^ The two best reasons for doing anything in the universe ever.
-
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!
Australian Competitive Brawl Ruleset Discussion *Update: 15/05/08* *Spoilers*
- Thread starter Scrubs
- Start date
Scrubs
Smash Lord
Shaz, you are getting worked up again. We talked about this....
Take a chill pill.
I am not arguing just for the sake of it. I am presenting an alternate point of view. Just because you don't agree with it doesn't mean that it is not valuable information.
I don't think I put my point about Dedede across very well. I will try and be concise.
In competition for a ruleset to be fair and unbiased. You cannot have special conditions for certain individuals.
It is like saying "In AFL a goal is worth 6 points, this is true for everyone in the competition except for Essendon for whom a goal is worth 9"
You can't make exceptions like that.
I am not arguing for Dedede to be banned. I am saying you have to either have the stages playable for EVERYONE or no one at all. This is the essence of a balanced ruleset.
Most people don't grasp the concepts you and CATS are putting up. As soon as you posted the Dedede rule several people disagreed with it.
I don't know if you directed your stage ban talk at me..... I never said that the point of stage bans were to create a level playing field. They are to remove stages that you think may disadvantage you in some way. And if there are 19 stages then removing 1 is simply not enough.
I am not trying to discredit what you say and if you look at the first post I am updating it with the RAMBO ruleset. You seem to have forgotten this thread is for discussion and have appointed yourself and CATS as the Kings of rule making and expect everyone to fall in line. This thread is here for people to express their opinions.
Free speech mate.
Take a chill pill.
I am not arguing just for the sake of it. I am presenting an alternate point of view. Just because you don't agree with it doesn't mean that it is not valuable information.
I don't think I put my point about Dedede across very well. I will try and be concise.
In competition for a ruleset to be fair and unbiased. You cannot have special conditions for certain individuals.
It is like saying "In AFL a goal is worth 6 points, this is true for everyone in the competition except for Essendon for whom a goal is worth 9"
You can't make exceptions like that.
I am not arguing for Dedede to be banned. I am saying you have to either have the stages playable for EVERYONE or no one at all. This is the essence of a balanced ruleset.
Most people don't grasp the concepts you and CATS are putting up. As soon as you posted the Dedede rule several people disagreed with it.
I don't know if you directed your stage ban talk at me..... I never said that the point of stage bans were to create a level playing field. They are to remove stages that you think may disadvantage you in some way. And if there are 19 stages then removing 1 is simply not enough.
I am not trying to discredit what you say and if you look at the first post I am updating it with the RAMBO ruleset. You seem to have forgotten this thread is for discussion and have appointed yourself and CATS as the Kings of rule making and expect everyone to fall in line. This thread is here for people to express their opinions.
Free speech mate.
Cronos_Rainbow
Smash Champion
Fark I've said this all along! The Melee stages Wife chose (Peach palyer) are NOT neutral in a fair sense of the world. Their Neutrality comes from lack of stage obstacles and even then with wind, shy guys etc this is false.I don't see how, at all? By your analogy - and view of melee, why don't we ban Peach on Dreamland and Marth on both Yoshi story and Battlefield at RAMBO. Its never to late
Well it started with the actual video game fact, but this was too much to handle for some also -_-.
That's exactly right. however at least Pit isn't glued to the place and made to have no option but to fire arrows. In this case luring and fake outs will play in and the cleverer player will win. The victim of Dededes chain can't move - and so it's much more dramatic.
Well if you don't recall, I spent a long time fighting for this to be ignored - and for those who can avoid getting grabbed by Dedede via various tactics to deal with it as so, while Scrubs was always co-captain of the 'ban stages now coz Dedede is hax' club. Why now that we've made the reevaluation do you suddenly start agreeing on the previous standpoint?
That assumption would be correct. There is no identical stage to another in Brawl. Platform size, number and position as well as actual perimeter dimensions set this. Not to mention various shapes.
With the Dedede rule if the Dedede player loses and wants to play Eldin they can - but they may not use Dedede. It's not an option for them to take you to Eldin with Dedede period.
Scrubs
Smash Lord
Bahhhh! I don't know why I bother when my point is being missed.
I think the stages should be banned.
I would prefer that they be playable for everyone, if the solution is banning them just for DeDeDe,
I will butt out now....
