Chain Grab - Your perspective/opinion

[PK Hexagon]

So now that we know that we have to continue dealing with DDD and IC's, what do we do? Improve our skill, of course.

Which is what should have been the immediate conclusion. Not whining about it taking no skill, or its cheap, or whatever else. Scrub mentality.

 

[TehBo49]

This thread is completely unnecessary; it should be closed.

Chaingrabbing is just another technique that can be exploited in the game. It is both avoidable & escapable. Most chaingrabs only do about 30-40% damage at max. Ganondorf can SH an autocancelled dair & follow up with an u-smash. This does about 50%. Does that mean we should ban it? No. Camping does a lot of damage & can stop characters from approaching. Does that mean we should ban it? No. Outside of infinites, there is nothing inherently broken about chaingrabbing. They are perfectly fine.

 

[Crizthakidd]

your just mad that

A) you got royally beat by ice climbers in a tournament

B) you cant do it yourself so you got pissed and made this


i would actually care for what you said until u told me i should be shot and burned. wow dude your lucky im in another state over.

 

[Sanzi]

whoever talks bad about chaingrabing is a noob. to do tht walking chaingrab across the level with the ice climbers actually does take skill. it takes a while to learn the timing for the grab. plus it's not the easiest thing in the world to get off a grab with the IC. if ur going against the iceclimbers just be like metaknight or something and dodge and dsmash alot. spam his dtilt also. plus he's very floaty so he's harder to CG. and his range is better and his moves are much faster. definetly get a good metaknight going for those IC.

 

[Exousia]

Chaingrabing has been around since Melee.

And its still in brawl so IDC.

If its in it and multipe Characters can do it, then its fine (cept infinites that are spammed over and over during certain matches like DDD dittos or 2 charcters that can ICG constantly)

 

[MidnightAsaph]

Quick example

Sheik can ftilt on heavy characters for a long long time, doing a big amount of damage. A Sheik player did this at a local tournament of mine and ended up winning

Does this mean we ban Sheik's ftilt?

No, it's obviously the opponent's fault if they fall into it and they have to deal with it, and obviously the Sheik player didn't beat Silent Specter and others by just using Ftilt, he also used all of Sheik's strengths to win

Me being a Dedede player (heavy character) I can either switch to someone else or just acknowledge and play around the fact that Sheik can do such a thing

Very similar to chaingrabs, simple metagame logic

I don't think so. Are you saying that every player has to be in total fear that their opponent may do those moves? Now, and I am strictly saying IF it is impossible to get out of, it is not the person's fault they were trapped into something like chain grabs or Sheik's move (at least in a sense). In other words, Sheik is GOING to do damage at one point, and it's obvious that any of the damage done by a move could have easily replaced by her ftilt.

I don't think they should be banned (any 'cheap' moves). I don't think chain grabs should be done either. Why? That's just how I think. Just play the game. Don't whine if you lose. At one point, damage forces you out of the chain because too much damage has been done and you bounce out. Who cares? As for Sheik's, I don't see the move done often, so I'm not sayin' anything on it.

The only other argument I have against chain grabs and other cheap moves is that it requires just about no skill. IN OTHER WORDS, if the person won and used chain grabs a lot, it's possible they DID NOT deserve to win. IMO, it's kind of cheating if it's impossible. I was victim to a nasty chain grab by Falco. I SORT OF didn't care, because it was a friendly game and we both know who deserved to win. Me. However, the chain grab really floored me. (I had no knowledge of such a disastrous move till then).

All in all, if anything is to be banned, it should be Falco's, but even then, I still disagree with banning something in the game. It's how the game is supposed to be played. If someone uses it, just shame them. Their reputation: bye bye.

 

[Monshou_no_Nazo]

I got infinited by DDD's standing grab while playing as Mario yesterday. My feelings on that? "Oh, wow. I should be a lot more careful next time." I didn't think, "Dear gosh. This guy didn't take any skill to do that. He didn't deserve the win at all."

I have the better mentality. If I were to play another Mario vs. DDD match, I now know exactly what to avoid, and if I do get grabbed, but not get infinited, I will surely tell my opponent that he should have infinited me, because I would feel that he was holding back. There is simply no reason not do exploit a person's mistakes unless it is banned (which I am very sure it won't be.)

