melee Competition Committee started voting on ruleset amendment submissions a few weeks ago, one (of several) questions that has been on many people’s minds were those rules surrounding Box/Alternatively-styled controllers. As the ruleset presently stands, those styles of controllers would not be allowed, and the Competition Committee is very much aware of the popular opinion against that ruling. As such, we have received a couple proposals for rule changes for Section 3.1.11, and the discussion on those rules are starting up again.
The Competition Committee is indeed working towards a vote on Custom Controllers.
Used as the “starting point” for the discussion is the very well written amendment proposal authored by Squibble & NFreak whose ruleset change would be as follows:
NFreak & Squibble submitted this amendment on along with several pages of informational and supporting documentation that will be considered when voting does happen, but there are still some concerns that the Competition Committee wants addressed. They wish to hear ideas on how to resolve some of the following concerns in a ruleset before bringing it to a vote, in hopes that having the most fair and comprehensive ruleset possible will have an agreeable outcome for everyone involved.3.1.11. Permitted Controllers
All controllers must fit within the following criteria:
- Macros are not allowed on any controller.
- Turbo buttons are not allowed on any controller.
- No single button input can have multiple separate possible outputs.
- There must be only one physical analog input on a controller to output any specific analog value.
- For controllers that utilize modifiers for analog values, only the magnitude can be modified, not the direction.
- Hardware modifications are legal so long as they do not violate any other rule.
- Case modifications and aesthetic mods are legal.
In addition, the following rules of enforcement apply:
- If a player suspects their opponent of cheating, they can request for a TO to inspect the opponent’s controller. The TO is not required to abide by this request.
- If a Game or Set cannot be played out in full due to a controller malfunction which cannot be fixed in a timely manner, and the player using this controller does not have a replacement controller readily available, the player will be disqualified.
- TOs reserve the right to decide on a legal set of restrictions for programmable controllers so long as they can electronically verify these settings. Unverifiable controllers may be banned at the TO’s discretion.
Main Concerns:
- Regarding SOCD (Simultaneous Opposite Cardinal Direction) Handling:
- The ruling the panel wishes to enforce is currently unwritten. When SOCD situations arise, the solution the panel will agree to is that the second input will be registered if and only if it is input after the first input is fully released. A one frame buffer window will be allowed. If the first input is still registering, the second input will not be registered unless removed and input after the first is released.
- The reason for this over “Second input is ignored until first is released” is that it does not allow for an unlimited buffer window to input the second direction.
- The ruling the panel wishes to enforce is currently unwritten. When SOCD situations arise, the solution the panel will agree to is that the second input will be registered if and only if it is input after the first input is fully released. A one frame buffer window will be allowed. If the first input is still registering, the second input will not be registered unless removed and input after the first is released.
- A maximum number of analog direction modifiers must be specified; this requires a full understanding of what analog direction modifiers do for each controller.
- Maximum values on the X and Y axes must not confer an unfair advantage on box controllers over the GCC. Two factors must be taken into account here: one, the maximum value that the GCC can input in a given cardinal direction, and two: the maximum X and Y values that can be input due to the octagonal gate on the GCC. Box controllers must have digital values that are not impossible on the GCC.
- Some sort of provision must exist such that the left hand cannot perform functions that the right hand would normally perform on the GCC, and vice versa. This issue is in reference to the possibility that a button could exist, mapped to c-stick down, to always buffer ASDI down in the event that the player is hit. We want to avoid the situation where a box creator puts a ‘c-stick down’ button within range of the left pinky (as an example) that can be depressed without affecting the abilities to perform other actions. This is not currently specific and more information needs to be provided in order to create this provision.
- A verification method must exist for Tournament Organizers to easily and uniformly check values for all controllers, regardless of controller design or creator. Whether it’s Hax’s boxx, the Smashbox, the Smash Stick, or any other product that may spring up, creators are responsible for creating a uniform program (collaboratively or with a 3rd party) allowing TOs to verify values not just for their controller, but others on the marketplace as well.
- In order for a controller to be considered legal, technical documentation detailing its design and the values assigned to each of its inputs must be made publicly available to TOs on request.
These concerns have already been shared with the B0XX and SmashBox teams to get their feedback, but due to the homebrew nature of many custom controllers we wanted to make sure the people also had some idea of what is going on at the moment and if you have any feedback or suggestions, please feel free to discuss it in this thread for maximum visibility to the Competition Committee, or submit it formally as an amendment if you think it covers everything!