Oh and quick question about the DeDeDe rule. Does it apply in teams???
I am assuming no, because your partner can come and break you out of it. If your partner dies, it is similar to being caught in an infinite by 2 characters so it should be allowed.
I was planning to make a big post but got distracted.
Don't prematurely ban anything is my opinion. Dedede is the closest I will come to accepting otherwise, simply because he is pretty **** broken in some situations. Aside from banning him completely, and to save tournament director effort (we all know how busy they are on tournament days), I say ban stages specific to the infinite when Dedede is chosen. Anything else is vulnerable to malicious players like myself that want to exploit the rules, or is more of a blanket rule than I would promote at this stage of the game.
Don't prematurely ban anything is my opinion. Dedede is the closest I will come to accepting otherwise, simply because he is pretty **** broken in some situations. Aside from banning him completely, and to save tournament director effort (we all know how busy they are on tournament days), I say ban stages specific to the infinite when Dedede is chosen. Anything else is vulnerable to malicious players like myself that want to exploit the rules, or is more of a blanket rule than I would promote at this stage of the game.
Cronos_Rainbow
Smash Champion
Double Post sry.
There is too much 'you are wrong' and 'nope' in here. I check back here all the time hoping not to have to write posts like this but to discuss something new. I've investigated, I've compiled, I've put forward new questions and I seem to get a whole bunch of ego in return. I'm nice and full of myself too - but there's a time and a place for that. Let's just accept that opinion pales beside fact, and work something else up that can be viable rather than always attacking the hard work Cats KO and I are doing as some kind of sport.
I'm simply asking for you to stop it, and continue with the actual task.
Alternate point of views are fine - it's encouraged actually, and as you would notice I changed my stance from allow everything to disallow the death chain grab because of them. Your degrading other peoples contributions without any reason other than to stir the pot isn't doing any good though except for filling this thread with posts like this from me.
Note: Horse racing is far more established than AFL.
Because? Please give some kind of reasoning with your opinions otherwise we can't comment or discuss.
You are more than welcome to take over the role. Without someone to make order and otherwise test and analyse claims the thread itself would be a mixing pot of varying opinions and unconfirmed accusation. I was under the impression this thread was to actually achieve something rather than blow wind about our personal feelings. We're seeking fact here not perspective.
There is too much 'you are wrong' and 'nope' in here. I check back here all the time hoping not to have to write posts like this but to discuss something new. I've investigated, I've compiled, I've put forward new questions and I seem to get a whole bunch of ego in return. I'm nice and full of myself too - but there's a time and a place for that. Let's just accept that opinion pales beside fact, and work something else up that can be viable rather than always attacking the hard work Cats KO and I are doing as some kind of sport.
I didn't ask wether it was banned or not, but how it was policed.
Scrubs
Smash Lord
Mic - From memory, it was capped at 20% damage.
Shaz - Grrr! I am sick of arguing.
Who decides that what you are saying is FACT? It is the opinion of yourself and CATS.
I don't throw stuff out into this thread just because. I do own the game.... and do test this stuff.... I have King Kong/Sloth over at least twice a week and we play with all of stages you have suggested. I base my opinions on this. As well as playing against the rest of the QLDers regularly.
When we have a tourney later this month we will test the RAMBO rule set as well.
I explained why we should have 2 bans. Because of the large amount of stages there are many stages that have similar properties. If we only have a 1 stage ban you can't limit playing on the stages you believe yourself to be at a disadvantage on.....
I did bring up something new. The Dedede rule in regards to teams......
Shaz - Grrr! I am sick of arguing.
Who decides that what you are saying is FACT? It is the opinion of yourself and CATS.
I don't throw stuff out into this thread just because. I do own the game.... and do test this stuff.... I have King Kong/Sloth over at least twice a week and we play with all of stages you have suggested. I base my opinions on this. As well as playing against the rest of the QLDers regularly.
When we have a tourney later this month we will test the RAMBO rule set as well.
I explained why we should have 2 bans. Because of the large amount of stages there are many stages that have similar properties. If we only have a 1 stage ban you can't limit playing on the stages you believe yourself to be at a disadvantage on.....
I did bring up something new. The Dedede rule in regards to teams......
Cronos_Rainbow
Smash Champion
I'm sorry if I missed your point - feel free to make it again in a different way and I'll try understand. I do (and I'm sureothers too) note that you think banning is the best option.
