Meta Competitive Smash Ruleset Discussion

[Supreme Dirt]

Didn't see it, thanks to whoever merged it lol.

 

[Noa.]

That counterpicking method while fair, seems quite complex. I'm sure you ran lots of tounaments using that kind of ruleset. Did the players always counterpick using that method? Or would they just ban a stage and counterpick a stage like the procedure for most tournaments? I am wondering in how it worked out in practice. The system seems fair if convoluted.

I'm not sure how many stages will be legal in the smash 3ds or wii u version. Personally I think that for the wii u version the stage list will be of a size where stage striking for the first match from neutrals and then opening up with a single ban and counterpick list for the following matches are enough. But the 3ds may have a smaller stage list. If there are only five legal stages or so I would suggest having all the stages available in the stage striking process for the first match, and to remove the differentiation between counterpick and neutral, and possibly not even include a ban for the winner.

However Supreme Dirt I doubt that you'll have such a small stage list for your tournaments. You seem to have an interesting opinion on stage legality.

May I ask a question? Why was Yoshi's Island Brawl in your Group 4 for your Brawl ruleset?

 

[B0NK]

Swiss Stuff

They ran it completely wrong Kenin, Dekillsage described to me how they ran it for Skullgirls. They had zero clue as to what they were doing.

The point of swiss is that if everyone has their own set-up and can start each round at the same time, it fairly seeds a top 8 or 16 bracket without taking as much time as round robin does. Swiss allows more matches at tourneys than a double elimination bracket without taking up more time assuming everyone has their own set up.

This is why it's used in chess, card games, and pokemon tournaments, everyone can start their matches at the same time each round. I'm sorry that the Skullgirl TO did not know how to run Swiss rounds, I encourage you to research how to properly run swiss. Their are a set order to breaking a tie, and it's impossible that there will still be a tie after all the checks. (Opponents' Win Percentage, Opponents' Opponents' Win Percentage, Head to Head, and Standing of Last Opponent).

Though Swiss works great for Smash 3DS, it will more likely than not never work for Smash WiiU because of the sheer amount of set ups you need to run it properly.

 

[S2]

I'd be for Swiss setups if it's possible, but yeah, there will always be the question of having enough setups. For larger tournaments I think it's a great idea.

I'm all for the 3-stock standard coming over from Brawl. I actually don't think 2 stocks is all that bad, but the additional stock really helps ensure that the better player wins and helps for comebacks in case someone loses a very quick stock.

What I'm most interested in is custom moves. I really feel it would be in the game's best interest (at least for now) to allow them. The amount of match-up variations it adds would be huge, since many of the alternate moves allow for different character playstyles. And ultimately that would lead to a much more varied and interesting game to learn and watch.

Of course, we'll have to wait and see the logistics of setting up custom moves, but I don't think it's unreasonable to require players to bring either a 3DS or an Amiibo containing their customs to tournaments (much like bringing a controller). It's a little unclear now how the transfering works. But with custom moves we really should give them a fair shake as a tournament standard. We have a lot to gain in terms of Smash 4's complexity, plus we can always ban them later if custom moves end up being bad for balance.

 

[B0NK]

I've never seen enough home consoles to run swiss at any event, large tournaments or not, Smash or not Smash.

Swiss will only work for 3DS because everyone has to bring their own set up to play in the tourney.

 

[SmashTheCstik]

or we could bring back the standard 4 stock rule!

if you set the damage ratio to 1.2, 1.3, or 1.4 (still figuring out which one is best) it plays and feels a lot like melee/PM.

2 stocks is absurd in my opinion. A SD most likely will cost you the match every time, thus detering players from taking those risky moves we all love to see.

 

[Dr. Giygas]

or we could bring back the standard 4 stock rule!

if you set the damage ratio to 1.2, 1.3, or 1.4 (still figuring out which one is best) it plays and feels a lot like melee/PM.

2 stocks is absurd in my opinion. A SD most likely will cost you the match every time, thus detering players from taking those risky moves we all love to see.

That's natural selection. Players with more technical skill and mastery of the game will be far less likely to SD. At even just mid-level play SDs are not a particularly common sight or deciding factor in matches.

In addition to this you've done nothing at all (At least in terms of real data or evidence) to suggest that the damage ratio needs any tweaking at all.

