chain grabbing cheap?

[bobson]

Bobson, unfortunately the OP did not lurk for 6 months before joining. As such, he bothered to make a thread regarding the validity of chain throws, showing that he does not understand that this forum is for competitive smashers.

But does that disqualify him from being allowed to question the validity in casual play? I think it makes for an interesting debate, set apart from the usual competitive debates here. Taking into account that "honor" usually exists in casual play, are some tactics used in competitive play forbidden?

A chain throw is what, 30%?

It's usually around 50% in my games. I don't deal with chaingrabbers much, though, so I don't know the average amount.

Marth's fthrow to dancing blade is 25% easy, and that's a legitimate combo. No one should be complaining about chain throws, unless you want to say that something as simple as a combo is cheap. Where does it end? Even in casual play, some lines have to be drawn; chain throwing is on the fair side of this line.

Fthrow to dancing blade has less potential to drain the fun out of a match, though. It's only two moves, and won't usually keep going irrevocably until you're at the end of the stage to be edgeguarded as chaingrabs do. Plus, on stages with walkoff edges, (which are allowed in casual play) it can easily mean a stock loss if you get grabbed.
Of the "cheapness" criteria I listed before, draining the fun each player is having is the main distinction of whether a move is cheap or not. "Cheapness" of moves changes for each individual player, but I'd estimate that the majority of casual players get irritated by it.

 

[RawrBoom]

@GofG. Just because of someone's join date doesn't mean they are not entitled to their own opinion.

And yes, cheap is amongst friendlies. If you want to go to the competitive aspect, either the other person would change to another character to avoid the CGer or just deal with it.

 

[Delta_BP26]

I find it hard to believe that ONLY Smashers believe that tires don exits. Being a vet of the GameFAQ's Brawl boards, (...) I have noticed many arguments opposing their existence; all of them being illogical.

The only good one I've seen is an argument that we're oversimplifying things into a value that cannot exist; but even that doesn't dismiss their existence. It's sad, really, that we're the only ones with people who believe that. Tiers are for queers... *shudder*

 

[GofG]

RawrBoom: that's why I have an exceptions list.

Delta: We're also the only competitive community that also encompasses a casual community.

There are no casual Street Fighter: Third Strike players.

 

[RawrBoom]

Then explain to me how Linkshot's join date in your signature actually affects what he's saying.

 

[Foxy]

No, you don't understand; that list isn't for games with tier lists that are agreed on. That list is for games where the MEMBERS AGREE THAT A TIER LIST EXISTS OF SOME SORT. There are scrubs in both melee and brawl who think that tier lists don't exist because it depends on the skill of the player; i.e. they don't understand what a tier list is.

in all seriousness the caps make your main point a lot harder to read

no, honestly

i CANNOT READ IT

p.s. bet you couldn't read that.

oops, off-topic, back to ganon

I USE FAIR IT MAKES ME GOOD EVEN THOUGH IT'S BAD SO I'M BAD
10scrubbingbubbles

 

[kainsword]

No, you don't understand; that list isn't for games with tier lists that are agreed on. That list is for games where the MEMBERS AGREE THAT A TIER LIST EXISTS OF SOME SORT. There are scrubs in both melee and brawl who think that tier lists don't exist because it depends on the skill of the player; i.e. they don't understand what a tier list is.

I'd figure coming from you that they wouldn't be marked off at all. There are scrubs in every fighting game that doesn't inherently believe there is some sort of statistical difference between characters. You and I know of the scrubs in Melee and Brawl, but that doesn't discount the fact that a child once bought Street Fighter and thought all the characters were great and/or had an even amount of match ups.

I know of no competitive gamer that goes out and obliterates major tournaments like Evo (Despite it's negligence of true Brawl competitive standards, such as NO ITEMS) that doesn't believe in tiers of characters.