I'm a prick - iron fisted one too. I would hate myself too if I didn't believe I truly do everything I can to reach the best possible outcome by everyone. The Dedede rule as a whole seems pretty popular, though of course it's not everyones cup of tea. Like anything thats evolving it's subject to change - and given no choice stages may have to be banned like you suggest. We just don't want to jump the gun on that option before trying alternatives.
As for the teams thing, I am only speaking my own opinion here from what I can figure. I think it is very similar to Melee team grab jabs, and the ability to pull it off in teams requires some kind of team synergy or lack of organisation on the victim team. The only thing I can think that would ruin this is a double Dedede team putting both opponents out of action. We'll have to consider this perhaps?
Scrubs
Smash Lord
Yeah this is concerning.
Off the top of my head I can't think of any stages that have 2 solid walls to allow this to happen.
On stages like Eldin if both DeDeDe's are heading towards each other the chain would break because of of players hitting each other.
I can still see DeDeDe's chain throwing both opponents of the stage in different directions though.
Cronos_Rainbow
Smash Champion
I posted based on your pre-editted post Scrubs. Left it there to cover what you had been thinking though.
My opinion was actually wrong. I thought you oculd escape the Dedede chain - it turned out in a lot of cases (more than we thought) you can't. We tested this, and confirmed it to be incorrect. Hence the arrival at factual conclusion.
I know what you're saying about the similar stages. We don't want you to ban the stages you are disadvantaged on. As far as the reason to counter picking goes, you want the loser to choose a stage you're disadvantaged on. You however get the choice to remove the one you hate absolute most as a morale booster - this is the reason the stage ban exists I feel, as if you can ban the disadvantage stages, and you already proved you can win on neutral stages - then the match is as good as yours - and doing best of three rather than best of one wouldn't be necessary. Can you see where I'm coming from with this?
In some cases there are only two stages that will suit the person counter picking - for instance they want a stage with a lot of water because water is there best place to win. They want to choose Great Sea - you ban that - their alternative is perhaps Deflino - and that too is banned. Now they're as good as re-losing the initial match to you since they have no water to work with. One ban would allow you to ban the stage with the longest water duration - Great Sea, though leave the opponent with some water time to fight you at their peak on Delfino - even if only sometimes it's something that will help them to have an edge over you more than they had on say FD the first round.
PS I don't doubt that you guys are speaking from experience. If I did we wouldn't have tested Dedede chain to begin with. Don't feel like your observations get ignored - I'm happy to have everyone address them all. It was the arguing (which I'm obviously also over) that was the problem as it makes finding information harder. This wasn't just myself and you, but throughout the thread it was between a lot of people - we're just the idiots still going lol.
My opinion was actually wrong. I thought you oculd escape the Dedede chain - it turned out in a lot of cases (more than we thought) you can't. We tested this, and confirmed it to be incorrect. Hence the arrival at factual conclusion.
I know what you're saying about the similar stages. We don't want you to ban the stages you are disadvantaged on. As far as the reason to counter picking goes, you want the loser to choose a stage you're disadvantaged on. You however get the choice to remove the one you hate absolute most as a morale booster - this is the reason the stage ban exists I feel, as if you can ban the disadvantage stages, and you already proved you can win on neutral stages - then the match is as good as yours - and doing best of three rather than best of one wouldn't be necessary. Can you see where I'm coming from with this?
In some cases there are only two stages that will suit the person counter picking - for instance they want a stage with a lot of water because water is there best place to win. They want to choose Great Sea - you ban that - their alternative is perhaps Deflino - and that too is banned. Now they're as good as re-losing the initial match to you since they have no water to work with. One ban would allow you to ban the stage with the longest water duration - Great Sea, though leave the opponent with some water time to fight you at their peak on Delfino - even if only sometimes it's something that will help them to have an edge over you more than they had on say FD the first round.
PS I don't doubt that you guys are speaking from experience. If I did we wouldn't have tested Dedede chain to begin with. Don't feel like your observations get ignored - I'm happy to have everyone address them all. It was the arguing (which I'm obviously also over) that was the problem as it makes finding information harder. This wasn't just myself and you, but throughout the thread it was between a lot of people - we're just the idiots still going lol.
Any reason why this can't be done with Dedede then?
Scrubs
Smash Lord
This would prevent the solid wall chainthrow.