"2 stocks is absurd in my opinion" This really seems to say more about your post than I could. If you think 2 stock matches are too low off just a gut feeling I recommend doing some testing and proper theorycrafting to back up your stance. The entire community will not back your suggestion based purely off of a gut feeling- it takes detailed analysis and carefully obtained "scientific" data to make a point worth making.

 

[Illuvial]

Its a damn shame I don't own a WiiU, so competing in WiiU tourneys will be a hassle once the game comes out, if only because the stages will differ.

In any case, I honestly like a 4 stock 8 minute format with best 2 of 3 for this game. Time will play an important factor in the game, so it adds an element to almost every MU that only the lamest of Brawl MUs had, but at the same time matches and sets only take about as long as your standard Brawl set or a someone sluggish Melee set.

 

[WizKick]

I like 3 stocks 5 minutes, it gives folks enough time to come back if they can. And matches that are clearly being won by a defensive player won't have to drag out so long.

Regardless of stock I'm all for 5 minute time limits though. To alleviate the burden on TOs and attendees.

 

[Terotrous]

I feel that each game really needs to be 3 stocks. The main reason for this is the rage mechanic. Rage effectively confers a huge advantage to whomever scores the first kill because when you kill your opponent, they also lose most of their KO power, allowing you to rack up additional percent basically for free until they finally get the stock off. In a 2 stock match, this confers a huge advantage to the player who gets the first kill, often leading to a 30-40% lead going into the final stock even if the match was close until the first kill. IMO, this makes matches much less exciting because once the first kill is recorded you almost always know who will win.

With a 3 stock match, both players have a chance to benefit from this mechanic and thus it doesn't affect the outcome quite so much (but still, I wish it wasn't in the game at all).

 

[SamuraiPanda]

To be honest, I'm enjoying 2 stock more than 3 stock right now. I live a busy life and 3 stock tournaments are a longer commitment for me. Also, the pace of a 2 stock match is much higher. The peak of excitement during a 2 stock match happens pretty quick and as a spectator keeps my interest the entire time rather than looking away when a match starts then looking back when its finally down to the last stock.

Every hit counts more in a 2 stock match. Every correct read is weighed heavier. Every factor has a bigger impact on the game... I think thats healthy for the game.

 

[Fortanono]

Okay, so, I personally think that the competitive scene is a bit restrictive, and that as of now, they are not playing the game to its fullest. But playing the game to its fullest would just be too random, I get that. However, my idea is that we could get at least a little bit closer to how its supposed to be played. I know jack about the competitive scene, but here are my ideas, and just be warned, these are a bit controversial:

GENERAL RULES:

Okay, well, I think that the general rules should still be set on Stock with 2 stocks, 7 minutes. I wanted to make the time limit viable, but not too restrictive. However, due to the new vectoring mechanic, I think 2 stocks is necessary to keep the time limit from sending people into Sudden Death. Add in the fact that Brawl's tournaments took too long, and I think that this is the ideal number for the matches.

STAGES:

While there aren't many stages that you can use as tournament legal in this game, I think we should be less restrictive with stages. Here is my possible stage list:

Starter:

• Battlefield
• Final Destination
• Yoshi's Island (Brawl
• Arena Ferox
• Prism Tower

Counterpick:

• PictoChat 2 (doesn't seem too bad in terms of hazards)
• Rainbow Road (honestly, the Shy Guys are very predictable)
• Any Omega form minus the ones of the stages previously mentioned. This is so competitive players can enjoy Smash's many stages.

CUSTOMIZATION:

Full customization should not be allowed. However, custom moves should be used in the standard movesets of characters to balance out their normal moves. Also, each character should have an "alternate moveset" with a few different moves. Custom equipment should be banned, though.

ITEMS:

Okay, I don't think items should be allowed. But there is one item that I think should: The Smash Ball. Why? Each character's FS is part of their moveset, and I think that all moves should be allowed (except maybe some custom moves).

So, there you have it, my ideas for the competitive scene! Peace out!

 

[Tristan_win]

I know jack about the competitive scene, but here are my ideas,

The next paragraph

However, due to the new vectoring mechanic, I think 2 stocks is necessary to keep the time limit from sending people into Sudden Death. Add in the fact that Brawl's tournaments took too long, and I think that this is the ideal number for the matches.