 

[qwertyman]

I am definately in favor of not banning ANYTHING unless it really is stupidly broken. If someone discovered that Captain Falcon had some shiny technique with which I could instantly four-stock VirtualVoid without any practice, then I would be in favor of banning it.


Good example of why chaingrabbing doesn't need to be banned:
In round one of a tournament, I fought a decent Wolf. I chaingrabbed him a good bit, and won 2-0. He went to the loser's bracket.
Both of us ended up making to the Grand Finals. However, from the Winner's Semifinals onward (halfway through the tournament), the organizer of the tournament had decided to ban chaingrabs and other "exploits". I ended up beating the Wolf again without chaingrabbing.

 

[YagamiLight]

I got infinited by DDD's standing grab while playing as Mario yesterday. My feelings on that? "Oh, wow. I should be a lot more careful next time." I didn't think, "Dear gosh. This guy didn't take any skill to do that. He didn't deserve the win at all."

I have the better mentality. If I were to play another Mario vs. DDD match, I now know exactly what to avoid, and if I do get grabbed, but not get infinited, I will surely tell my opponent that he should have infinited me, because I would feel that he was holding back. There is simply no reason not do exploit a person's mistakes unless it is banned (which I am very sure it won't be.)

My stance is more or less this. If you fall for something, instead of complaining about it, don't fall for it again.

 

[PK Hexagon]

I was victim to a nasty chain grab by Falco. I SORT OF didn't care, because it was a friendly game and we both know who deserved to win. Me. However, the chain grab really floored me. (I had no knowledge of such a disastrous move till then).

All in all, if anything is to be banned, it should be Falco's, but even then, I still disagree with banning something in the game. It's how the game is supposed to be played. If someone uses it, just shame them. Their reputation: bye bye.

Actually, I would say your Falco friend did deserve to win:

1. He gathered information on a useful tech.
2. He applied said tech in an actual match.
3. You went into a match ignorant of the most glorified part of Falco's metagame.

And now, you think its shameful to use something that all Falcos are known for doing. lol

 

[metalmonstar]

When Marth, Falco, DDD, and Ice climbers become God Tier and are the only ones who win tournaments because of their infinites then we should talk until then it is fair game. Honestly I don't see this happening.

 

[Stroupes]

chain-grabbing IS annoying, but it's a good technique.

 

[ALiAsVee]

Its these types of techniques that make people flock to certain characters though, it seems that if there is some kind of "gimmick" to a character, people go nuts and pick them. Idk, this might be false logic but thats what i think

 

[TehBo49]

That will always happen as long as there are good & bad characters.

 

[Mario & Sonic Guy]

From what I've seen, chain grabs are harder to pull off in Brawl compared to Melee. Of course, you can never pull off chain grabs against CPUs anyway.

 

[Bud]

I play fast brawl, which is a bit faster than melee but not too fast. It eliminates most of the chaingrabs and really punishes camping.

 

[James177]

You seem to be a competitive player...interesting.

What is it Brawl lacks that Melee had?

Combo's.

A combo is defined as what?

An initiation of moves that is inescapable to get out of.

Interesting.

What are some of the most competitive fighting games?

Street Fighter, Dead or Alive, and other franchises.

Is it me or...are their actual practice modes which TEACH you muscle memory to familiarize others with the functions to start the combo's?

I believe it's not just me.

Combo's are missing from Brawl, correct?

Correct.

Now...a chain grab is an inescapable grab...right?

Right.

But wait...you can only grab them and continue if there's room on the stage left.

Well, in most situations.

So...does that actually limit the combo's...?

I believe so...thus spacing...another aspect plays a big role.

That makes it strategical...correct...?

So now...Melee is competitive...no?

It is.

Are their combo's in Melee...inescapable?

Yes.

Are their in Brawl?

No.

Do chaingrabs prove to be escapable...?

Yes...it's called the end of the stage and others.

Hmm...interesting...

What is the purpose of a fighting game...?

To fight...

In a fight...do you get hit to win?

No...you hit others...and not get hit...

...so...is an attack that hits you...part of a fight?

Yes...

Is arguing against some...against the very principle...?

Mhmm, yes...

Hehehe...

...we rest our case...

It can become inescapable, there's a thing called b throw, learn it. Might have been thinkin' bout the Ice Lock.

