DDD's standing infinite should not be banned.

[RDK]

Because it's just unfair, dammit!

Don't you want to have fun? ****ing scrooges, the lot of you.

 

[#HBC | Red Ryu]

Can we stop using hypotheticals? The fact of the matter is is that D3 is the only one with an infinite like that. But it doesn't mean that we should ban it. We have never banned anything character specific before so why should we start?

IDC.

10metaknights.

 

[Zankoku]

Banned for purposes of keeping a tournament running smoothly. One of two exceptions to the "don't ban things that don't completely warp the metagame" guideline.

 

[FatJackieChan]

No, running a tournament is a TO's responsibility. There is no reason to ban this even if tournaments were to run smoothly. There is an alternative solution.

According to the rule of stalling: Any infinite must end after 300% to avoid excessive stalling. Ankoko you posted that. The issue of the infinite is that it kills someone because it runs for 300%, if we want to change anything, we should change how much damage one can do in an infinite. When we change technical rules for everyone the game can remain fair. There is no reason to ban a character specific technique when there are alternatives. So don't go for the ban of the infinite, just change the limit on how long the infinite can be done.

 

[Zankoku]

That's stupid. You want everyone to be trustworthy on counting how long they're IDCing for?

 

[#HBC | Red Ryu]

Banned for purposes of keeping a tournament running smoothly. One of two exceptions to the "don't ban things that don't completely warp the metagame" guideline.

I meant it for his comment on how we haven't banned stuff character specific, when in reality, we have.

The ban is justifiable for the reasons you claimed while DDD isn't for the reasons you claimed.

 

[FatJackieChan]

No, it just means that the current penalty for doing that is stalling, so if you go higher than what ever it is you get punished for stalling. If I remember correctly that means you lose the round. What would happen if you did a banned move, like the cape glitch (which is in my opinion... stalling). Wouldn't you lose the round? So it is the same thing, but the infinite is usable.

 

[1048576]

Are people really in favor of banning things to make matchups more even? If so, please tell me why a 90-10 matchup is acceptable, but a 99-1 matchup is not.

As long as we're down this road, lets ban Pika's cg on Fox, give everyone a handicap according to their tier position, and makes sure everyone only plays on neutral stages.

 

[SuSa]

Neutral stages aren't exactly the most fair.

Also having a character at a % disadvantage doesn't mean the lower tier has it any easier. If they can't hit the person in the first place... how does the % help at all?

 

[Red Arremer]

Furthermore, %-handicaps disable a few advantages this character may have, like chaingrabs or jab locks or something.

 

[FatJackieChan]

Neutral stages aren't exactly the most fair.

Also having a character at a % disadvantage doesn't mean the lower tier has it any easier. If they can't hit the person in the first place... how does the % help at all?

He was being sarcastic for the stages thing, and he was also saying that 90% isn't different from 99%. He was being sarcastic.

 

[SuSa]

People actually believe that **** sometimes though, that's the thing.

Also 90% is different from 99%. By 9%. :3

 

[1048576]

If a character has an advantage on neutrals, doesn't that mean they flat out have the advantage? You can't win just by winning your counterpicks.

Also, are people really arguing that giving better characters a higher starting percent would actually improve some of their matchups? The purpose of a chaingrab or jab lock is to rack up damage.

Not saying it would make it even; just that it would make it more even.

I realize it's a stupid idea, but I'm waiting for some of these pro-bies to tell me how what I'm proposing is different then what they are proposing on one character.

 

[Nanaki]

Also, are people really arguing that giving better characters a higher starting percent would actually improve some of their matchups? The purpose of a chaingrab or jab lock is to rack up damage.

Not saying it would make it even; just that it would make it more even.

There are situations where you wouldn't want your opponent to start with a high %. Some of those chaingrabs/locks end in guaranteed deaths to your opponent, which you can't guarantee without said chaingrab/lock.

Ex: Falco chaingrab-spike. If you can't get the CG (your opponent's % is too high for the CG), you can't get the guaranteed spike. Against some characters, this is a guaranteed foostool-edgehog KO.

Just saying, it's not always a good thing to have low % against certain characters. I know Inui (I'll lol if he pops up here from name searching) eruption-damages himself with Ike up to 34% (right number??) against Falco so he doesn't have to worry about the CG-spike. It's a valid (and smart) strategy.

inb4SDItechthespiken00b

 

[cutter]

Just saying, it's not always a good thing to have low % against certain characters. I know Inui (I'll lol if he pops up here from name searching) eruption-damages himself with Ike up to 34% (right number??) against Falco so he doesn't have to worry about the CG-spike. It's a valid (and smart) strategy.

inb4SDItechthespiken00b

Err... don't you mean Snake by blowing himself up with a grenade + C4? Trying to damage yourself with Ike's Eruption is so horrendously inefficient.