At first the vectoring mechanic did look very dreadful with how effective it was but new insight and studies has come to light that has thrown the original information into question. We can't say for sure right now if Smash4 will normally drag on like they tend to do in Brawl. More to my point though, why do you think this? Did you attended any Brawl tournaments if so then you obviously know more then nothing about smash and if you really didn't attend any tournaments then what right do you have for making a thread base on your 'ideas' when they aren't yours?

After looking though the rest of your thread I don't see much of any controversial over what the majority of people on smashboards seem to want.

I would argue that PictoChat 2 should be banned in omega and in normal due to it's pure black floor giving greninja a advantage with his shadows and due to the hazards being able to suddenly appear and kill people.

Edit: and the idea of allowing smashballs. Which is the most unbalance thing ever due to characters like sonic getting one means he earn a free kill while for peach you just need to make sure your airborne when she activates it and even when does work it doesn't necessary mean she can kill you in one hit while your asleep.

I don't think this deserves it's own thread to be honest.

 

[DavemanCozy]

Okay, so, I personally think that the competitive scene is a bit restrictive, and that as of now, they are not playing the game to its fullest. But playing the game to its fullest would just be too random, I get that. However, my idea is that we could get at least a little bit closer to how its supposed to be played. I know jack about the competitive scene, but here are my ideas, and just be warned, these are a bit controversial:

GENERAL RULES:

Okay, well, I think that the general rules should still be set on Stock with 2 stocks, 7 minutes. I wanted to make the time limit viable, but not too restrictive. However, due to the new vectoring mechanic, I think 2 stocks is necessary to keep the time limit from sending people into Sudden Death. Add in the fact that Brawl's tournaments took too long, and I think that this is the ideal number for the matches.

STAGES:

While there aren't many stages that you can use as tournament legal in this game, I think we should be less restrictive with stages. Here is my possible stage list:

Starter:

• Battlefield
• Final Destination
• Yoshi's Island (Brawl
• Arena Ferox
• Prism Tower

I think that Prism Tower would be a better Counterpick stage. The changing size of the platform is annoying, + being able to pass through the stage makes characters like Meta Knight, Jigglypuff, and Peach be able to recover from just about anywhere. See Mute City in Melee or Halberd in Brawl.

Counterpick:

• PictoChat 2 (doesn't seem too bad in terms of hazards)
• Rainbow Road (honestly, the Shy Guys are very predictable)
• Any Omega form minus the ones of the stages previously mentioned. This is so competitive players can enjoy Smash's many stages.

Regarding the Omega forms: each of them vary in size, boundaries, etc. For example: the walls on the side of the stage of Wily's castle give characters with wall jumps options they normally wouldn't have in FD. The size of Gerudo Valley is also considerably larger than normal FD, giving a slight advantage to characters who can run away. Yes, they are small differences, but each one of them should be accounted for in a competitive ruleset.

Pictochat 2 is one of those stages that I personally am against for even in Omega form due to the colors in the stage camoufaging certain characters (I got ninja'd by Tristan_win in the above post). I personally think that these factors need to be considered, however small they are they will make a difference.

CUSTOMIZATION:

Full customization should not be allowed. However, custom moves should be used in the standard movesets of characters to balance out their normal moves. Also, each character should have an "alternate moveset" with a few different moves. Custom equipment should be banned, though.

I'd be ok with this. Maybe have it be it's own side format: singles and doubles with custom moves. This would allow for a more deep exploration of characters.

ITEMS:

Okay, I don't think items should be allowed. But there is one item that I think should: The Smash Ball. Why? Each character's FS is part of their moveset, and I think that all moves should be allowed (except maybe some custom moves).

No. Just because it's part of the moveset does not mean it should be tournament legal. Chasing a randomly appearing item that could suddenly give a big advantage to someone shouldn't be allowed. The fact that it appears in a random spot in the stage is what adds to this luck factor, since it could be in a place where it's easier for someone to grab it before the other fighter even gets there.

Feel free to turn them on if playing for fun, but when you're competing, being cheaped out by something that appeared out of nowhere is just frustrating.

 

[infomon]

I'd like to prefer 2-stock for all the same reasons as SP, but that rage effect.... it seems pretty significant.

 

[Terotrous]

To be honest, I'm enjoying 2 stock more than 3 stock right now. I live a busy life and 3 stock tournaments are a longer commitment for me. Also, the pace of a 2 stock match is much higher. The peak of excitement during a 2 stock match happens pretty quick and as a spectator keeps my interest the entire time rather than looking away when a match starts then looking back when its finally down to the last stock.