However, it does not prevent the walk off stage chainthrow.
With the new diminishing power physics. Dedede's down throw can do a minimum of 4% per throw that is 5 throws before reaching the 20% cap. This can cover quite a bit of horizontal distance.
So you can chainthrow someone of the side of Mario Circuit, or any other stage with walk off edges but keep under the 20%.
I see where you are coming from Shaz, I was under the impression that stage bans were more than just a moral boost. I thought that they were used strategically to cover some of the weaknesses of your character. Or to negate some of the strengths of your opponents character.
In Melee for example, Peach dies easily off the top. So I used to ban either Corneria or Yoshi's story.
Peach has a good recovery so most of the time my opponent would ban Dreamland 64.
Mic, if I am not mistaken the rule was used in (mostly) preventing stalling tactics (e.g. I keep doing it at 999% because I am a stock up). The TDs that bent to public will had more severe bans on it and I don't know how they policed it.
My opinion has mostly been formed by talking to cats/shaz, but here's what I think of Dedede. Ban him on stages that he can infinite to death as a blanket ban for one character. However, allow people to accept matches on that stage if the Dedede player asks. This way, the tournament director isn't to blame for a player being cheap and the Dedede player is not disadvantaged by missing out on a good Dedede stage because of a cheap tactic he doesn't use.
That way, it's a trust relationship between the opponents. The blanket ban prevents the situation of having an untrustworthy player.
My opinion has mostly been formed by talking to cats/shaz, but here's what I think of Dedede. Ban him on stages that he can infinite to death as a blanket ban for one character. However, allow people to accept matches on that stage if the Dedede player asks. This way, the tournament director isn't to blame for a player being cheap and the Dedede player is not disadvantaged by missing out on a good Dedede stage because of a cheap tactic he doesn't use.
That way, it's a trust relationship between the opponents. The blanket ban prevents the situation of having an untrustworthy player.
King Kong
Smash Lord
So the solution is to simply ban Dedede's chain grab?
That would work very well, but it would be difficult to police and enforce.
You would have to get a third person to watch over the match and ensure no chain grabbing (against a wall or across a flat stage) was done. Seems fair.
I honestly dont know why anyone would want to play on Eldin anyway. Its the ultimate campers stage. I would pretty much give up on trying to fight Pit/Toon Link etc there unless I had a character with projectiles. I give it couple of tournaments before it gets banned for being grossly imbalanced.
peace out
That would work very well, but it would be difficult to police and enforce.
You would have to get a third person to watch over the match and ensure no chain grabbing (against a wall or across a flat stage) was done. Seems fair.
I honestly dont know why anyone would want to play on Eldin anyway. Its the ultimate campers stage. I would pretty much give up on trying to fight Pit/Toon Link etc there unless I had a character with projectiles. I give it couple of tournaments before it gets banned for being grossly imbalanced.
peace out
Sirias
Smash Champion
Ahahahahah, such a waste of time reading all that, it's going nowhere.
The tournament that we're apparently holding sometime soon will apparently use the RAMBO ruleset, so we'll see how that goes.
And Bryce is gonna try to host a tournament around when he comes back.
2 tournaments in succession? Dunno if that's a good thing. o:
I'm pretty sure there'd be at least one person watching every match...
And it wouldn't be that hard to police, do what Zac says, if they do it too much (i.e 20+%) smack them with your controller. c:
The tournament that we're apparently holding sometime soon will apparently use the RAMBO ruleset, so we'll see how that goes.
And Bryce is gonna try to host a tournament around when he comes back.
2 tournaments in succession? Dunno if that's a good thing. o:
I'm pretty sure there'd be at least one person watching every match...
And it wouldn't be that hard to police, do what Zac says, if they do it too much (i.e 20+%) smack them with your controller. c:
I'm not going to re-quote what you said to me Shaz and re-argue points that I can easily do. It will just keep the cycle rolling. So I'll quit it right now. If you want me to bring it up and do it, just ask, and I will.
My biggest problem with the dedede rule is simple this:
At this stage of the metagame if we decide on such bans, we won't learn to avoid his grab. Latter enough if we find more broken techniques characters can only do on certain stages we will be more inclined to just -ban that character on that stage- then we would be to work towards getting around it.