 

[IrArby]

As far as difficulty is concerned it doesn't matter. Melee infinites were banned and so will Brawl infinites. Yea its hard as crap to consistently pin someone against a wall and SHDair > shine to SHdair>shine (with fox) but if someone was doing it its an infinite and it doesn't allow for the other person to stand a quaisy fair chance at winning its illegal. CG is essentially a combo, I kinda said this earlier but combos take more skill and most combos, even in melee are escapable at points. Thats why say a Marth CGing fox is perfectly legal since the combo is only guaranteed up to 28% the rest takes a lot of practice and is by no means inescapable. But those aren't the kind of CGs were talking about so they have to be limited in some way.

 

[redgreenblue]

When Marth, Falco, DDD, and Ice climbers become God Tier and are the only ones who win tournaments because of their infinites then we should talk until then it is fair game. Honestly I don't see this happening.

Falco doesn't have an infinite...

 

[S_B]

I got infinited by DDD's standing grab while playing as Mario yesterday. My feelings on that? "Oh, wow. I should be a lot more careful next time." I didn't think, "Dear gosh. This guy didn't take any skill to do that. He didn't deserve the win at all."

I have the better mentality. If I were to play another Mario vs. DDD match, I now know exactly what to avoid, and if I do get grabbed, but not get infinited, I will surely tell my opponent that he should have infinited me, because I would feel that he was holding back. There is simply no reason not do exploit a person's mistakes unless it is banned (which I am very sure it won't be.)

You're just going to get grabbed and ***** again.

Play as someone other than Mario.

When Marth, Falco, DDD, and Ice climbers become God Tier and are the only ones who win tournaments because of their infinites then we should talk until then it is fair game. Honestly I don't see this happening.

(sorry this turned into a long rant which isn't really aimed at you, Metalmonster)

They won't make "god tier" but that's not the issue here. The issue is that characters who might otherwise have tournament potential are being artificially moved to bottom tier because of infinites against them.

Mario and Luigi, for example, are both excellent characters, and Mario has one of the best anti-camping moves in the game. Both, however, won't be mained by anyone with any sense because they fear being infinite grabbed by a D3 player and they're right in doing so.

Sakurai f*cked up and didn't beta test the game properly.

Proof?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KPcctYoF2bY&feature=related (works on stages other than custom, FYI)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mAot3e3_f-c

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L2gIvIarzIs

Also, it's evidenced in suicide moves being entirely comtroller dependent. If Bowser Bowsercides and he's 1st player, he wins. If he's 2nd player, it goes to sudden death.

What are the odds of a beta tester not catching something like that? Or was it left in because they just never cared to fix it?

The point is, we're taking the approach to Brawl as if the game is gospel and infallible when nothing could be further from the truth. Brawl is a buggy, unbalanced mess, and anyone who thinks that it was designed to be played to the limits that the competitive SSB community does is sorely mistaken.

I know the tournament scene will do what they will, but I think that approaching Brawl as if everything contained within will suit their purposes as a competitive arena is like taking a bicycle into a motocross race.

Infinites trivialize the game. Brawl was never balanced around a landing a single move being a guaranteed kill at any damage, but that's exactly what an infinite is for certain characters.

I'd say just put a 5 grab limit on all chains and everyone wins: the chain grabber racks up a PILE of damage, but it's not the end of a stock by one easily-landed move.

Most tournaments ban walk-off stages because of D3's chaingrab being an easy kill and they ban stages with walls to prevent infinite grabs against a wall. So why is it ok to have infinites so long as the wall isn't involved?

 

[juniorv376]

I am still around to defend my points actually.


All of you know it's unfair, all of you (that are defending CG) are ignoring the fact that it is near impossible to escape those grabs. To tackle the point of unfairness by just saying "Dodge grabs" is avoiding the issue and point. And you know what, based off that argument alone, I have no quall's against playing you, chain grabbing you, and edge guarding you. And if you can dodge all my grabs, I will call your point valid. But anyone with a brain will know, a good match a good set of games, that's just pretty much stupid talk.

Ok, CG's are near impossible to escape...... And does 30-50%

Now lets look at other fighting games.

