Weegee stalling

[Tesh]

Why isn't infinite coin laddering banned? Its almost as broken as homing attack stalling.
Can any BBR members make sure there is a rule banning this in 4.0? Or maybe 3.2?

 

[mood4food77]

when the hell are you gonna pull it off?

 

[Trent]

Usually I'd consider this trolling on Tesh's part.

However, in doubles, if two Luigis are teaming, this is possible. So technically it's in the same boat as Sonic's HA stall.

Spoiler

No matter how stupid both debates are

 

[SuSa]

Technically this and Sonic's HA stall are both legal and not stalling.

The opponent can jump down and hit them. Regardless if they die trying, they can.

 

[B!squick]

WTF HAXXZORZ! Hurry up and ban this shiz, BBR!

 

[Ripple]

they are not preventing any and all combat with the other players. they are in fact constantly getting hit.

 

[SuSa]

they are not preventing any and all combat with the other players. they are in fact constantly getting hit.

I think it specifies the opponent, but they aren't preventing themselves from getting hit. Snake can use side-B, Pit can do a fancy/epic looped arrow. MK can go down there and choose any move he pleases. (Well.. so can Pit.. haha)

It's not stalling. It's tactically hiding.

 

[Trent]

Basically what BBR should get out of this, is that if HA stall isn't banned, then neither should this be. If HA stall is banned, this should be banned as well.

Nothing too big or anything.

 

[iRJi]

Technically this and Sonic's HA stall are both legal and not stalling.

The opponent can jump down and hit them. Regardless if they die trying, they can.

However, I think you can do this in the air too iirc. Don't take my word for it, but you might be able to pillar to the death line without dying, since the knock back on the weak up B might not be strong enough to actually kill you from momentum.

 

[#HBC | Dark Horse]

Actually, this is part of the "no stalling" rule, I think

 

[SuSa]

However, I think you can do this in the air too iirc. Don't take my word for it, but you might be able to pillar to the death line without dying, since the knock back on the weak up B might not be strong enough to actually kill you from momentum.

You could time it better and try to do it in the corner of the stage, or near the sky but space the up-B's a bit.

Still hittable by a majority of the cast.

Actually, this is part of the "no stalling" rule, I think

It's not, neither is Sonic's homing attack (but TO's ban it still anyways)

Extending Meta Knight's Dimensional Cape by leaving the ground and returning to it while invisible is banned. (For example, flicking the C-Stick up while holding down on the control stick during the move will cause this to happen.)


Stalling is banned.
Stalling: The act of deliberately avoiding any and all conflict so that one may make the game unplayable. Running away from an opponent to reach a better position is not stalling, while using an infinite to run out the timer rather than to score a KO is. As such, any infinite chain-grabs, locks, etc. cannot exceed 300%.

Read that carefully.

You are avoiding conflict, but your opponent can bring it to you. Technically your opponent is stalling if you sit down there homing attack/spamming up-B as double weegee all day. As they are avoiding going under the stage to attack you.

 

[Poltergust]

I don't see how this is a problem. This can only happen during doubles, right? Can't you just foot-stool your partner to reach the Luigis?

EDIT: And if they are doing it under the stage, most characters can stop them similarly to Sonic's HA under the stage.

 

[Masky]

..........

 

[SuSa]

No... this is stalling. Peach infinite side-b was stalling in Melee

Then I was lied to by the BBR. I've been told by several of them that homing attack is not banned as stalling - but TO's ban it anyways.

Also that shouldn't have been banned. (Characters could attempt to spike her, then walljump/recover back up if able)

 

[Masky]

..........

 

[SuSa]

Hey Masky. Reread the stalling quote.

Extending Meta Knight's Dimensional Cape by leaving the ground and returning to it while invisible is banned. (For example, flicking the C-Stick up while holding down on the control stick during the move will cause this to happen.)


Stalling is banned.
Stalling: The act of deliberately avoiding any and all conflict so that one may make the game unplayable. Running away from an opponent to reach a better position is not stalling, while using an infinite to run out the timer rather than to score a KO is. As such, any infinite chain-grabs, locks, etc. cannot exceed 300%.

Nowhere do I see this as avoiding any combat (they can still be hit, and by a decent proportion of the cast as well) | Also they aren't avoiding combat (as has been said by Ripple) as they are constantly getting hurt. They are not avoiding all conflict as the opponent may choose to hit the at any time. (Although doing so, may lead to their death. So it's not that they can't, it's that they won't)

So technically the enemy team that isn't doing this... is stalling.

Also, I don't see how information from the Smash Lab would be relevant.....

 

[Masky]

..........