Its like fighting scrubs who are like 'Shine is so cheap! nothing I can do', yet we find shine so easy to avoid and get around - to a degree
Now I know what I said can appear to be a contradiction what I said on the Eldin discussion, but I've stated my points on that and they don't relate. My worry was more walk-offs. Which is another discussion all together, one we argued plenty about and I won't bring up again for the moment.
I do agree AT THIS STAGE, we allow more ban's. Until the current list is slowly disintegrated away and made smaller, we just have far to many stages. So many that one ban is ludicrous and un-helpful.
My biggest problem with the dedede rule is simple this:
At this stage of the metagame if we decide on such bans, we won't learn to avoid his grab. Latter enough if we find more broken techniques characters can only do on certain stages we will be more inclined to just -ban that character on that stage- then we would be to work towards getting around it.
Its like fighting scrubs who are like 'Shine is so cheap! nothing I can do', yet we find shine so easy to avoid and get around - to a degree
Now I know what I said can appear to be a contradiction what I said on the Eldin discussion, but I've stated my points on that and they don't relate. My worry was more walk-offs. Which is another discussion all together, one we argued plenty about and I won't bring up again for the moment.
I do agree AT THIS STAGE, we allow more ban's. Until the current list is slowly disintegrated away and made smaller, we just have far to many stages. So many that one ban is ludicrous and un-helpful.
Cronos_Rainbow
Smash Champion
Well Dedede is still welcome to chain grab as much as he likes with the Dedede rule - it just wont lead to either certain kill or to 999%. So learning to evade the grab is still very important
Things are moving along now - Everyone putting in their view plus some facts and suggesting alternatives - this is what I've been waiting for :D
What Bringer said is pretty much the Dedede in a nutshell anyway - I didn't mention the agreement thing when perhaps I should have - figuring it would be viewed that way anyhow after similar scenarios like reusing FD or something if it's agreed on in Melee- My bad.
Yeah Scrubs it is for strategy - its use is for exactly what you say (which will give a morale boost knowing you're not trying to fight scissors with paper). Only thing though is that it seems two would be canceling many of the stage types totally not just limiting the least compatible one for you. I strongly suggest we all give it a try with just the one ban for now as it's much easier to add one more if it's not working out well enough.
Here's an example of a few rare stage types players could prefer that two bans can possibly totally kill off:
-Water you can swim in
-Largely destructible land
-Low gravity
-Avoidable OHKO stage hazards (to throw opponent into)
-Overlapping edged platforms
-Walk off edged stages
-Stage hazards that are unpredictable and chaotic
I say try one ban first because there are players I've faced from Melee who do much better on these kind of stage than they do on 'neutral-like' stages where pressure tech generally reigns supreme. Players like but not limited to Sam, Cats, Mic128.
I really think we should try hard to give things a shot before cutting them - more stages can be added to the ban list, characters can be banned, and an extra cancel or ban is added in easily also - if we don't give the chance to test these things however it's going to be hard to have actual experience and data to fuel these decisions.
Things are moving along now - Everyone putting in their view plus some facts and suggesting alternatives - this is what I've been waiting for :D
What Bringer said is pretty much the Dedede in a nutshell anyway - I didn't mention the agreement thing when perhaps I should have - figuring it would be viewed that way anyhow after similar scenarios like reusing FD or something if it's agreed on in Melee- My bad.
Yeah Scrubs it is for strategy - its use is for exactly what you say (which will give a morale boost knowing you're not trying to fight scissors with paper). Only thing though is that it seems two would be canceling many of the stage types totally not just limiting the least compatible one for you. I strongly suggest we all give it a try with just the one ban for now as it's much easier to add one more if it's not working out well enough.
Here's an example of a few rare stage types players could prefer that two bans can possibly totally kill off:
-Water you can swim in
-Largely destructible land
-Low gravity
-Avoidable OHKO stage hazards (to throw opponent into)
-Overlapping edged platforms
-Walk off edged stages
-Stage hazards that are unpredictable and chaotic
I say try one ban first because there are players I've faced from Melee who do much better on these kind of stage than they do on 'neutral-like' stages where pressure tech generally reigns supreme. Players like but not limited to Sam, Cats, Mic128.
I really think we should try hard to give things a shot before cutting them - more stages can be added to the ban list, characters can be banned, and an extra cancel or ban is added in easily also - if we don't give the chance to test these things however it's going to be hard to have actual experience and data to fuel these decisions.