MvC2- A basic air combo.... Impossible to escape..... Does 30-50% TOTAL life bar. (and it is only a 6 button pattern)

SF3: 3s- Ken- Crossover>mp>hp>Shoryuken 35ish% impossible to escape... Cancel the shoryuken into special and well over 50%


Fighters are designed to get consecutive hits.... Chain grabs dont give any rroe of an unfair advantage then having a character with better combo ability in a game.

just becasue magneto/Storm can combo better then everyone else in the game does that mean not to combo with them, or not to combo past 5 hits because there character can and yours cannot. You say unfair advantage becasue IC'ers can CG and so can Falco? Is it unfair that Snakes Utilt hits from So freaking far away and when the animation clearly misses you still go flying up? yes, snake has possibly the best move in the game when considering Speed to power ratio... So we shouldnt be aloud to use it because it is what gives snake players an edge ove other characters whos moves don't compare?

I seriouslly dont understand what you are trying to express....

It seems that you want all characters to be the same. To have the same moves. With same speed. And same knockback. and same grabs.

Because if you don't want those things then your argument/opinion don't make sense. You are saying what those characters have that are different then other characters is unfair(Their grab is better then snakes while snakes move list is better then theirs by a TON.)


So in theory your perfect game would be one where no character has better grab then another, and no character has a better close range then another. And now character has a better keepaway game from another. (I have collected this information from your opinion on CG's, not that you mentioned it directly)

That seems like a pretty 1 dimensional game if you ask me.

Unescaple chain of grabs? Whats so different from unescapable chain of hits? and don't say the simplicity of it because basic combos deal good amount of damage in most to all respectable fighting games and they are far easier in timing then the simplest of CG's.

 

[S_B]

Unescaple chain of grabs? Whats so different from unescapable chain of hits? and don't say the simplicity of it because basic combos deal good amount of damage in most to all respectable fighting games and they are far easier in timing then the simplest of CG's.

I'm not arguing against chaingrabs, but I will say that any game where you earn your opportunities one at a time instead of catching an opponent off guard once and chaining them into an unstoppable combo to death is a game which takes far more skill and a better ability to read your opponent.

As a Bowser main, I've learned to mindgame my opponents and predict their next moves because Bowser isn't exactly big on combos, and that takes far more skill than me chaingrabbing someone with my D3 to the edge of the stage or off of a walk off level.

Again, not arguing against chain grabs. Just saying that I'd never play MvC2 or any other game where I can take an opponent from 100% health - death because I memorized a string of commands which will kill them every time. There's only one moment of tension in the entire match and that's who lands the first hit and the rest would be a yawn-worthy combo with a predictable outcome.

 

[juniorv376]

Sakurai f*cked up and didn't beta test the game properly.

Proof?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KPcctYoF2bY&feature=related (works on stages other than custom, FYI)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mAot3e3_f-c

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L2gIvIarzIs

All games have a number of glitches in them. It is way to tedious and would probably take a lifetime of testing to catch every glitch, especially since some glitches are situational and would rarely happen on their own occord.

Also, it's evidenced in suicide moves being entirely comtroller dependent. If Bowser Bowsercides and he's 1st player, he wins. If he's 2nd player, it goes to sudden death.

What are the odds of a beta tester not catching something like that? Or was it left in because they just never cared to fix it?

That was done on purpose because the programming needs a responce for every action. Though I agree that it was dumb, they could have just made it ALWAYS Sudden death

The point is, we're taking the approach to Brawl as if the game is gospel and infallible when nothing could be further from the truth. Brawl is a buggy, unbalanced mess, and anyone who thinks that it was designed to be played to the limits that the competitive SSB community does is sorely mistaken.

No game is gospel or infalible. Games are all filled with mistakes. And if you look at all sucessfull competitive fighter it is all the mistakes, glitches, and flaws that make them so sucessful. Exploiting those flaws create depth to a game. Some game are more balanced then others but that can never be helped.

I know the tournament scene will do what they will, but I think that approaching Brawl as if everything contained within will suit their purposes as a competitive arena is like taking a bicycle into a motocross race.

Infinites trivialize the game. Brawl was never balanced around a landing a single move being a guaranteed kill at any damage, but that's exactly what an infinite is for certain characters.

If a character can get infinited then counter picking comes in, secondaries come in....again depth comes in.

I'd say just put a 5 grab limit on all chains and everyone wins: the chain grabber racks up a PILE of damage, but it's not the end of a stock by one easily-landed move.

