• Welcome to Smashboards, the world's largest Super Smash Brothers community! Over 250,000 Smash Bros. fans from around the world have come to discuss these great games in over 19 million posts!

    You are currently viewing our boards as a visitor. Click here to sign up right now and start on your path in the Smash community!

A new idea for items in competitive play

XavierSylfaen

Smash Apprentice
Joined
Jul 19, 2012
Messages
138
Location
Folsom, CA reppin' the 916
I'm sure everyone can agree that randomness detracts from skill, even if they're okay with that happening. And most people don't want anything but skill to be a part of competitive play. I wouldn't be fine with controlled spawns of items if there was any randomness involved, and I know many people think the same way. Say I'm playing Falco v. Falcon, and I get kneed away just as an item spawns. Falcon picks it up, it happens to be a Frankin Badge. Now I can't use my lasers at all. My options to approach have now been limited to a significant degree. And don't give me any "but you could just approach another way" crap. The fact of the matter is, due to the item randomly being a Franklin Badge rather than something like Food or a Smoke Ball, I have now been put at a disadvantage. A random factor has changed the way the match will be played, and very possibly changed the outcome of the match as well.

The ONLY way items could be a part of competitive play is if they were completely un-random. Period. There is a way to do this, but it's not anywhere close likely to happen in SSB4. But there's nothing wrong with speculation. Here's my proposal:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

BASIC GAME RULES

Instead of sticking with the Melee standard of four stocks with an 8-minute time limit, the game would be three stocks with a 5-minute time limit. (Alternatively, a 5 min. 30 second time limit, to be explained later.) The shorter games are a result of having more games. Every set would be played at least best of 5 games instead of the minimum of best of 3 there is now, and Grand Finals would be best of 7 or best of 9, or possibly higher if the TO wishes it.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

ITEM LOCATION AND SPAWN TIME

Items would have to spawn in one given location, and never, ever deviate from this exact location. Items would have to spawn at exact intervals, and players would need to be made aware of these intervals. The timer would have to be turned on, and items could always spawn in the one given spawn place at 15-second or 30-second intervals or something. It would have to be 10, 15, 20, 30, maybe 40, or 60 seconds, realistically, because if you do something stupid like every 17 seconds then you'll have players doing mental math to figure out when the item's coming instead of playing the game. To help awareness of when the item would spawn, there would be a separate timer in the upper right that counted down to the next item spawn. Here's a poorly-done example in MS Paint.



I propose 60-second intervals for the item spawns. This could be changed fairly easily, although the time limit would have to change slightly as well, although I'll explain that later Assuming the speed at which people die in the one Mario v. Megaman match we've seen remains the same for the final version, this would spawn about one item per life depending on how defensively each player was playing.

This solves the placement issue, but not the randomness of the items themselves. There are three ways to solve this issue:

1. There is only one item allowed in all competitive play everywhere. It is always the same item. It always spawns in the middle of the stage at a given interval.
2. The first game is played with no items. The loser then gets to pick one non-overpowered item that can spawn in the middle of the stage at said intervals. It will be the same item the whole game.
3. (my personal favorite, and the one I will be explaining) The first game is played with no items. Then the following system would be put into place:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

DETERMINING WHICH ITEM SPAWNS

Which item is picked to spawn seems like it would have to be random, but that's not necessarily the case. There could be a system in which you first set the the interval at which items spawn (in this example, 60 seconds) then set the time limit (in this example, 5 minutes). After that, there would be four slots in which to put items. The slots each correspond to a time - In this case, 1:00, 2:00, 3:00, and 4:00. Each player would take turns picking an offical competitive play-approved item to go in each slot, and then that corresponding item would then spawn at that given time. The first game is played without items, as I said, but then once each player has got a feel for his opponent he will have a chance to pick items to help deal with them. The loser of the inital game will have control over the 1 minute and 3 minute slots, while the winner will be able to pick the items for the 2 minute adn 4 minute slots. Here's an MS Paint example.



If you wanted items to spawn at 30 second intervals, you would have to have a 5 minute 30 second time limit.