 

[Tesh]

The 2 luigis aren't avoiding conflict with each other.

 

[Crow!]

Same boat as homing attack stall here, and actually less problematic. In certain matchups, being able to perpetually hang out underneath the stage is stalling, whereas in other matchups it isn't. Since this requires doubles, if either opposing character can break the stall, you're in good shape, whereas in singles you have to be such a character yourself.

Like HA stall, and like short extensions of the dimensional cape, the policy is pretty much "the TO can call it out in obvious problem cases, but in borderline cases we just hope people don't try to stretch the rule because it's not really enforceable."

 

[SuSa]

Positioning your character under the center of the stage indefinitely seems to me to be "avoiding any and all conflict"... Historically in Smash, if the only way to interrupt a stalling tactic involves killing your own character (like stopping a rising pound stall offstage, or the Peach infinite wall bomb), it is generally classified as stalling, especially if it's risky that you might not even kill the staller in your attempt.

Information from the Smash Lab is relevant if they objectively discover "XXX is officially unbeatable and must be declared stalling, here is the frame data". For instance, if the Smash Lab people discovered "Luigi is untouchable if he does this stall, here is our evidence", then it would make it clear that TOs should interpret it as stalling in applying the rules

That's historically, it doesn't mean it's right.... America found that out when they ended slavery and gave woman suffrage.

It also doesn't involve killing your own character, if you are a character that can handle it. Maybe you should like... go Pit/Snake/MK/Jigglypuff/DDD/Wario (I'm sure he could pull it off), and I'm certain I'm forgettting others.... if you're going to be facing a double Luigi team.

Also Luigi isn't invincible during this, so he'd be touchable.

 

[Masky]

..........

 

[Tesh]

With well coordinated footstooling and up B saves, I think even a double ganon team could overcome this.

 

[SuSa]

I agree with your first part but... since when is that "the policy"? What do you mean by "the policy"? Who created this "policy"? Are you saying that the TO does NOT have the ability or the right to call it out in "borderline" cases? What is a "borderline" case? What prevents a TO from simply making the judgement, isn't that the purpose for why stalling is defined as a category of tactics instead of a list of them? Is it even possible to enforce the stalling rule without the TO making judgments of his own?

This is exactly what I meant when I said BBR members individually tend to obfuscate players' and TOs' perception of the rules, since they don't have a coherent image and all have different agendas.

That's because the TO's can have whatever **** rules they want.

The BBR only make suggestions, and as such - they aren't uniform in decisions. Each has their own view, even if many are shared.

With well coordinated footstooling and up B saves, I think even a double ganon team could overcome this.

I lol'd. Technically most every doubles team could with a well timed footstool to save your teammate, and then up-B to recover... except maybe.. Mario.

 

[Tesh]

Mario could use FLUDD to push him teammate under the stage without double jumping, and then cape them to amplify their up B. Then you can jump into their up B to help yourself recover. You may have to tech the ledge as well.

Or he could just use FLUDD to push the luigis close enough to sweetspot up b on each other.

I'm just worried the doubles metagame will soon revolve around who can punish ICL stalling while having a solid team on stage.

 

[Masky]

..........

 

[SuSa]

The BBR itself makes uniform decisions. You don't see multiple factions or individual members of the BBR putting out different rulesets and naming them "The BBR Official Ruleset."

The problem with BBR members posting vague, wrong, or often radical statements is that people tend to interpret these as more "official" than what non-BBR people say, and view it as representative of the BBR's stance.

You demonstrated this yourself earlier in the thread when you said that you believed a certain interpretation of the stalling rule to be correct because BBR members told you so. IMO, they should be a bit more responsible

I'm sure there are many splits in the BBR considering the ruleset (It's obvious, and stated often). If it was that easy to make uniform decisions with 70~ people, you'd see TO's doing it themselves [and this would actually be better for the community if they could do this...]

Also rules are open for interpretation when they are not specific enough.


your argument

 

[Masky]

..........

 

[SuSa]

The BBR as a group only need to have a 2/3rds majority for their rules. I'm unsure how it works out if they are unable to reach that amount. Especially since so many seem to be pretty inactive from what I hear.

We don't need the BBR to tell us that certain characters are better than other characters...

I've yet to see a BBR member say items should be legal - but I do see many arguing for Snake to drop.

But none of those were stating an interpretation of what is presented. Stalling is an interpretation. If I was a TO, this would not be banned - because it's not stalling. Hence, if they are to classify this as stalling - you cannot back that by the BBR's ruleset (at this does not fall under it) but rather what the TO classifies it as.

Reread this post a couple times if you still don't understand what I'm trying to say.

 

[Masky]

..........