 

[Nanaki]

Err... don't you mean Snake by blowing himself up with a grenade + C4? Trying to damage yourself with Ike's Eruption is so horrendously inefficient.

Whatever works for you, I just gave one example. Snake's is easiest, Ike's works too. So does DDD's Jet Hammer, and others. If Pichu was in this game he would rock at it.

I just first remember hearing about the idea from Inui with Ike is all.

 

[ShadowLink84]

5 second charge to inflict 10%. XD TERRIBLE IDEA!
Same with DDD

 

[Nanaki]

You only need to get to 35% or so. And hopefully Falco will help you out along the way if you just run away from him and let him laser spam you.

 

[Zankoku]

You can always release the Eruption if Falco decides to try to grab you anyway. Otherwise whether you take the 40% in Eruptions or lasers doesn't really matter.

 

[Nanaki]

You can always release the Eruption if Falco decides to try to grab you anyway. Otherwise whether you take the 40% in Eruptions or lasers doesn't really matter.

Someone gets it!

 

[GunmasterLombardi]

Apparently this thread has no purpose since there is no further discussion on the topic that lead to it.

Really, all posters here should move their chat to the Falco or Ike General Discussions.

 

[swordgard]

inb4SDItechthespiken00b

You pretty much read my mind, it still amazes me how little some of the known pros know about the game.

 

[#HBC | Red Ryu]

Link could blow himself up with Bombs.

Wolf, Fox and other Falcos could shoot lasers until the other character reflects them back.

 

[Nanaki]

You pretty much read my mind, it still amazes me how little some of the known pros know about the game.

And how much some non-pros know!

Just goes to show how much baiting and reading play into one's ability to play at the professional level.

Link could blow himself up with Bombs.

Wolf, Fox and other Falcos could shoot lasers until the other character reflects them back.

TL too, obviously.

Theoretically, G&W could spam judgement until he gets enough 1's. But he doesn't have to worry about most of this stuff anyway.

 

[PokemonMasterIRL]

Guys... the infinite cg isn't even that big of a ****ing deal. Jeesh.

You can't properly INFINITE Mario, Samus, or Luigi (the two not-fat ones) until you grab them and they are above ~120% because they can mash out before you do the required 2 pummels. So it essentially doesn't matter for them.

For DK and Bowser, well for 1. I don't infinite cg when I play people and 2. I never see other people do it.

Everyone makes this out to be such huge deal but the fact of the matter is that that's why the SBR says nothing about it, and why everyone bans it at their own tournies (to ensure that niche of the turnout).

Michael Hey does. He never messes up either, he is a beast.

 

[Wolfric]

i dont think it should be banned. But now that i think about it, it shouldnt make much of a difference...well maybe except for luigi and DK. Mario and Samus still have problems, and luigi still has some bad matchups. Not too sure about DK though, but the matchup without the infinite would still be in D3's Favor. I dont think it'd make a huge difference.

Shouldn't make much of a diference? You're saying without the chaingrab they'll still "practically" start the match when they're 125%, as it happens when Chaingrabbed?

The infinite only works on 4 characters; Mario, Luigi, Samus, and DK. (Technically against Bowser, it is a finite chaingrab) For Mario, Luigi, and Samus, they are able to break out of the required pummel past 125% before it becomes a true infinite. This means the only characters that actually get screwed by the infinite are DK and Bowser. This infinite only adversely affects 2 matchups, and probably 3 more. 5 skewed matchups certainly does not meet the criteria for overcentralizing the game due to the massive amount of other characters that don't get infinited. King Dedede has clearly proven that he is not a broken character, and his infinite only works on 2 characters and 3 more when you're WELL past killing percents.

Why ban something that isn't broken?

So you're saying, it's okay that the match ACTUALLY starts at 125% for Mario, Luigi, and Samus?

 

[Zankoku]

I'm totally confused by what you're talking about. They can break out of the pummel before 125%, but they're probably screwed if they get grabbed past that %.

 

[RDK]

Shouldn't make much of a diference? You're saying without the chaingrab they'll still "practically" start the match when they're 125%, as it happens when Chaingrabbed?



So you're saying, it's okay that the match ACTUALLY starts at 125% for Mario, Luigi, and Samus?