Item 1 - 0:30
Item 2 - 1:00
Item 3 - 1:30
Item 4 - 2:00
Item 5 - 2:30
Item 6 - 3:00
Item 7 - 3:30
Item 8 - 4:00
Item 9 - 4:30
Item 10 - 5:00

Obviously there would still have to be a banned items list that would have to be universally accepted, and obviously this isn't going to happen in the first place because we're not the developers of Smash unless one of us happens to be working at Bamco. But it's just an idea that I thought might be a lot of fun.

Thoughts/ideas/suggestions?
 

Ometa

Smash Apprentice
Joined
Jan 11, 2011
Messages
99
Location
Under your bed
3DS FC
4167-5056-0993
I think this could go both ways (though I doubt they would implement this XD). Example: Match turns hype, item spawns = no more hype, and vice-versa. It also seems to a character with dominating stage-control (like snake or olimar, just for reference), the items would be almost advantagous don'tcha think? :/ But I could see people having tournament with this in their ruleset, and some that would ban this completely. Nevertheless, I like the idea;):bluejump:
 

PlayerXIII

Smash Journeyman
Joined
Jun 14, 2013
Messages
209
NNID
ShailsPT
3DS FC
3652-1682-9410
This idea seems quite good. A good way to make items legal although I'd say we should still have some tournaments with items banned as there will be those that fully support the idea and those that are completely against it: This will make both parties happy.
 

LiteralGrill

Smokin' Hot~
Joined
Dec 9, 2012
Messages
5,976
Location
Wisconsin
And items for competitive play thread already exists, and I think it even has a hack to do somewhat what you wanted to in brawl, give it a quick search on here, it's an excellent read and they did a TON of work on it!
 

[Corn]

Smash Ace
Joined
Mar 21, 2013
Messages
621
Location
Northville, Mi
And items for competitive play thread already exists, and I think it even has a hack to do somewhat what you wanted to in brawl, give it a quick search on here, it's an excellent read and they did a TON of work on it!

The thread mentioned allows for the selection of where items can spawn, but the rate and location are still relatively random.

This solves most of the issues, but is unlikely SSB4 will have then in such great detail seeing as the formula for items hasnt changed.
 

LiteralGrill

Smokin' Hot~
Joined
Dec 9, 2012
Messages
5,976
Location
Wisconsin
The thread mentioned allows for the selection of where items can spawn, but the rate and location are still relatively random.

This solves most of the issues, but is unlikely SSB4 will have then in such great detail seeing as the formula for items hasnt changed.

I can agree with you here, but it at least gives people something to look at possibly for an idea of standard items play, so it's worth a look.
 

Diddy Kong

Smash Obsessed
Joined
Dec 8, 2004
Messages
26,423
Switch FC
SW-1597-979602774
Items will never be used in Smash competitive play.
 

PlayerXIII

Smash Journeyman
Joined
Jun 14, 2013
Messages
209
NNID
ShailsPT
3DS FC
3652-1682-9410
Items will never be used in Smash competitive play.

If they are made more regular and not as random as with this idea, I wouldn't be surprised if they were used. They add extra depth to the game as knowing what items work best with your character and against the enemy character, as well as how to counter certain items and learning how to control the map (even with a character that doesn't fare too well at it) so you are there when the item comes, in my opinion, all fall into the skill-field.
 

_R@bid_

Smash Journeyman
Joined
May 15, 2013
Messages
462
Location
Inside Your Head
I personally don't like this, because too great an emphasis would be given to stage control. In a game where death is based on your position on the stage, stage control is already very important without adding in one specific spot where items spawn.
 

smashbrolink

Smash Journeyman
Joined
Jun 14, 2013
Messages
307
Location
Santa Ana California
I'm fine with the randomness.
Even when it doesn't work in my favor, I feel it's just a bigger challenge to deal with unexpected circumstances, and that makes the match more exciting.
Makes it more like a real fight, where you're not always going to be able to predict what will happen, where you've got to be even more on your toes to deal with the unexpected.
In my experience, it's only the people that get upset at losing a match for any reason they can't control that get angry in the end over this sort of thing.
 

SmashChu

Banned via Warnings
Joined
Jul 14, 2003
Messages
5,924
Location
Tampa FL
The ONLY way items could be a part of competitive play is if they were completely un-random. Period.
Not sure why this is an issue. DOTA 2 has a ton of random elements but it doesn't stop them. And I think DOTA 2 is a bigger competitive game than Smash.
 