Ok and Snake can only U.Tilt 5x's and F.tilt 5 times.

Most tournaments ban walk-off stages because of D3's chaingrab being an easy kill and they ban stages with walls to prevent infinite grabs against a wall. So why is it ok to have infinites so long as the wall isn't involved?

Walls and walk-off stages are not counterable. Takeing away depth in the game. While allwoing counter picking allows depth.

 

[juniorv376]

I'm not arguing against chaingrabs, but I will say that any game where you earn your opportunities one at a time instead of catching an opponent off guard once and chaining them into an unstoppable combo to death is a game which takes far more skill and a better ability to read your opponent.

As a Bowser main, I've learned to mindgame my opponents and predict their next moves because Bowser isn't exactly big on combos, and that takes far more skill than me chaingrabbing someone with my D3 to the edge of the stage or off of a walk off level.

Again, not arguing against chain grabs. Just saying that I'd never play MvC2 or any other game where I can take an opponent from 100% health - death because I memorized a string of commands which will kill them every time. There's only one moment of tension in the entire match and that's who lands the first hit and the rest would be a yawn-worthy combo with a predictable outcome.

This was to the OP, he saids chaing grabs them selves where broken.

 

[Killress]

I think if you use a character that has the ability to chain throw, go for it.

 

[S_B]

All games have a number of glitches in them. It is way to tedious and would probably take a lifetime of testing to catch every glitch, especially since some glitches are situational and would rarely happen on their own occord.

Some of these would be immensely easy to catch by any beta testing team worth its salt. Players had it figured out within less than a month of Brawl's release that different results come from Bowser's suicide move.

If a character can get infinited then counter picking comes in, secondaries come in....again depth comes in.

It's not the depth that's the question. It's the artificial removal of otherwise decent characters from the running because of infinites.

If Mario is only going to be available as a counter pick, why would anyone bother maining him at all? Even if it was a blind pick, so long as the Mario player was known for being a Mario player, you'd better believe that they'd be find themselves coming up against D3s as a result.

And the end result is that no one will bother bringing Mario to tournaments at all. They're far better off investing their time into mastering a character who isn't vulnerable to infinite grabs at all.

I realize the game will have tiers regardless, but this is an artificial generation of a tier list due to ultra-poor beta testing on Sakurai's part. Mario, Bowser, Luigi, Samus, DK, Ness and Lucas aren't actually bottom tier, but they'll be placed there because no one with any sense will attempt to bring them to a tournament knowing they can be counterpicked by a D3/Marth player and be destroyed.

Ok and Snake can only U.Tilt 5x's and F.tilt 5 times.

Don't build that straw man.

Snake's tilts aren't guaranteed KOs from 0%-death. If Snake KOed his opponent from one easy to land move EVERY time it was landed, Snake would be banned across the board.

Infinites were banned in many Melee tournaments because they trivialized matches and the Melee infinites were harder to do than most of these Brawl infinites. I predict the same thing will happen, limiting the infinite to 4-5 grabs or so.

This was to the OP, he saids chaing grabs them selves where broken.

Yeah, I don't think they're broken and I think the OP is being overly dramatic about it.

There's a huge difference between racking up damage on an opponent and KOing them because of landing a SINGLE grab.

 

[Monshou_no_Nazo]

You're just going to get grabbed and ***** again.

Play as someone other than Mario.

Yeah. I don't like this tone you're giving me, by telling me how to play the game. My example isn't to say, "Oh, Mario sucks against DDD, but I'm going to be stubborn", but that even in such an extreme situation I still manage not to go up in arms and talk about how unfair it was. A lot of people are NOT going to be playing this match up, but still to talk about how unfair chain grabbing is. I'm trying to tell people that they need a mindset "me > my opponent's grab", instead of "ban chain grab".

 

[juniorv376]

Well ultimatly, it how you look at it. If you are gonna use this game as just a "Pass time" Then the rules can eb made that way. But for competitive sake. It doesn't make sense.

Here is a quote from an amazing article which everyone posting against CG's should read.

it is long, but well worth reading. And hopefully some of you may understand why so many people feel that removing CG's or banning them would remove depth from a game (Regressing if you will)

A link to the full article at the bottom. and the following as well.

