Okay I have talked to some of you about a ruleset change that I put together, well I want to present it here having changed a variety of things since I last talked to most of you. The biggest thing is that it isn't quite a ruleset change per se. I encourage you to take this seriously, because the new wobbling thread has given us a real chance at making a change in TOing here.
THE GOAL: Perhaps find a compromise that IC players would agree to consistently that involved no low%-death wobbling that everyone finds so dreadful to watch. Please read and consider.
MY WOBBLING COMPROMISE IS THIS:
Wobbling is legal by default.
The NON-IC player can either choose to leave it on, or they can ask the IC player if they would initiate PEEF's wobbling compromise. If they agree, the following compromise is in effect:
1: The IC player may only use a semi-wobble of 5 tilts (lasts 2 or 3 seconds) before they must throw/do something else.
2: The NON-IC player may not counterpick any non-neutral stage other than Pokemon Stadium (Unless the IC player agrees of course. This means the non-IC player may not CP Brinstar, KJ, or RC. The IC player still gets a stage ban.)
----------------------------
What the IC's lose: The ability to do a 0-death or low%-to-death wobble. The IC player must use only ESCAPEABLE, NON-INFINITE chaingrabs.
What the IC's gain: They may no longer be taken to a ******** stage to get timed out/projectile camped/whatever.
-----------------------------
What the NON-IC player loses: The ability to counterpick a wack stage like Brinstar or RC.
What the NON-IC player gains: The long-lasting, low% wobbles to death that are at the center of this controversy will be ILLEGAL.
------------------------------
What EVERYONE/THE SPECTATOR gains:
1) Spectators will not see long, boring wobbles deciding tourney matches.
2) Spectators will not see long, boring gay-stage timeouts centered around not getting wobbled in tourney matches.
3) This compromise encourages more creative, interesting, and fun-to-watch grab stuff from the ICs, and discourages campy boredom.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Why I am posting this here:
Really, this is not a ruleset change. What it is is an agreement that could be initiated between two players, kindof like agreeing to play on Corneria even if it is banned. This does not tie ANYONE into an agreement they do not want to take. However, I want the agreement to be crafted in such a way so that IC mains would actually take it! I have talked to Wobbles, and he said that if this compromise was available, he would take it. I myself would take it in many circumstances that I can imagine because I really like doing flashy stuff. I also talked to many non-IC mains that said they would take it this compromise as well because they don't enjoy playing long campy matches on gay stages, but feel like they have to when wobbling is on.
So let me know what you think. Would you take this compromise? Both IC and non-IC mains are encouraged to answer.
Would consider taking the compromise:
PEEF
Wobbles
ICG
THE GOAL: Perhaps find a compromise that IC players would agree to consistently that involved no low%-death wobbling that everyone finds so dreadful to watch. Please read and consider.
MY WOBBLING COMPROMISE IS THIS:
Wobbling is legal by default.
The NON-IC player can either choose to leave it on, or they can ask the IC player if they would initiate PEEF's wobbling compromise. If they agree, the following compromise is in effect:
1: The IC player may only use a semi-wobble of 5 tilts (lasts 2 or 3 seconds) before they must throw/do something else.
2: The NON-IC player may not counterpick any non-neutral stage other than Pokemon Stadium (Unless the IC player agrees of course. This means the non-IC player may not CP Brinstar, KJ, or RC. The IC player still gets a stage ban.)
----------------------------
What the IC's lose: The ability to do a 0-death or low%-to-death wobble. The IC player must use only ESCAPEABLE, NON-INFINITE chaingrabs.
What the IC's gain: They may no longer be taken to a ******** stage to get timed out/projectile camped/whatever.
-----------------------------
What the NON-IC player loses: The ability to counterpick a wack stage like Brinstar or RC.
What the NON-IC player gains: The long-lasting, low% wobbles to death that are at the center of this controversy will be ILLEGAL.
------------------------------
What EVERYONE/THE SPECTATOR gains:
1) Spectators will not see long, boring wobbles deciding tourney matches.
2) Spectators will not see long, boring gay-stage timeouts centered around not getting wobbled in tourney matches.
3) This compromise encourages more creative, interesting, and fun-to-watch grab stuff from the ICs, and discourages campy boredom.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Why I am posting this here:
Really, this is not a ruleset change. What it is is an agreement that could be initiated between two players, kindof like agreeing to play on Corneria even if it is banned. This does not tie ANYONE into an agreement they do not want to take. However, I want the agreement to be crafted in such a way so that IC mains would actually take it! I have talked to Wobbles, and he said that if this compromise was available, he would take it. I myself would take it in many circumstances that I can imagine because I really like doing flashy stuff. I also talked to many non-IC mains that said they would take it this compromise as well because they don't enjoy playing long campy matches on gay stages, but feel like they have to when wobbling is on.
So let me know what you think. Would you take this compromise? Both IC and non-IC mains are encouraged to answer.
Would consider taking the compromise:
PEEF
Wobbles
ICG