LiteralGrill

Smokin' Hot~
Joined
Dec 9, 2012
Messages
5,976
Location
Wisconsin
See, items COULD have a chance of being used. It'd just take a different mindset to try it, though we do have ample opportunities with 2 smash games this time.
 

XavierSylfaen

Smash Apprentice
Joined
Jul 19, 2012
Messages
138
Location
Folsom, CA reppin' the 916
In my experience, it's only the people that get upset at losing a match for any reason they can't control that get angry in the end over this sort of thing.

Well, that's the whole point of this idea, though. If you played a competitive match with items the way they are it would be unfair towards whoever the random item spawn favored.

Not sure why this is an issue. DOTA 2 has a ton of random elements but it doesn't stop them. And I think DOTA 2 is a bigger competitive game than Smash.

I don't play DOTA 2 because I don't like MOBA gameplay, but if it does have a ton of random elements as you said, I can't imagine I'd like playing it that much even if I did enjoy the core of the game. I like competition to be purely skill-based. The only reason people (including me) don't gripe about G&W is because he's terrible, so there's never any salt over losing a match because of a "9" hammer since no one plays him anyways.
 

LiteralGrill

Smokin' Hot~
Joined
Dec 9, 2012
Messages
5,976
Location
Wisconsin
Items don't play favorites; there's nothing unfair about a 50/50 chance.
Got a fair point here, it could just as easily go random for the other guy too though.

Some people have said have bo5 fights instead of bo3 and make the time limit shorter to possibly help with any randomness before, any thought on this idea?
 

XavierSylfaen

Smash Apprentice
Joined
Jul 19, 2012
Messages
138
Location
Folsom, CA reppin' the 916
Items don't play favorites; there's nothing unfair about a 50/50 chance.
Imagine a match that is on its last game with each person with one stock and both at 150%.

Now, a Starman materializes in front of Player 1, and he wins the match because he can approach easily and KO Player 2.

This is not fair. The point of competitive play is to display one's skill and test it against others'. The point of casual play is to have fun without caring one way or another what the consequences of the match are. Having random items detracts from skill, but can enhance the fun of casual play for some people.

I don't know how you can even possibly debate that random items as they are now work in comp play. They just don't. Items have to be reworked immensely, in the way I proposed or a different method, to even dream of having them work in competitive play. Trying to claim that games played with items are representative of skill is just silly. I'd have fun going to a tournament with items turned on but it'd be just that - some cheap fun, not that sense of satisfaction gained from a hard-earned victory. Item play as it is is glorified rolling of the dice.
 

SmashChu

Banned via Warnings
Joined
Jul 14, 2003
Messages
5,924
Location
Tampa FL
Imagine a match that is on its last game with each person with one stock and both at 150%.

Now, a Starman materializes in front of Player 1, and he wins the match because he can approach easily and KO Player 2.

This is not fair. The point of competitive play is to display one's skill and test it against others'. The point of casual play is to have fun without caring one way or another what the consequences of the match are. Having random items detracts from skill, but can enhance the fun of casual play for some people.

I don't know how you can even possibly debate that random items as they are now work in comp play. They just don't. Items have to be reworked immensely, in the way I proposed or a different method, to even dream of having them work in competitive play. Trying to claim that games played with items are representative of skill is just silly. I'd have fun going to a tournament with items turned on but it'd be just that - some cheap fun, not that sense of satisfaction gained from a hard-earned victory. Item play as it is is glorified rolling of the dice.
1)These bad things you keep mentioning can work in your favor as well
2)Your assuming that by items being a roll of the dice that they determine the winner. Items are not a magic "I win" button (though some are stronger than others). Like anything else, you have to learn to adapt
3)Likewise, just because the other person got a Star doesn't mean they'll win.
4)Matches are best 2 our of 3. Marvel went to best 3 out of 5 because of the randomness of the game. Again, only Smash players have an issue with this.
 

smashbrolink

Smash Journeyman
Joined
Jun 14, 2013
Messages
307
Location
Santa Ana California
Imagine a match that is on its last game with each person with one stock and both at 150%.