Scrubs
Smash Lord
I see what you are saying. However.
The two things I mentioned about using counterpicks strategically were
- Negating the Strengths of your opponents character
- Protecting the weaknesses of your character
If we only have 1 stage ban, considering there are 19 stages it is extremely hard to do that.
I will use Metaknight as an example. He struggles on walk of stages big time. As his game is essentially based around edge guarding. He has very few kill moves.
If I was a Metaknight player I would probably ban Eldin (it is the largest walk off stage) if there was only 1 ban there would be 4 other stages with walk of ledges that my opponent could counter pick me on. Banning Eldin did not advantage me in any way.
It is rather pointless banning 1 stage when your opponent can take you to a very similar stage, presenting you with the exact same problems that you would have faced on the stage that you chose to ban.
After saying this though. I think it is fair to give 1 ban a try.
Scrubs
Smash Lord
Sorry for the double post.... This is on a different topic so I thought I would separate it from the post above and it has been about 5 hours since I posted the other one.
I imagine that this is a given. But for clarification I will bring it up.
All controllers and controller schemes are permitted.
I imagine that this is a given. But for clarification I will bring it up.
All controllers and controller schemes are permitted.
scrubs i'm curious as to why you want the same ratio of stage bans to stages that was in melee. obviously you were better off strategically when being on the end of a stage ban if you can remove 1/8th of the possible stages you had to deal with rather than 1/19th, but you still have a strategical decision to make regarding which stage you prevent your opponent from choosing in brawl with just a single stage ban.
it's my belief that you're not meant to gain an advantage via stage bans anyway since your opponent is getting the counterpick because they just lost, if you could effectively ban all the stages that are good for them or bad for you then there's no real point to the counterpick in the first place.
in the end, 1/8th is just a number that is the result of the ammount of stages left in melee after banning the most hax ones and having 1 stage ban. that number could have been anything and doesn't define what's the most fair number of stage bans to stages.
i also want to add that the dedede rule will be more adaptable later on in comparison to outright stage bans, since if we find ways around dedede and his grab hax then people will feel less inclined to keep stages banned just because they've always been banned. it creates 2 distinct groupings of the banned stages; the stages that are banned because they're hax, and the stages that are banned because dedede is hax.
also i don't think shaz or myself ever said we're the kings of rule making or whatever it was that was said, we just collaborate on the knowledge we have on brawl and try and present an effective and well thought out solution to whatever issues the competetive scene as a whole is having. sorry if it seems like we're trying to force them upon you, we're just wanting others opinions and giving our rationalizing on why we made the choices we did.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
i imagine all control schemes would be permitted because there's no real reason for it to be otherwise.
on a side note, what characters is everyone using atm? like maybe they're not your mains but what characters are you enjoying and using alot?
for me i like robot, dedede and marth (where there is cheap you will find me ;3 )
it's my belief that you're not meant to gain an advantage via stage bans anyway since your opponent is getting the counterpick because they just lost, if you could effectively ban all the stages that are good for them or bad for you then there's no real point to the counterpick in the first place.
in the end, 1/8th is just a number that is the result of the ammount of stages left in melee after banning the most hax ones and having 1 stage ban. that number could have been anything and doesn't define what's the most fair number of stage bans to stages.
i also want to add that the dedede rule will be more adaptable later on in comparison to outright stage bans, since if we find ways around dedede and his grab hax then people will feel less inclined to keep stages banned just because they've always been banned. it creates 2 distinct groupings of the banned stages; the stages that are banned because they're hax, and the stages that are banned because dedede is hax.
also i don't think shaz or myself ever said we're the kings of rule making or whatever it was that was said, we just collaborate on the knowledge we have on brawl and try and present an effective and well thought out solution to whatever issues the competetive scene as a whole is having. sorry if it seems like we're trying to force them upon you, we're just wanting others opinions and giving our rationalizing on why we made the choices we did.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
i imagine all control schemes would be permitted because there's no real reason for it to be otherwise.
on a side note, what characters is everyone using atm? like maybe they're not your mains but what characters are you enjoying and using alot?
for me i like robot, dedede and marth (where there is cheap you will find me ;3 )
Scrubs
Smash Lord
Hahaha....
I like Toon Link, Zelda, Lucas and Dedede
I know your not supposed to gain an advantage from stage bans.