Every hit counts more in a 2 stock match. Every correct read is weighed heavier. Every factor has a bigger impact on the game... I think thats healthy for the game.

I can see where you're coming from, but in general, the players themselves don't really care if a match is exciting to watch, they want a ruleset which gives them the best chance to play the game to the fullest of their ability. I'm fairly positive 3 stock will be more popular with the players (particularly the really strong ones) for this reason.

Honestly, I think 3 stock 8 minutes is not inordinately long. We've been running 8 minute matches for a long time in the Smash community. Sure, our tournaments take a long time, but it hasn't really done much to deter people from entering or watching them.


I would be much more okay with 2 stock matches if the Rage mechanic could be removed somehow, but until Smash 4 Plus happens we have to live with it.

 

[Terotrous]

Stages:

The problem with Rainbow Road is that it's too similar to Prism Tower. The stage concept is almost identical and so are most of the stage forms, it just has a minor hazard thrown in to make the matches a bit more annoying. We generally don't want to have a lot of stages that are really similar to each other because that kind of defeats the purpose of DSR.

This also somewhat applies to Pictochat 2. It's basically similar to FD, it just has a lot of crud going on that I don't think anyone really wants in the game.

Of the remaining stages, I think Tomodachi Life is by far the most legitimate. That still allows us to have 7 stages (even though they vary, I think it's necessary to count Omega Mode as one stage for the purpose of DSR), which allows us to run DSR somewhat effectively.


Match Rules:

7 minutes is super long for 2 stock. Even at 5 minutes, timeouts very rarely occur for 2 stock.

The Smash Ball will never be allowed, it's probably one of the most obviously unbalanced items. Not only are its appearance and movement random, but so is its durability, so you never know which hit is going to break it. Some FSes also confer a huge advantage while others are fairly useless, and enabling the Smash Ball also enables Pity FSes as well.

 

[Fortanono]

Yeah, you guys are right. My Smash Ball argument was a bit ridiculous, and Rainbow Road and Pictochat don't seem too good for competitive play. But my custom moves point still stands. And finally, the "only banned Omega stages" seems a bit ridiculous now that I think about it, and with PictoChat's colors it seems even worse. Sorry for this whole thread, guys.

 

[Rizen]

For general things in the OP:
I like the 2 stock best of 3 format. Tourneys can take forever and people aren't nearly as good at 2AM. Plus in the less populated states we have to drive a long time to and from tourneys.

I'm for the double elimination. Don't fix what's not broken.

Custom moves could be up to the TO. Some tourneys could use customs and others not. IMO the standard should be no custom moves.

Keep everything simple, easy to set up and to the point.

 

[iNinja5567]

The second is if they give us premade Miis with the Wii U version (they did not for the 3DS version).

Personally, I'm a bit annoyed they don't have premade Miis for us to use. I have 0 Miis on my 3DS because I think they are stupid. I would have much rather have had them give me ones to use.

They do give you premade miis. When you're making one, there are guest miis that you can use.

 

[WizKick]

I can see where you're coming from, but in general, the players themselves don't really care if a match is exciting to watch, they want a ruleset which gives them the best chance to play the game to the fullest of their ability. I'm fairly positive 3 stock will be more popular with the players (particularly the really strong ones) for this reason.

Honestly, I think 3 stock 8 minutes is not inordinately long. We've been running 8 minute matches for a long time in the Smash community. Sure, our tournaments take a long time, but it hasn't really done much to deter people from entering or watching them.


I would be much more okay with 2 stock matches if the Rage mechanic could be removed somehow, but until Smash 4 Plus happens we have to live with it.

Whatever the stock ends up being, I still think 8 minutes is way way too long.

 

[Terotrous]

Whatever the stock ends up being, I still think 8 minutes is way way too long.

8 minutes has been the standard for like a decade now. The idea is that the timer should be set high enough that timeouts rarely occur, under current rules most matches tend to take 5-6 minutes.

 

[Master WGS]

I think 2 stock, 5 minutes, bo5 is the best option. Carries over for glory, gives room for set comebacks, allows counterpicking to not be SO damning, and provides both players with plenty of options. If that's too long, I'd motion for 2 stock, 5 minutes, bo3. I think the advantages 2 stocks provides (less time for tournaments, bringing in new players, etc.) are more important, and I think that you can still read your opponent in that amount of time. I understand that comebacks are rougher, but I think it's still entirely possible, just a bit harder.