Now, a Starman materializes in front of Player 1, and he wins the match because he can approach easily and KO Player 2.

This is not fair.

No, it's perfectly fair.
Know why?
Because that Starman had an equal chance of not only appearing in front of player two, but also appearing in a place where it would have missed both entirely.

There are no favorites in a 50/50 chance.
The only time people think otherwise is if they're not the one benefiting from it.


Edit: Also this:

1)These bad things you keep mentioning can work in your favor as well
2)Your assuming that by items being a roll of the dice that they determine the winner. Items are not a magic "I win" button (though some are stronger than others). Like anything else, you have to learn to adapt
3)Likewise, just because the other person got a Star doesn't mean they'll win.
4)Matches are best 2 our of 3. Marvel went to best 3 out of 5 because of the randomness of the game. Again, only Smash players have an issue with this.
Most excellent.
I've even got a personal example.
Small time tournament I participated in, I was against a Samus.
She happened to get a Smash Ball before I could stop her.
Know what I did?
I jumped over the blast. Everyone assumed I was going to lose, but I made a come-back by using all 3 of Link's jumps to sail right over the majority of the blast, avoiding the majority of the damage.
At the end, I only got nicked by the tail of it. I did get sent flying a bit of a ways, but I didn't lose the match and it wasn't an unfair advantage, because my skill made up the difference.
With a lot of the items in the game, it all comes down to how they are used.
In the case of the star-man, it becomes a matter of how well you are able to avoid your opponent, though I do not disagree with that particular item not being used.
 

smashbrolink

Smash Journeyman
Joined
Jun 14, 2013
Messages
307
Location
Santa Ana California
Got a fair point here, it could just as easily go random for the other guy too though.

Some people have said have bo5 fights instead of bo3 and make the time limit shorter to possibly help with any randomness before, any thought on this idea?
I don't know what BO 5 and BO 3 are abbreviations for....
 

Aidebit

Smash Journeyman
Joined
Jun 10, 2013
Messages
210
Location
Philippines
1)These bad things you keep mentioning can work in your favor as well
2)Your assuming that by items being a roll of the dice that they determine the winner. Items are not a magic "I win" button (though some are stronger than others). Like anything else, you have to learn to adapt
3)Likewise, just because the other person got a Star doesn't mean they'll win.
4)Matches are best 2 our of 3. Marvel went to best 3 out of 5 because of the randomness of the game. Again, only Smash players have an issue with this.
1.) I don't want random things to help me win a match, that makes me feel undeserving of the win.
2.) and 3.) Imagine you have stage control, then a starman appears where your opponent is, and he gets stage control, and he wins. He won because he got stage control back with the starman.
4.)That could work, possibly, but it may feel dragged out.
 

LiteralGrill

Smokin' Hot~
Joined
Dec 9, 2012
Messages
5,976
Location
Wisconsin
1.) I don't want random things to help me win a match, that makes me feel undeserving of the win.
2.) and 3.) Imagine you have stage control, then a starman appears where your opponent is, and he gets stage control, and he wins. He won because he got stage control back with the starman.
4.)That could work, possibly, but it may feel dragged out.

What if the match times were shorter, it'd depend on if items actually sped up play but maybe 5 minute 3 stocks with best of 5 could work. best of 7 for finals maybe?
 

Aidebit

Smash Journeyman
Joined
Jun 10, 2013
Messages
210
Location
Philippines
No, it's perfectly fair.
Know why?
Because that Starman had an equal chance of not only appearing in front of player two, but also appearing in a place where it would have missed both entirely.

There are no favorites in a 50/50 chance.
The only time people think otherwise is if they're not the one benefiting from it.
So we're just gonna decide everything with a 50/50 chance, it's perfectly fair, right?
What if the match times were shorter, it'd depend on if items actually sped up play but maybe 5 minute 3 stocks with best of 5 could work. best of 7 for finals maybe?
Maybe, but five minutes 3 stocks could lead to timeouts if the game is based on defensive play. Maybe if it was 2 stocks, five minutes, it could work.
 