However eliminating one stage out of 19 is fairly pointless. It becomes less strategic and more of a morale booster.
1 out of 19 stages would make you think...."Well at least I don't have to play on that stage that I hate"
not
"Well my Metaknight is weak on walk off stages so I will ban Eldin, and his Ike kills me too easily so I am going to ban a small stage like Yoshi's Island"
I like Toon Link, Zelda, Lucas and Dedede
I know your not supposed to gain an advantage from stage bans.
However eliminating one stage out of 19 is fairly pointless. It becomes less strategic and more of a morale booster.
1 out of 19 stages would make you think...."Well at least I don't have to play on that stage that I hate"
not
"Well my Metaknight is weak on walk off stages so I will ban Eldin, and his Ike kills me too easily so I am going to ban a small stage like Yoshi's Island"
Cronos_Rainbow
Smash Champion
Well you're on the right track there then Scrubs - just go ahead and choose(to ban) which one you think he will totally pwn you on, and hope to play the one you're more likely to scrape a win on .
In response to the played characters: Ike, ZSS, Lucas, Samus, Link, Metaknight, Falco, Wolf, Sonic and a little Robot and Diddy Kong.
.In response to the played characters: Ike, ZSS, Lucas, Samus, Link, Metaknight, Falco, Wolf, Sonic and a little Robot and Diddy Kong.
Redact
Professional Nice Guy
i play olimar, blue pikmin, yellow pikmin, red pikmin, white pikmin, purple pikmin, and dedede
then robot on the side now with a little falco
but ill play almost anything
then robot on the side now with a little falco
but ill play almost anything
Scrubs
Smash Lord
We need 2 bans......
King Kong
Smash Lord
Im in support of the two bans thing. It just makes more sense, as a DK player I know i struggle (Not just have a hard time, actually struggle just to keep up) against campy characters on big stages like Eldin and walk off stages like that wierd Pikman level with the rain.
It was something I realised the other day playing, that counterstages are going to be SOOO much more potent in this game.
But, might as well try with one ban and see how that goes.
peace out
It was something I realised the other day playing, that counterstages are going to be SOOO much more potent in this game.
But, might as well try with one ban and see how that goes.
peace out
With the amount of stages we currently have, one ban simple isn't enough.
The problem is that no matter what you ban, you will have an identical stage which will cause you the exact same problems. Basically it is just banning the stage you dislike playing on rather then banning a stage due to strategy.
I think until we get rid of more stages, which I think will be a more viable option down the track, for now we implement a second ban system. Have one ban choose before the set and then allow another after the first game? I dunno, just a thought. I know there is a lot of problems with that idea tho^^ so no need to point them out.
Oh, I play Ice Climbers, Ike and Wolf.
The problem is that no matter what you ban, you will have an identical stage which will cause you the exact same problems. Basically it is just banning the stage you dislike playing on rather then banning a stage due to strategy.
I think until we get rid of more stages, which I think will be a more viable option down the track, for now we implement a second ban system. Have one ban choose before the set and then allow another after the first game? I dunno, just a thought. I know there is a lot of problems with that idea tho^^ so no need to point them out.
Oh, I play Ice Climbers, Ike and Wolf.
undead_moose
Smash Lord
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE
I was wondering if its still 4 stock because if its is thats way too long
3 in singles 4 in teams maybe?
And are there any stages banned in teams that arnt in singles?
I was wondering if its still 4 stock because if its is thats way too long
3 in singles 4 in teams maybe?
And are there any stages banned in teams that arnt in singles?
Scrubs
Smash Lord
How do you do that Mic?
EDIT: I figured it out.
EDIT: I figured it out.
Scrubs
Smash Lord
Are you maining the Weeg Bjay??
That is sick. He kicks butt.