But, I can see the arguments for 3s/8m too. I just think this is a great time to shift how we run our tournaments to make them more welcoming for new players.

While I love custom moves, I think for simplicity's sake we should just use defaults. I think TOs who want to test them SHOULD, though. I'd love to see how a custom move tournament runs vs no custom moves. Same goes for Miis - I kinda think we should ban them, but I would love to see them be tested in a tournament setting before we make any official move as a community.

Still haven't played enough for real stage insight. Will be back later.

 

[Arctic]

I definitely agree with the two stock, 5 minute rule set. In my experience with competitive gameplay so far, I have felt like matches over two stocks drag on.

Otherwise, the reason I am commenting is because I am very pro-custom movesets, however I am against custom attributes/badges (A bowser running sonic speed is stupid). I think it is awesome that we finally have the opportunity to customize our gameplay. My ZSS feels perfect and it is very different than the standard, it just feels right to have a very short ranged blaster with a lot of stun and a low but very distanced down special. I understand that there may be arguments against certain movesets as the metagame for custom moves develops. I think it just adds to the fun.

But I have an idea. I do understand an argument brought up earlier discussing how very competitive play can require a significant amount of matchup knowledge and it may be unfair to muddle the whole metagame with an incredibly large pool of character possibilities. What if, when using a custom character, the moves changed are told to the opponent so they are not surprised by a given move?

I just think we should develop with the games in order to have the best experience. I am incredibly sad about other things that I will not bother to mention on this thread, but it just feels right to be able to customize the moves of a character to tailor your play style.

 

[Gameboi834]

As a competitive Smash player, you're expected to know the 20+ moves of every single character and their properties. Adding six more, many of which are just slight variations on normal specials, isn't that big of a deal.

 

[WizKick]

8 minutes has been the standard for like a decade now. The idea is that the timer should be set high enough that timeouts rarely occur, under current rules most matches tend to take 5-6 minutes.

We're here to discuss a new standard, not maintain status quo. Going to 2 or 3 stocks inevitably shortens match length, further hurting the argument for 8 minutes.

 

[Leebee]

frankly, the "new standard" seems to encourage less risk-taking with only having 2 stocks per player.

this is especially detrimental in a game that is ripe for gimping and offstage shenanigans because of great recoveries for most of the cast.

3 stock, 8 minutes is the way to go.

 

[Master WGS]

frankly, the "new standard" seems to encourage less risk-taking with only having 2 stocks per player.

I beg to differ. Those risks now have WAY bigger payoffs. A well-timed gimp now cost your opponent 50% of their stocks.

 

[Leebee]

and yet in most of the tourney footage I've seen (unless I've been missing out on a ton of stuff; I would love it if I'm wrong), people have not really been going for gimps...

 

[Terotrous]

We're here to discuss a new standard, not maintain status quo. Going to 2 or 3 stocks inevitably shortens match length, further hurting the argument for 8 minutes.

Brawl was 3 stock 8 minutes too. Matches were not generally shorter than Melee despite the reduction of stock because kills generally took longer to achieve.

Smash 4's pacing seems to be about the same as Brawl's (there's more combos, but characters also survive a bit longer), so it makes sense to preserve the same limit.


Besides, like I said before, the problem with 2 stock is that the rage mechanic just has way too much of an impact. TourneyLocator has already been running 3 stock 8 minute tournies and even at this early stage in the game there's only been a couple timeouts.

 

[Rizen]

I think the new ledge and lessened camping mechanics will support the 2 stock, 5 minute, best of 3 style. In Brawl a lot of games revolved around getting the lead and avoiding the opponent. Things like planking, Dair camping (MK), laser/pikmin/projectile camping. Getting around these ate a lot of time and 8 minutes were needed.
I think games will move faster in SSB4.

 

[Terotrous]

I think games will move faster in SSB4.

So then what's wrong with 3 stock 8 minutes?

Keep in mind the goal generally isn't just to make matches shorter. If we wanted that we could play 1 stock. We still want each match to be long enough to be a fair test of skill for both players.

 

[Zork]

One of the biggest complaints by TOs about Brawl was it took too long to finish. This was with 3 stocks and 8 mins. Your average Brawl match would take 4:30--6 mins to complete.