[Corn]

Smash Ace
Joined
Mar 21, 2013
Messages
621
Location
Northville, Mi
No, it's perfectly fair.
Know why?
Because that Starman had an equal chance of not only appearing in front of player two, but also appearing in a place where it would have missed both entirely.

There are no favorites in a 50/50 chance.
The only time people think otherwise is if they're not the one benefiting from it.


Holy crap this logic makes my head hurt.
Using the word 50/50 chance with no player control in thread that is talking about competitive play with items is ludicrous. The ruleset is to decrease the random chance of nearly everything so skill reigns.


The only possible way items will be allowed is if they have set spawn location and time as well as restricting said items in general. Something of which the OP did nicely.



I like the idea posed in the OP.
Though this reduces the luck invloved by alot, it puts an emphasis on stage control which I believe could completly destroy counterpicking stages. I wouldnt know though as it has never been tried.
 

LiteralGrill

Smokin' Hot~
Joined
Dec 9, 2012
Messages
5,976
Location
Wisconsin
I like the idea of having Best of 5, because the longer a match goes on, the more fun I get to have.
The time limit, however, I feel should either stay where it is or go away entirely. Just my two cents.

The idea for the best of five, would be to counter the possible randomness items provide, while the shortening of matches would be to help people running tournaments so they don't got on forever. Having ran many tournaments in PSASBR where we didn't get a timed option for stock, I'll just mention how horrifyingly long matches with no time can be. Had a grand finals match last almost 2 hours long with a best of 5... then the guy in loser's won so we waited another hour and a half to finish the tournament...
 

smashbrolink

Smash Journeyman
Joined
Jun 14, 2013
Messages
307
Location
Santa Ana California
So we're just gonna decide everything with a 50/50 chance, it's perfectly fair, right?
Wrong.
Giving you a 50/50 chance at an item is not the same as giving you a 50/50 chance at a guaranteed win and at everything else in general.
An advantage is only unfair when the other player has a 0% probability of the same thing ever happening to them in a match, and that's simply not how items work.
It's how you use those kinds of opportunities that matter.

But, heck, if it's really such a huge game-ruining concern, then there's an entire thread out there listing items that don't give a super huge advantage and that can be perfectly viable for tournament play, even going down to the point of separating counterpicks and detailing what works in 1vs1 as opposed to 2vs2.

The hate over items isn't justified. That's my take on it; there's no reason to abhor them this ardently.
 

DefenseTech

Smash Apprentice
Joined
Jun 12, 2013
Messages
81
Even if there was a timer counting down to the next spawn...

Some characters are simply more mobile than others, in my opinion having items would never be a 50/50 toss up unless it was a mirror match

Bowser players across the nation would cringe every time an item spawned between them and a fox
 

[Corn]

Smash Ace
Joined
Mar 21, 2013
Messages
621
Location
Northville, Mi
Wrong.
Giving you a 50/50 chance at an item is not the same as giving you a 50/50 chance at a guaranteed win and at everything else in general.
An advantage is only unfair when the other player has a 0% probability of the same thing ever happening to them in a match, and that's simply not how items work.
It's how you use those kinds of opportunities that matter.

But, heck, if it's really such a huge game-ruining concern, then there's an entire thread out there listing items that don't give a super huge advantage and that can be perfectly viable for tournament play, even going down to the point of separating counterpicks and detailing what works in 1vs1 as opposed to 2vs2.

The hate over items isn't justified. That's my take on it; there's no reason to abhor them this ardently.


Encouraging luck in anything competitive is a stupid concept.

The thread you are mentioning tried to normalize spawn locations through the use of hacks as well as banning many items whilst allowing other gamechanging ones, but it still had many random elements because the game sinply couldnt be hacked enough to remove most of the luck. In essence its a crappy version of what the OP is proposing.
 

smashbrolink

Smash Journeyman
Joined
Jun 14, 2013
Messages
307
Location
Santa Ana California
Holy crap this logic makes my head hurt.
Using the word 50/50 chance with no player control in thread that is talking about competitive play with items is ludicrous. The ruleset is to decrease the random chance of nearly everything so skill reigns.


The only possible way items will be allowed is if they have set spawn location and time as well as restricting said items in general. Something of which the OP did nicely.