That is sick. He kicks butt.
why should you be allowed to completely avoid the stages you feel you're at a disadvantage on? that IS the purpose of counterpicking and it works vice versa too in that they can't avoid the type of stage you want to take them to.
no two stages are exactly alike, similar elements perhaps, but not exactly alike. 1 stage ban will be you're choosing the lesser of two evils rather than avoiding the evils all together.
opponents counterpicks shouldn't be neutral for you, they're meant to be places you struggle.
edit: beware of too much shield pressure as luigi. while his recovery has been buffed and he combos like a champ he is still vulnerable to being forced into making only aerial advances since while he shields he gets pushed back causing you to always be out of attack range on the ground. the problem with that is that his aerials aren't very long in range and he moves pretty slow aerially so multihit moves that last awhile can prevent an aerial dodge approach too.
get pushed back on the land, hard approach via the air. that is luigi lol
no two stages are exactly alike, similar elements perhaps, but not exactly alike. 1 stage ban will be you're choosing the lesser of two evils rather than avoiding the evils all together.
opponents counterpicks shouldn't be neutral for you, they're meant to be places you struggle.
edit: beware of too much shield pressure as luigi. while his recovery has been buffed and he combos like a champ he is still vulnerable to being forced into making only aerial advances since while he shields he gets pushed back causing you to always be out of attack range on the ground. the problem with that is that his aerials aren't very long in range and he moves pretty slow aerially so multihit moves that last awhile can prevent an aerial dodge approach too.
get pushed back on the land, hard approach via the air. that is luigi lol
Scrubs
Smash Lord
Hahaha he is hard to approach with. He is still awesome though.
It is Luigi.
Back on topic. 2 bans doesn't ruin the counter picking. Your opponent can use one of the other 20 something (inc. neutrals) to counter pick with.
Players must state the stages they wish to Ban before the set starts.
So if you are worried about not playing on a stage that you like chances are that it won't be banned.
It is Luigi.
Back on topic. 2 bans doesn't ruin the counter picking. Your opponent can use one of the other 20 something (inc. neutrals) to counter pick with.
Players must state the stages they wish to Ban before the set starts.
So if you are worried about not playing on a stage that you like chances are that it won't be banned.
I think we start with 1 ban and go with there. Otherwise it'll basically be "Why should I even bother learning to deal with ____ when I can just ban both of the stages that have it?"
Unless we start bringing in Counter-bans where you could trade a stage ban for a stage immunity. Which is starting to sound too much like a reality TV show for my tastes, ugh. Just no one suggest custom stages as intruders, heh.
Unless we start bringing in Counter-bans where you could trade a stage ban for a stage immunity. Which is starting to sound too much like a reality TV show for my tastes, ugh. Just no one suggest custom stages as intruders, heh.
Scrubs
Smash Lord
Hahah Brawl Survivor.....
That would be an awesome show.
I agree with trying 1 ban. After the first tourney's we need to ask people if they felt that their ban did them any good or not?
That would be an awesome show.
I agree with trying 1 ban. After the first tourney's we need to ask people if they felt that their ban did them any good or not?
The thing is CATS, that there are so many counter-picks, your not going to avoid the one you hate/know you'll be counter picked up.. because there will be like 3-4 other ones which destroy you in the exact same manner.
I know the point of counter-picking is to gain the advantage after losing. And the point of banning is to help narrow that advantage they gain. But atm, with one ban, your not narrowing that advantage at all. not even a little bit. Its still like a giant gaping hole of doom with death lazers pewpewpew.
In melee(sorry) as IC, they got destroyed by both rainbow cruise or Pokefloats the worst. Now that is a good scenario because I am better at rainbow cruise by a fare bit, I ban pokefloats. I am still at a major disadvantage, but at least I've narrowed it slightly. Now lets say there are four stages similar to that, I ban one.. but I am not really helping anything.
I am up for just going one stage ban. Miswell see how well it runs. But also after RAMBO I reckon stage discussion will get a lot more interesting and probably lead to more stages put on ban, so the need for two bans would fundamentally be nullified
I know the point of counter-picking is to gain the advantage after losing. And the point of banning is to help narrow that advantage they gain. But atm, with one ban, your not narrowing that advantage at all. not even a little bit. Its still like a giant gaping hole of doom with death lazers pewpewpew.
In melee(sorry) as IC, they got destroyed by both rainbow cruise or Pokefloats the worst. Now that is a good scenario because I am better at rainbow cruise by a fare bit, I ban pokefloats. I am still at a major disadvantage, but at least I've narrowed it slightly. Now lets say there are four stages similar to that, I ban one.. but I am not really helping anything.
I am up for just going one stage ban. Miswell see how well it runs. But also after RAMBO I reckon stage discussion will get a lot more interesting and probably lead to more stages put on ban, so the need for two bans would fundamentally be nullified