 

[SuSa]

Because one user proves you're wrong by showing the interpretation of the BBR ruleset varies from TO to TO?

 

[WedginatorX]

@ the whole "HA stall is beatable in certain matchups" thing.
then if you lose to a sonic due to HA stalling, counterpick a character that can beat it and/or a stage which sonic can't HA stall on. Simple as that. Rules aren't generally decided based on "oh this is gay against this and that character." Otherwise MK would be banned already. If it's a literally unbeatable tactic by many characters, then ban it. There are few characters that can't punish HA stalling, and about as many or fewer stages that sonic can EFFECTIVELY homing attack stall on.
/said while extremely tired, so I may want to rethink things later.

 

[Wretched]

guys
if a team of weegees takes one stock off of the other team they can stall>win

 

[Raziek]

Am I the only one thinking about the fact that if you attack them under the stage, they lose TWO stocks, you only lose one?

This really doesn't seem like a problem. (If you even die)

 

[Delta-cod]

guys
if a team of weegees takes one stock off of the other team they can stall>win

But if y-

Am I the only one thinking about the fact that if you attack them under the stage, they lose TWO stocks, you only lose one?

This really doesn't seem like a problem. (If you even die)

I really wanted to post that, but I saw this too late. fuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu

 

[Tesh]

But.....what if they have a 5 stock lead?

 

[Starwarrior27]

It seems to me like Susa has taken an interesting approach to the definition of stalling saying that if it can be interrupted, then the team that is not interrupting it is stalling. An interesting idea, but knowing that that clause about stalling was put in to make the game more competitive, not more fair, putting one's self in a strategic position so that the opposing forces have only one choice is not competitive.

So my take on this is that this Luigi laddering is stalling, since looking back at the definition Susa offered:

Stalling is banned.
Stalling: The act of deliberately avoiding any and all conflict so that one may make the game unplayable. Running away from an opponent to reach a better position is not stalling, while using an infinite to run out the timer rather than to score a KO is. As such, any infinite chain-grabs, locks, etc. cannot exceed 300%.

Now, I agree with this definition, but to say that "conflict" is analogous to "receiving damage" would be illogical (This is not an accusation at you Susa.). From the American Heritage Dictionary in 2010, conflict means "opposition between characters or forces." Let me emphasize the important part "opposition between characters or forces." Since the Luigis are not opposing one another (they are on the same team) and they are under the stage, they are avoiding conflict by my standards.

However, when it comes down to it, Susa is right when he says that it should be up to the TO to ban this "technique." Since the definition stalling provided in the official MLG rules are still vague, it should be banned under the discretion of the TO.

Oh, and Tesh, what exactly is your opinion on the topic? Your posts appear to contradict one another.

 

[SuSa]

However, when it comes down to it, Susa is right when he says that it should be up to the TO to ban this "technique." Since the definition stalling provided in the official MLG rules are still vague, it should be banned under the discretion of the TO.

You just made my point right there. I don't think it should be banned - you do. Just different interpretations of the same rule.

Also the opposing team can work together (as mentioned) so long as both of them are alive.

 

[Tesh]

I want everything banned until we are left with MK dittos on battlefield with a very strict LGL in 1 stock food matches.

I was pro ban then I realized that everyone except MK is just brokenly awful.

 

[Starwarrior27]

However, when it comes down to it, Susa is right when he says that it should be up to the TO to ban this "technique." Since the definition stalling provided in the official MLG rules are still vague, it should be banned under the discretion of the TO.

You just made my point right there. I don't think it should be banned - you do. Just different interpretations of the same rule.

Also the opposing team can work together (as mentioned) so long as both of them are alive.

Susa, I made no claim that the "technique" should be banned; I merely said that it was stalling. In fact, when you quoted me, I said that "it should be banned under the discretion of the TO." You said that too! Since you said "If I was a TO, this would not be banned," we just agree that it should be up to the TO. I merely wanted to add that I believed that the "technique" was also stalling.

 

[SuSa]

I want everything banned until we are left with MK dittos on battlefield with a very strict LGL in 1 stock food matches.

I was pro ban then I realized that everyone except MK is just brokenly awful.

The latter part of that is soooo sigworthy.
"I was pro ban, then I realized that everyone except MK is just awful."

Susa, I made no claim that the "technique" should be banned; I merely said that it was stalling. In fact, when you quoted me, I said that "it should be banned under the discretion of the TO." You said that too! Since you said "If I was a TO, this would not be banned," we just agree that it should be up to the TO. I merely wanted to add that I believed that the "technique" was also stalling.

You said it was stalling. Stalling=Banned, therefore to you, the technique is banned. Transitive Property