I like the idea posed in the OP.
Though this reduces the luck invloved by alot, it puts an emphasis on stage control which I believe could completly destroy counterpicking stages. I wouldnt know though as it has never been tried.
Encouraging luck in anything competitive is a stupid concept.

The thread you are mentioning tried to normalize spawn locations through the use of hacks as well as banning many items whilst allowing other gamechanging ones, but it still had many random elements because the game simply couldnt be hacked enough to remove most of the luck. In essence its a crappy version of what the OP is proposing.
I see even less benefit in completely controlling item spawn locations/intervals because that would, in the end, just encourage a player to camp the spot when they know the next spawn interval is coming up.
That takes away from the excitement of the match and shows even less strategic capability than being able to take advantage of an unexpected situation appropriately when it occurs.
At least the list goes through which items are best suited to not being overpowered, which is much better an option than just tossing items out.

Competitive play takes itself too seriously; there's nothing inherently wrong with a 50/50 chance, though I find it funny that it is so ardently against chance when there's nothing that can be done to completely control it even without items.
To entirely negate chance, players woul'd have to control their opponent, too. They can learn an opponent's playstyle and predict their next move to a degree, but in the end they're still betting on the chance that the opponent will react the way they're expecting them to react to the player's own actions.
 

Aidebit

Smash Journeyman
Joined
Jun 10, 2013
Messages
210
Location
Philippines
Wrong.
Giving you a 50/50 chance at an item is not the same as giving you a 50/50 chance at a guaranteed win and at everything else in general.
An advantage is only unfair when the other player has a 0% probability of the same thing ever happening to them in a match, and that's simply not how items work.
It's how you use those kinds of opportunities that matter.

But, heck, if it's really such a huge game-ruining concern, then there's an entire thread out there listing items that don't give a super huge advantage and that can be perfectly viable for tournament play, even going down to the point of separating counterpicks and detailing what works in 1vs1 as opposed to 2vs2.

The hate over items isn't justified. That's my take on it; there's no reason to abhor them this ardently.
But what if that item was a Bob-omb? Isn't that just a stock if you hit it? And before you say just use less game-changing items, what will that bring to the game exactly? (Asking a legit question)
It's not hate against items, it's hate against randomness. Randomness detracts from Skill, and I would want skill to be the only determining factor in who wins.
 

smashbrolink

Smash Journeyman
Joined
Jun 14, 2013
Messages
307
Location
Santa Ana California
The idea for the best of five, would be to counter the possible randomness items provide, while the shortening of matches would be to help people running tournaments so they don't got on forever. Having ran many tournaments in PSASBR where we didn't get a timed option for stock, I'll just mention how horrifyingly long matches with no time can be. Had a grand finals match last almost 2 hours long with a best of 5... then the guy in loser's won so we waited another hour and a half to finish the tournament...
XD Okay, I understand the time limit, now, so yeah, leaving it as-is would be fine. Heck, maybe even shorten it.
I can understand why some people would get bored over too long a match, even if I myself do enjoy them.
 

[Corn]

Smash Ace
Joined
Mar 21, 2013
Messages
621
Location
Northville, Mi
I see even less benefit in completely controlling item spawn locations/intervals because that would, in the end, just encourage a player to camp the spot when they know the next spawn interval is coming up.
That takes away from the excitement of the match and shows even less strategic capability than being able to take advantage of an unexpected situation appropriately when it occurs.

Competitive play takes itself too seriously; there's nothing inherently wrong with a 50/50 chance, though I find it funny that it is so ardently against chance when there's nothing that can be done to completely control it even without items.
To entirely negate chance, players woul'd have to control their opponent, too. They can learn an opponent's playstyle and predict their next move to a degree, but in the end they're still betting on the chance that the opponent will react the way they're expecting them to react to the player's own actions.


You dont seem to understand why comp players hate chance.

Chance is something completely random or random enough to not be able to be capitalized on until it has already been sighted or used while also not having skill or pattern recognition alter results at all. Throwing a pokeball and getting a legendary compared to Goldeen or Magikarp is like that.

An opponent doing something unexpected is not nearly as close to being random as an item, you clearly recognize a pattern or habit and take advantage of it THE NEXT TIME HE TRIES IT.