I've never even been in a tournament for winnings and I agree that there is inherently a tier list. A tier list is a ranking of characters based on their traits. Higher ranked characters have traits that support higher level play, such as Fox who in the hands of a technical player, like Silent Wolf, is inherently superior to even one of the best Bowsers in the world, Gimpyfish. Because each character has unique and varying traits, there is inherently a difference in their level of potential. Slow characters are rarely ever top tier material because their speed is not conducive to a high level of play. It limits their options severely. In fact, I can't name a single game that has a slow character that is top tier.

I wouldn't count those scrubs as part of tournament play. They're merely fodder for helping skilled players move farther along the tourney ladder without risk of being knocked out.

Is there a competitive player here winning major tournaments that doesn't believe in tiers? I can't name one. Can you?

 

[Foxy]

For those discussing the tier list:

People who say that they "don't believe in" it or think that it's "bad"/"wrong" are incredibly ignorant.

A tier list is a well-thought-out and agreed-upon observation. It has no consequences or effects on the game, or on you (other than more knowledge).

People look at character matchups and tournament performance and those together can be used to rank characters. Why? Well, why not? It's just fun to see who's better than who.

Proof: a tier list doesn't actually even exist for Brawl (and won't for a while) and everyone knows how good every character is relative to the others. Metaknight is still good despite the non-existence of a Brawl tier list. Captain Falcon is still bad.

A tier list should have no effect on who/how/when/wherewhat/why people play. It's a freaking list.

 

[GofG]

Kainsword, the thing is; the child who goes out and buys Street Fighter doesn't then go onto Shoryuken and muck up their amazingly well organized Competitive Fighting Games community by asking whether spamming fireballs with Ryu is cheap. In Brawl, we have that problem.

See, the competitive community in Smash (SWF) is forced to encompass the casual community (also SWF) because we are a highly publicized website. That is what I was trying to get at; I apologize if I wasn't clear.

 

[Delta_BP26]

I'd figure coming from you that they wouldn't be marked off at all. There are scrubs in every fighting game that doesn't inherently believe there is some sort of statistical difference between characters. You and I know of the scrubs in Melee and Brawl, but that doesn't discount the fact that a child once bought Street Fighter and thought all the characters were great and/or had an even amount of match ups.

I know of no competitive gamer that goes out and obliterates major tournaments like Evo (Despite it's negligence of true Brawl competitive standards, such as NO ITEMS) that doesn't believe in tiers of characters.

I've never even been in a tournament for winnings and I agree that there is inherently a tier list. A tier list is a ranking of characters based on their traits. Higher ranked characters have traits that support higher level play, such as Fox who in the hands of a technical player, like Silent Wolf, is inherently superior to even one of the best Bowsers in the world, Gimpyfish. Because each character has unique and varying traits, there is inherently a difference in their level of potential. Slow characters are rarely ever top tier material because their speed is not conducive to a high level of play. It limits their options severely. In fact, I can't name a single game that has a slow character that is top tier.

I wouldn't count those scrubs as part of tournament play. They're merely fodder for helping skilled players move farther along the tourney ladder without risk of being knocked out.

Is there a competitive player here winning major tournaments that doesn't believe in tiers? I can't name one. Can you?

Well, think of it like this. I knew nothing of tiers until 2-3 years ago. I admit it. However, immediately after hearing about it, I knew they existed. There can not be balance.

Most players of other competitive games realize this. Everyone who plays Soul Calibur or Tekken knows that some characters are far better than others even before knowing about tier lists, such as myself when I bought SC2, and as such accept tier lists when they learn about them. Only smashers deny them, except for maybe a few rare cases (I'm referring to the gamers of other fighting games), and usually in those rare cases the players aren't complete morons.

 

[RawrBoom]

Kainsword, the thing is; the child who goes out and buys Street Fighter doesn't then go onto Shoryuken and muck up their amazingly well organized Competitive Fighting Games community by asking whether spamming fireballs with Ryu is cheap. In Brawl, we have that problem.

See, the competitive community in Smash (SWF) is forced to encompass the casual community (also SWF) because we are a highly publicized website. That is what I was trying to get at; I apologize if I wasn't clear.