A common call of the scrub is to cry that the kind of play in which ones tries to win at all costs is "boring" or "not fun." Let's consider two groups of players: a group of good players and a group of scrubs. The scrubs will play "for fun" and not explore the extremities of the game. They won't find the most effective tactics and abuse them mercilessly. The good players will. The good players will find incredibly overpowering tactics and patterns. As they play the game more, they'll be forced to find counters to those tactics. The vast majority of tactics that at first appear unbeatable end up having counters, though they are often quite esoteric and difficult to discover. The counter tactic prevents the first player from doing the tactic, but the first player can then use a counter to the counter. The second player is now afraid to use his counter and he's again vulnerable to the original overpowering tactic. (See my article on Yomi layer 3 for much more on that.)

Notice that the good players are reaching higher and higher levels of play. They found the "cheap stuff" and abused it. They know how to stop the cheap stuff. They know how to stop the other guy from stopping it so they can keep doing it. And as is quite common in competitive games, many new tactics will later be discovered that make the original cheap tactic look wholesome and fair. Often in fighting games, one character will have something so good it's unfair. Fine, let him have that. As time goes on, it will be discovered that other characters have even more powerful and unfair tactics. Each player will attempt to steer the game in the direction of his own advantages, much how grandmaster chess players attempt to steer opponents into situations in which their opponents are weak.

Let's return to the group of scrubs. They don't know the first


Historical Scrubs: The British Redcoats. The ultimate example of being too bound up by rules to actually fight. They fought "honorably" by marching into gunfire.
thing about all the depth I've been talking about. Their argument is basically that ignorantly mashing buttons with little regard to actual strategy is more "fun." Superficially, their argument does at least look true, since often their games will be more "wet and wild" than games between the experts, which are usually more controlled and refined. But any close examination will reveal that the experts are having a great deal of fun on a higher level than the scrub can even imagine. Throwing together some circus act of a win isn't nearly as satisfying as reading your opponent's mind to such a degree that you can counter his ever move, even his every counter.

Can you imagine what will happen when the two groups of players meet? The experts will absolutely destroy the scrubs with any number of tactics they've either never seen, or never been truly forced to counter. This is because the scrubs have not been playing the same game. The experts were playing the actual game while the scrubs were playing their own homemade variant with restricting, unwritten rules.

The scrub has still more crutches. He talks a great deal about "skill" and how he has skill whereas other players---very much including the ones who beat him flat out---do not have skill. The confusion here is what "skill" actually is. In Street Fighter, scrubs often cling to combos as a measure of skill. A combo is sequence of moves that are unblockable if the first move hits. Combos can be very elaborate and very difficult to pull off. But single moves can also take "skill," according to the scrub. The "dragon punch" or "uppercut" in Street Fighter is performed by holding the joystick toward the opponent, then down, then diagonally down and toward as the player presses a punch button. This movement must be completed within a fraction of a second, and though there is leeway, it must be executed fairly accurately. Ask any scrub and they will tell you that a dragon punch is a "skill move." Just last week I played a scrub who was actually quite good. That is, he knew the rules of the game well, he knew the character matchups well, and he knew what to do in most situations. But his web of mental rules kept him from truly playing to win. He cried cheap as I beat him with "no skill moves" while he performed many difficult dragon punches. He cried cheap when I threw him 5 times in a row asking, "is that all you know how to do? throw?" I gave him the best advice he could ever hear. I told him, "Play to win, not to do ‘difficult moves.'" This was a big moment in that scrub's life. He could either write his losses off and continue living in his mental prison, or analyze why he lost, shed his rules, and reach the next level of play.

http://www.sirlin.net/archive/playing-to-win-part-1

http://www.sirlin.net/archive/playing-to-win-part-2-mailbag/

http://www.sirlin.net/archive/playing-to-win-part-3-not-playing-to-win/

 

[samdaballer]

whatever it takes to win, if you dont believe in that, dont play competitively

 

[S_B]

Yeah. I don't like this tone you're giving me, by telling me how to play the game. My example isn't to say, "Oh, Mario sucks against DDD, but I'm going to be stubborn", but that even in such an extreme situation I still manage not to go up in arms and talk about how unfair it was. A lot of people are NOT going to be playing this match up, but still to talk about how unfair chain grabbing is. I'm trying to tell people that they need a mindset "me > my opponent's grab", instead of "ban chain grab".