Right now Smash 4 at least in terms of game time, is looking similar to this. Here's a recent set of Grand Finals from Japan:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eMYPU8lAgBI

This took roughly 4 mins for each match on two stocks. This means on 3 stocks it would likely take as long as Brawl if not longer.

Of course it is still very early. But at the end of the day this game is looking very similar to Brawl (and I don't mean that as insult, I'm an avid Brawl player).

Right now, there are plenty of true combos at low percents but at higher percents, there are very few confirms into kills outside of a few grabs here and there. Which was exactly the case in Brawl.

The true combo (in the air) potential is definitely higher than Brawl thanks to more hitstun. But I wonder just by how much.

 

[Rizen]

So then what's wrong with 3 stock 8 minutes?

Keep in mind the goal generally isn't just to make matches shorter. If we wanted that we could play 1 stock. We still want each match to be long enough to be a fair test of skill for both players.

What Zork said. The goal is to have a match that displays each player's skills in the shortest reasonable time. I've been to tourneys that have gone until 2 AM (although I left earlier). 3 stocks 8 minutes ends up taking too long if there are more than 1 events (singles, doubles, SSB64, P:M...), especially if the setup count is low. Players lose steam after a few hours.
2 stocks 5 minutes gives players enough time to adjust to the opponent but doesn't drag on too long. 1 stock isn't enough time to adapt. IMO.

 

[smashmachine]

8 minutes has been the standard for like a decade now. The idea is that the timer should be set high enough that timeouts rarely occur, under current rules most matches tend to take 5-6 minutes.

and people are starting to realize that this was a bad idea, in both Melee AND Brawl

(also regarding stock counts, Project M was cut from 4 to 3 at The Big House 4, and I don't see anyone saying it was somehow worse for it)

 

[WizKick]

So then what's wrong with 3 stock 8 minutes?

Keep in mind the goal generally isn't just to make matches shorter. If we wanted that we could play 1 stock. We still want each match to be long enough to be a fair test of skill for both players.

The goal for many seems to be allowing a fair test of skill while making matches shorter. And I fully agree with the real life implications it has.

 

[Ben Holt]

I think that this would be the ideal ruleset:

-3 stock, 8 minutes.

-No items (duh).

-Fortanono's stages that he mentioned, only make all Omega formes Neutrals.

-Custom moves allowed (They add a lot of depth and strategy to the game while still being balanced. The argument about having to unlock them should have no more validity than wanting to ban characters for being unlockable.).

-Custom equipment disallowed (Unlike Custom Moves, they are severely unpredictable, random, and they skew matchups to hell. Plus they will lead to very short, fast offensive matches and slow, often timed out ultra defensive matches.).

I agree with TOs setting rules individually, but I think this would make a nice standard on which to base tiers and "official" tournaments.

As for Miis, I'm more on the fence. I definitely think the default Mii size should be allowed, but the stat changes based on size are pretty easy to detect and play around while being nowhere near as dramatic as Custom Equipment. But with them being more varied than any other character, they definitely need more extensive testing.

 

[JingleJangleJamil]

And so it begins.

I'm in favor of customization. At first I was unsure, but now that we've seen most of it, none of it seems very game-breaking, and can in fact help out some characters that would initially play low on the tier list.

I'll update this post later when I have an opinion on stages.

I'm not entirely sure I think there should be custom moves or not yet. They definitely are not broken from the ones I've seen,but the thing that makes me not sure is that there are over 300 so for competitive play I think it might be a lot to learn and would take a long time to learn how they can be used. That may just be me though I have not seen many arguments against or for custom moves.

 

[Ben Holt]

I'm not entirely sure I think there should be custom moves or not yet. They definitely are not broken from the ones I've seen,but the thing that makes me not sure is that there are over 300 so for competitive play I think it might be a lot to learn and would take a long time to learn how they can be used. That may just be me though I have not seen many arguments against or for custom moves.

I don't think that's a very relevant argument, especially given that most of the moves are simply variations. Assuming Miis are banned, that's only 512 moves to know. It sounds like a lot, but its really not given that the A-moves are static.

 

[JingleJangleJamil]

I don't think that's a very relevant argument, especially given that most of the moves are simply variations. Assuming Miis are banned, that's only 512 moves to know. It sounds like a lot, but its really not given that the A-moves are static.

Wait there are over 500? Damn the person I heard it from was way off then. You have a pretty good point though.