Competitive Brawl Rule Set (NOT OFFICIAL)

[LeeHarris]

Everyone should use this

 

[SothE700k]

You must be joking. Sarcasm is hard to detect over the internet. Shadow Moses and Yoshi Island Pipes are good anti MK stages, isn't it obvious to see why? lol.

Yeah, and get wall infinited to 300%+, that's good to have. Hey, I should play you one day, and just stick you to the wall and keep you there till 999%! Something simple as a jab at that point would rocket you to your death! Repeat! 3 STOCK MOTHAF***A! OWNED!

 

[OverLade]

Im using this ruleset for a tourney Im hosting in january, though I may change it back to 5 neutrals so stage striking doesn't too much of a tole on available neutrals. May also bring back a few CPs.

But otherwise it's excellent and really does a good job of testing the skill of the player.

Everyone should use this

 

[yellowroy]

yeah this is the best list but why don't you put yoshi's island in neutrals? don't you think 3 is too little.

 

[Deleted member]

updated. should be good to go now.

I have had several tournament hosts confront me and tell me that this rule set is the best they have used so far.

That said, if you have used this rule set at a tournament, post here and tell me about it. Player reactions, difficulties, etc. anything really. If there are any other flaws, this will be the best way to fix them.

 

[AlphaZealot]

- If the timer runs out, the victor is determined first by stock and then by percentage. In the event of a sudden death, both players are to suicide IMMEDIATELY. No fighting with bombs @ 300. At the results screen, regardless of what the screen says, the player with the higher DAMAGE TAKEN is the loser. No exceptions. In the result of a tie, the match will be discarded and played over, same characters and stage. For teams, if this should ever happen, add the damage taken instead for both teams.

Why? This makes me cry.

Then again, Diddy players will rock tie breakers.

 

[OverLade]

I used this in a tourney I hosted last saturday.

Very successful and ungay. :D

 

[_umbra_]

hey, redhalberd. nice avatar.

on topic, still in love with this ruleset I might end up using this at a psu tournament if I ever end up hosting one again.

 

[OverLade]

hey, redhalberd. nice avatar.

on topic, still in love with this ruleset I might end up using this at a psu tournament if I ever end up hosting one again.

Thank you. You have pretty good taste yourself. :D

 

[CO18]

You both have terrible taste.

 

[OverLade]

You both have terrible taste.

CO18 is sippin that haterade ignore him lol.

O2 is the ish.

 

[Deleted member]

stop spamming my thread.

 

[cAm8ooo]

So i don't see anything about other forms of suicide. Whats the rules for this?

 

[Amide]

So i don't see anything about other forms of suicide. Whats the rules for this?

If it goes to sudden death and not from a "Bowercide," the person with the lower percentage wins.

 

[matthewmilad]

Ok, so when you say "DDD's Down throw Infinite is banned", to what extent does this apply?
Am I still allowed to walk slightly forward and re-grab DK and Bowser? Am I allowed to grab people against the wall in Delfino? Am I allowed to standing grab Mario, Luigi, Samus before continuing with running grabs? Please clarify

Edit: Also, if we're banning DDD's Infinite grab, then why is Corneria banned?

If it goes to sudden death and not from a "Bowercide," the person with the lower percentage wins.

What if it goes to sudden death from Bowsercide? And what was the port you wanted to be able to die after your opponent? Port 1 right? And then Port 2 does what again?

 

[AlphaZealot]

If it goes to sudden death and not from a "Bowercide," the person with the lower percentage wins.

Which is just dumb: now that I'm kirby if I'm at 100% and you are at 20% and I suicide KO you-then you should win? That makes no sense-you died at the SAME TIME. Death, not the percent at which it occurs, is the important part of Smash. If the percentage mattered, then we should either play stamina, or we should award the victory to whoever deals more damage in a match.

 

[cAm8ooo]

Which is just dumb: now that I'm kirby if I'm at 100% and you are at 20% and I suicide KO you-then you should win? That makes no sense-you died at the SAME TIME. Death, not the percent at which it occurs, is the important part of Smash. If the percentage mattered, then we should either play stamina, or we should award the victory to whoever deals more damage in a match.

Agreed. I know this might be the kirby bias coming out of me. But i don't think you should win just cuz you jumped into my big *** mouth.

 

[Ace Of Flames]

I'm loving this new stage list. Especially since one of my most hates stages(japes) is banned. Nice work.

 

[G1G4 G0N0RRH34]

needs more norfair

 

[Overswarm]

Which is just dumb: now that I'm kirby if I'm at 100% and you are at 20% and I suicide KO you-then you should win? That makes no sense-you died at the SAME TIME. Death, not the percent at which it occurs, is the important part of Smash. If the percentage mattered, then we should either play stamina, or we should award the victory to whoever deals more damage in a match.

Deaths are the important thing.

So, who died first?