I honestly think the problem is that you and others failed to realize that the first post of this thread was geared more towards friendlies... not competitive play.

 

[GofG]

I think the problem is that this thread was created in the first place; the idea that chain throws are cheap and unfair in any environment is ludicrous. They are a fundamental part of the game.

 

[Foxy]

I honestly think the problem is that you and others failed to realize that the first post of this thread was geared more towards friendlies... not competitive play.

I think the problem is that you fail to realize that the post is about something that is concerned with Tactical Brawl and it was posted in the wrong forum.

If he's discussing the "cheapness" of chaingrabs, it warrants a competitive perspective. (Feel free to call me on this)

There isn't a "Brawl General Gameplay" forum. There's "General Brawl" and "Tactical Brawl". One's for random stuff, like music and lolz, and the other concerns fightin' words.

 

[Foxy]

i think the problem is double post

10postcounts

 

[Dumah]

All the videogame understands is who won and who lost, and that's all that matters in tournaments and in money matches and in any competitive gaming environment.

So why are walk off stages banned, or any stage that isn't neutral? Or wall infinites? Or items? Or infinite dimensional cape? If all the game recognizes is win/loss, and that's all that competitive smashers care about, there is no reason to ban anything...none. There is no "in the interest of fairness or balance" or to "eliminate luck" if all that matters is a win.

anything that is legal in competitive play and helps you win, should be sued, period

Legality is the cornerstone of the argument. It's totally an opinion. Do anything to win....except this...or this...or that.

 

[bobson]

I think the problem is that this thread was created in the first place; the idea that chain throws are cheap and unfair in any environment is ludicrous. They are a fundamental part of the game.

The basis of it is that most attacks have a distinct risk/reward ratio. You can get some 20% off with DK's fsmash, but it's slow enough that it isn't considered unfair. Similarly, most fast attacks don't do a lot of damage and knockback. The majority of chaingrabs will end with at least 30% and leave you set up for whatever the opponent wants to do to you, and they come out with the speed of a jab with comparatively little cooldown. Competitively, this would merely make chaingrabs a good tactic, but with honor in the equation, they get put on the fringe.

If he's discussing the "cheapness" of chaingrabs, it warrants a competitive perspective. (Feel free to call me on this)

How? It's established that "cheapness" in general terms doesn't exist in competitive play.

 

[globiumz]

There is not a cheapness/unfair/haxed scale. There is an unbalanced/overpowered scale.

You don't understand what I'm saying.

"Cheap", as an adjective, implies that it's unfair for a move/character to be used, and that the player using that move/character shouldn't use it because it's dishonorable or something.

Ok, sorry. To clarify what I mean, it's that I think chaingrabbing should be banned since the point of tournaments is to test who is more skilled. That's means anything you can counter with skill, i.e Pit arrow spamming, is perfectably justifiable.

Now you mighht say that you could just avoid getting grabbed, but that's not gonna happen when two people are close in skill. In some cases CGing and infinite grabbing also widens the tier gap. Sure, there's Yoshi and his chain on MK but what about Dedede's infinite on several characters? It makes certain characters unplayable or you have to counterpick. The infinites on Lucas and Ness sucks too.....

 

[Foxy]

\How? It's established that "cheapness" in general terms doesn't exist in competitive play.

I guess the original post doesn't exist either.

No need to argue about it, then.

 

[White Assassin]

i think it´s i8nteresting that there is a chaingrab, and it´s ok, or good to know how it works, but using it in a regular match is cheap, to me.
it´s like saying: " i am afraid u will beat me so i do this, that u dont have a chance."

 

[bobson]

I guess the original post doesn't exist either.

No need to argue about it, then.

The OP was obviously not talking about competitive play.

 

[Foxy]

The OP was obviously not talking about competitive play.

This thread isn't about the OP, it's about the thread.

I'm gonna loop this back to "Smashboards is generally for competition", "discussing how good a strategy/technique is relates to competition absolutely", and "hi thar".

And as such we return to the beginning.

infinite combo imo