Look, I'm not trying to sound rude, but I play Bowser for life and even I know how taking him into a match against an evenly-skilled D3 player is going to end.

Sirlin articles

On the discussion of scrubs...

Walls and walk-off stages are not counterable. Takeing away depth in the game. While allwoing counter picking allows depth.

That some scrubbish logic right there.

Why should stages with walls be banned? Don't go near the wall if you don't want to be infinite grabbed.

And there's a counter to walk-offs: don't get grabbed! Only a scrub would insist upon banning these levels.

 

[Monshou_no_Nazo]

Look, I'm not trying to sound rude, but I play Bowser for life and even I know how taking him into a match against an evenly-skilled D3 player is going to end.

You missed my point a second time. I know that these are bad matchups, but what you're not seeing in my explanation is that the PLAYER needs to avoid johnning about the grabs, whether they play as Bowser, or whether they play as Metaknight. Because, I'm sorry to say, chain grabs are not going to be banned. The goal is to be above your opponent, not equal with him.

I will not use Mario in a tournament, but I can use him in friendlies, in order to help myself get better by forcing myself into a dangerous situation where I need to learn to find options for.

 

[thebasman]

I don't think people are noticing that there's a very big difference between infinites and regular chaingrabs. I think it's pretty obvious that infinites will ultimately get banned. Every fighting game with a governing structure for competition has provisions to ban or restrict repeating infinite combos. They got banned in Melee, what has changed between now and then that would make the decision any different?

But infinites are a completely different animal from non-infinite chaingrabs, like Falco's or DDD's on most characters.

Also, Smash Brother, if you support the banning of infinites, why is "don't get grabbed" a suitable answer to getting grabbed by DDD on a walkoff stage? They're both situations that start with one grab and end in a stock. I think you ban those stages along with infinites.

 

[Monshou_no_Nazo]

I don't think people are noticing that there's a very big difference between infinites and regular chaingrabs. I think it's pretty obvious that infinites will ultimately get banned.

Still, I wouldn't be surprised if they weren't banned, which is why I am preparing myself for the worst.

 

[thebasman]

I'm just saying that if the governing structure of Smash is in any way the same as it was for Melee (which I think it is) then these tactics will get banned. So I'm not too worried about it. What I am worried about it people getting confused and doing things like limiting regular chaingrabs to 5 repetitions, or whatnot. That would just be the result of putting these two things into the same category, which displays a lack of thought.

 

[S_B]

Also, Smash Brother, if you support the banning of infinites, why is "don't get grabbed" a suitable answer to getting grabbed by DDD on a walkoff stage? They're both situations that start with one grab and end in a stock. I think you ban those stages along with infinites.

Exactly. I'm being the devil's advocate to prove a very valid point.

If Snake can be wall-infinte grabbed, they ban stages with walls.

If Mario, Bowser, DK, Luigi, Samus, Ness and Lucas can be infinite grabbed WITHOUT the use of a wall, no one seems to give a sh*t.

I find that a curious inconsistency, to say the least.

You missed my point a second time. I know that these are bad matchups, but what you're not seeing in my explanation is that the PLAYER needs to avoid johnning about the grabs, whether they play as Bowser, or whether they play as Metaknight. Because, I'm sorry to say, chain grabs are not going to be banned. The goal is to be above your opponent, not equal with him.

I don't mean CHAINS, I mean INFINITES, and those are a different story from chains.

The irony of this situation is that tournies ban walk-off stages to prevent D3's chaingrab from being an easy kill, but they have no issue with the fact that D3 doesn't need the walk off to achieve the EXACT same easy kill on 5 different characters.

Either tournaments need to allow walk-off/walled stages or ban infinites, because the current system discriminates against the 7 characters vulnerable to easy grab kills but protects the rest from easy grab kills due to walls and walk-offs.

It's hypocrisy, plain and simple.

 

[juniorv376]

Why should stages with walls be banned? Don't go near the wall if you don't want to be infinite grabbed.

And there's a counter to walk-offs: don't get grabbed! Only a scrub would insist upon banning these levels.