The entire smash ruleset exists to limit chance and encourage skill.
 

smashbrolink

Smash Journeyman
Joined
Jun 14, 2013
Messages
307
Location
Santa Ana California
But what if that item was a Bob-omb? Isn't that just a stock if you hit it? And before you say just use less game-changing items, what will that bring to the game exactly? (Asking a legit question)
It's not hate against items, it's hate against randomness. Randomness detracts from Skill, and I would want skill to be the only determining factor in who wins.
Funny; I remember someone saying that DOTA 2 makes random work very fairly and it doesn't detract from skill in any way shape or form.
The case is the same here; having a banana to toss isn't going to affect the skill it would take to time the toss right, just like it wouldn't affect the skill it would take to land a smash on an approaching opponent.
By the same token, just as an opponent could do a variety of things to me were I to try a normal attack, they've also got options when a banana is being flung their way.

Also, did I not mention the list?
Yeah, it takes out things like Bob-ombs. It's a pretty well-balanced list. I seem to see people in here only using the most devastating items as their examples in order to discard items as a whole.
If we're talking fairness in our cases, there's not much fair about doing that, either.
 

[Corn]

Smash Ace
Joined
Mar 21, 2013
Messages
621
Location
Northville, Mi
Funny; I remember someone saying that DOTA 2 makes random work very fairly and it doesn't detract from skill in any way shape or form.
The case is the same here; having a banana to toss isn't going to affect the skill it would take to time the toss right, just like it wouldn't affect the skill it would take to land a smash on an approaching opponent.
By the same token, just as an opponent could do a variety of things to me were I to try a normal attack, they've also got options when a banana is being flung their way.

Also, did I not mention the list?
Yeah, it takes out things like Bob-ombs. It's a pretty well-balanced list. I seem to see people in here only using the most devastating items as their examples in order to discard items as a whole.
If we're talking fairness in our cases, there's not much fair about doing that, either.


I hope you realize that that thread is meant soley for a hacked version of Brawl that limits item spawns. A Banana is very gamechanging mind you.
 

Nick Schovitz

Smash Cadet
Joined
Jul 13, 2010
Messages
70
The exclusion of items always put me away a bit form the competitive community. The game is not as fun to me without them. If I ran them though I would turn off all the power ups and bob-ombs though, just basically anything that can give you benefit by just walking into it rather than from how you use it.
 

smashbrolink

Smash Journeyman
Joined
Jun 14, 2013
Messages
307
Location
Santa Ana California
You dont seem to understand why comp players hate chance.

Chance is something completely random or random enough to not be able to be capitalized on until it has already been sighted or used while also not having skill or pattern recognition alter results at all. Throwing a pokeball and getting a legendary compared to Goldeen or Magikarp is like that.

An opponent doing something unexpected is not nearly as close to being random as an item, you clearly recognize a pattern or habit and take advantage of it THE NEXT TIME HE TRIES IT.

The entire smash ruleset exists to limit chance and encourage skill.
The same can be said about a thrown banana or shell, or any of the other fair-play items listed in that thread I mentioned.
How the opponent uses items is also a part of their playstyle.
If you can plan around patterns in how they act when attacking without an item, then its more than possible to remember how different players handle different items and react accordingly to those, too, right down to the timing they wait for to use them so that you can either avoid them or catch and use them for yourself.

Also, you're once again bringing up overpowered examples as your support, when the page brought up in discussion shows that there's a perfectly-viable list of items outside of them.

Also, I understand perfectly well why competitive players hate random chance.
What I'm saying is that I disagree with their reasons and find the hate silly.

Understanding does not automatically mean agreement.
I don't have to agree with them to understand where they are coming from.
 

smashbrolink

Smash Journeyman
Joined
Jun 14, 2013
Messages
307
Location
Santa Ana California
I hope you realize that that thread is meant soley for a hacked version of Brawl that limits item spawns. A Banana is very gamechanging mind you.
Game changing in a positive sense; if you use it right, it can help you, but if your opponent uses it better, you're screwed.
Items of the right sort are a benefit as they add another level of strategy to the battle depending on how they are used and on what character is using them.
 
Top Bottom