Oh, it was simultaneous?

That was the line of thinking that ended up bringing % into account; it is an arbitrary choice over other options such as sudden death or 1 stock do-overs because sudden death is a completely different skill set (with bombs!) and 1 stock do-overs add a lot of length to a set, especially when it can happen multiple times.

 

[Deleted member]

It is unfortunate that many situations involving this game are decided by arbitrary means.

 

[Overswarm]

It is unfortunate that many situations involving this game are decided by arbitrary means.

Yeah, but we can't really have a non-arbitrary way of doing it. Even just doing what the game says is arbitrary.

If we were making rules for one giant tournament with a bunch of judges it'd be easier, but this is a grassroots deal.

 

[Deleted member]

I would like to see the results of this rule set used at more tournaments. Any input?

 

[g-regulate]

Umbreon you failed to mention a ruling on Kirby and DDD suicide KOs. Who wins there?

 

[Sinz]

nevermind, I am ********.

 

[G U R U]

needs more norfair

gtfo

I honestly love this ruleset. No complaints.

 

[Deleted member]

Umbreon you failed to mention a ruling on Kirby and DDD suicide KOs. Who wins there?

play it. once bowser and ganon grab you, they have to go through with it. kirby and DDD don't.

I had bowser only because it's controller port based, but I see other TOs doing the same for ganon, so I added it.

 

[Skip2MaLoo]

norfair, tyvm.

 

[Xyro77]

im going to be honest, your the ONE sbr member that understand WTF is wrong with the REST of the sbr. Im totally in shock right now.

THANK YOU

 

[Anonymous.]

This is the greatest ruleset ever.

I love you max

 

[Deleted member]

im going to be honest, you're the ONE sbr member that understand WTF is wrong with the REST of the sbr. Im totally in shock right now.

THANK YOU

actually, the SBR is very split in regards to tournament ideology, it's just that the conservative side is the posting minority. there are plenty of members that agree with me and simply don't post as much.

 

[g-regulate]

play it. once bowser and ganon grab you, they have to go through with it. kirby and DDD don't.

I had bowser only because it's controller port based, but I see other TOs doing the same for ganon, so I added it.

what do you mean "play it"? it goes to sudden death, who wins?

 

[Eddie G]

Should Jungle Japes really be considered as banned? It seems much more hazardous in Melee than it is in Brawl, and was still listed as a counterpick in the other title. :/

 

[Jam Stunna]

I admit that I haven't read the entire thread, but can someone explain why the ICs infinite is legal, yet D3's isn't?

 

[adumbrodeus]

I admit that I haven't read the entire thread, but can someone explain why the ICs infinite is legal, yet D3's isn't?

Because it's difficult enough to achieve a grab while desnynched and while nana is near that it doesn't create any ridiculously bad match-ups.


Granted, DDD's doesn't deserve a ban either, but banning IC's infinite is just dumb because there's nothing powerful about it, period.



Had to say it because people actually argue that IC's grab needs to be banned.

 

[Jam Stunna]

Yeah, I was going in the other direction. It seems inconsistent to ban one infinite and not the other.

 

[adumbrodeus]

Yeah, I was going in the other direction. It seems inconsistent to ban one infinite and not the other.

Completely disagree. If DDD was able to infinite the entire cast in the same manner that he does DK, that would be bannable, or if IC's had DDD's grab range.

Compare either to IC's currently... nothing.

 

[Jam Stunna]

So the problem isn't infinites themselves(apparently), it's the range/difficulty/effectiveness of infinites? Those are rather murky criteria to base bans on.

 

[adumbrodeus]

So the problem isn't infinites themselves(apparently), it's the range/difficulty/effectiveness of infinites? Those are rather murky criteria to base bans on.

The criteria is whether the infinite actually overcentralizes the game.

While ease of performance is not an issue, ease of achieving the actual situation where it's actually an infinite (assuming that you can perform it flawlessly when you're in a situation where your input is all that matters) is a crucial issue.


Why?

Because to overcentralize, it has to actually affect a reasonable number of match-ups. If the infinite is effectively useless, then it's not relevant.


This criteria applies for any tactic.

 

[Deleted member]

what do you mean "play it"? it goes to sudden death, who wins?

it becomes based on damage as would any other sudden death. I suppose I should elaborate on this more.

I admit that I haven't read the entire thread, but can someone explain why the ICs infinite is legal, yet D3's isn't?

I had a longggggg debacle with Hylian on this, where he can more or less prove that the Ice Climber infinite is not always present, while on those specific matches, DDD's always is.

And to some degree, it is easy to move against some infinites over others based on difficulty. For example, Fox/Mewtwo had infinites that were never banned in melee, while most of the TOs I know banned Wobbling. Is it a good answer, obviously not.

I suggest you contact Hylian, he has a wealth of information about the various infinites and their differences and would give you better answers than I ever could.