I never agreed to banning the stages because they can get wall infinited or banning stages because they can get grabbed off the edge. I just told what I think the people where thinking when they banned the stage. I think they should be left on. Adds mroe depth with counter picking. If Mario can get infinite grabbed anywhere then that equals poor game design and they have left Mario useless in competitive play. My arguments are all towards competivive play. Learning Marios will still be good because now you can Counter Pick a Toon link with marios good Anti camping moves.

More then 75% of the MvC2 cast are useless in high level play, yet the game is laoded with depth and one of the most respected fighters out.

If we are talking "Non-competitive" then none of this matters, since non-competitivly you can do w/e you wish, but competitivly CG's and all exploits that just "Give you an edge" should be on. And it is obvious here that CG/Infnintes are only adding depth to this game since CGers/infiniters are not winning majority of competitive games.

I don't mean CHAINS, I mean INFINITES, and those are a different story from chains.

The irony of this situation is that tournies ban walk-off stages to prevent D3's chaingrab from being an easy kill, but they have no issue with the fact that D3 doesn't need the walk off to achieve the EXACT same easy kill on 5 different characters.

Either tournaments need to allow walk-off/walled stages or ban infinites, because the current system discriminates against the 7 characters vulnerable to easy grab kills but protects the rest from easy grab kills due to walls and walk-offs.

It's hypocrisy, plain and simple.

Funny, if they allowed Walk-offs/walls then you'd have twice as many poeple crying becasue then it will be boarder lining broken. Since now CG'ers = better then the entire cast.


Ex: Akuma in SF Super turbo

But the first version of Street Fighter to ever have a secret character was Super Turbo Street Fighter with its untouchably good Akuma. Most characters in that game cannot beat Akuma. I don't mean it's a tough match---I mean they cannot ever, ever, ever, ever win. Akuma is "broken" in that his air fireball move is something the game simply wasn't designed to handle. He's miles above the other characters, and is therefore banned in all tournaments. But every game has a "best character" and those characters are never banned. They're just part of the game...except in Super Turbo. It's extreme examples like this that even amongst the top players, and even something that isn't a bug, but was put in on purpose by the game designers, the community as a whole has unanimously decided to make the rule: "don't play Akuma in serious matches."

In all it is in the best interest in Brawls competitive scene to allow the depth of glitched/exploited grabs, but remove what would make those grabs broekn to "Akuma's" point.

I assume thats why they ban wall/walk-off's

 

[S_B]

So we agree then: if a tournament is going to ban stages to prevent infinite or "unstoppable to death" chaingrabs, then they should ban the circumstances under which this can happen. Or they allow EVERYTHING in the game with no holds barred.

I should point out, though, that the SF reference you posted specifically mentions Akuma's prowess "not being a bug" and as such is unusual to ban. I find that interesting because D3's chaingrab is recognized as a bug by tournaments who ban walk-off stages, yet his standing infinite isn't.

 

[Monshou_no_Nazo]

Stages are banned because that is a solution that results in the least arguments, is simple, and prevents accidents entirely.

And I seriously doubt DDD's infinite will be banned, simply because it doesn't work on every character. Same for Marth's infinites on the Mother kids. I do not directly support infinites, but from lurking this forum for the last few months, I have read enough statements to know that there isn't much chance for these things to be banned.

Ice Climbers can supposively infinite any character, but it actually requires timing from what people say, and even then people also say it is more difficult for Ice Climbers to get grabs in due to shortened grab range. I don't know this from experience, but it doesn't look like they've been dominating too many tournaments, so I am forced to take their word for it.

 

[WoodyWiggins]

Chain grabing is awesome. Brawl's version of a Rushdown.

 

[PK Hexagon]

Exactly. I'm being the devil's advocate to prove a very valid point.

If Snake can be wall-infinte grabbed, they ban stages with walls.

If Mario, Bowser, DK, Luigi, Samus, Ness and Lucas can be infinite grabbed WITHOUT the use of a wall, no one seems to give a sh*t.

I find that a curious inconsistency, to say the least.

Because nearly all characters can be infinite grabbed up against the wall. Nearly all characters can be jab-locked up against the wall. Nearly all characters can be Marth D-Tilt locked up against the wall. Nearly all characters can be easily laser locked up against the wall.

This isn't a case of character bias, trust me. This game simply isn't meant to be played on walled levels (in a competitive setting). Blame Sakurai.