Right, because it's absolutely guaranteed that Dedede will get a grab off at the beginning of every single match.

 

[metalmonstar]

Right, because it's absolutely guaranteed that Dedede will get a grab off at the beginning of every single match.

Not to mention every stock following that as well. The opponents of infinites in general always seem to assume that you will be infinited every match and every stock and there is literally nothing you can do as a player to avoid or stop it.

 

[Kewkky]

Why are people still arguing about this? The only REALLY hindered character is DK, since barely anyone plays Bowser... And DK can use a secondary just like how Fox should use a secondary against Pika and every other character that ***** him... Nothing embarassing about changing mains every once in a while.

If you guys ever decide to run tourneys and think that DDD's infinite taking characters to 200% then dtilting them to their death is metagame-centralizing, then just make up a rule like: DDD's infinite can only be repeated 3/4/5 grabs (you decide) before they're forced to take off one of their own stocks or DQ'd out of the match, whatever... And you fixed your problem. Now it's just like if DDD grabbed you at the middle of the stage and did 3-5 dthrows before reaching the ledge, problem solved... Being a TO requires that you play around with rules a bit so you can appeal to your players' requests, otherwise you'll just see a drop of hardcore gamers and/or an entry of casual gamers... Don't change any rules if what is being used as a good ruleset works.

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

ive had lots of people who dont even play d3 but just learned the infinite do it against my luigi in matches... really makes me wonder why i should even bother sometimes

´
This is why I quit playing Luigi and DK. And samus.

Well maybe you just suck that much?

JKJKJKJKJKJKJKJKJK, please dont kill me, im just kidding .

But yeah, i think when in serious competition people(some of them) have morals and such, and think that standing infinite is just plain stupid, and he pretty much just wanted a good match agaisnt you .

Well, im for the infi-ban, duno why, but i just know its the best to do.

@Gehb: The day you get infinited you shall feel the pain =/.

Yeahhh...uhhh...the basic thing about banning it isn't that it's broken or any **** like that. It's a trade-off. You lose something that really doesn't matter that much for your character anyway (I mean seriously...like everyone else said, all these matches are still in your advantage without the infinite), and suddenly a few characters become more viable. You'd have to be rather selfish and ignorant to not see that there are more pros to banning it than there are cons.

It's kinda like wobbling in Melee (you bring in Melee, so will I), only wobbling didn't really do anything but make it easier for the IC to 0-death you (which a good IC could do anyway with CGs) and make a match look more boring, and it's basically banned because of it (or so I'm led to believe? Correct me if I'm wrong). Do you see IC mains complaining about this though? Nope. Now quit whining about losing something you don't need, can easily avoid using, and shouldn't even really care about in the first place, and do it for the greater good.

And I honestly don't care if I sound dumb for this post, because I've basically just told you to do the exact same thing as you're telling a lot of other people to do; and that is to man up. The only difference is that mine is a lot more reasonable of a request.

Thank you Writer.

Wobbling isn't banned.

On topic, this is all very amusing to me because people are starting to lose their tolerance for completely stupid bull**** despite the fact that it isn't truly broken.

Yeah, we're sick of completely stupid bull****. Who isn't?

So we should ban the turtle to make the Jigglypuff match-up better?

-___-

One turtle =/= death

Let's ignore a tactic that is easy to do, attached to a top tier, and completely invalidates IIRC now 10 characters to the point of unplayability in the matchup.

That's basically what you're saying.

So what exactly is the point of defending free win CP's vs DK or anyone else he can infinite? What is there to gain from keeping his infinite?

Thank you.

This is the happy ending to this fairytale, DDD is one of my favorite matchups without the infinite, combo city . Even if DDD still has like, a 60-40 advantage.

I'm in for the ban, cause I don't like to see some scrub win against some awesome players by abusing DDD's grab range, and pressing the down button a few times :/.

Unlike the ICs, there's actually take some skills.

There isn't an infinite problem that can't be solved through better spacing.

Love the avvy (Sauce? :V), hate the comment. Play as DK vs. DDD and space yourself so that you don't get grabbed. It's like trying to play against falco and never get hit by a single laser. As ganondorf.

Don't choose a character who can get infinited in the first place. This is not rocket science, people.

See above.

Lemme get this straight.

Pro ban argument:
-Mains of chars A,B,C, etc. can show their faces in tournaments without getting gayed out by the most wildly imbalanced CP in the game
-DDD doesn't lose anything important
-More money for the TOs

Anti-ban argument:
-IT'S NOT BROKEN ENOUGH


So basically we shouldn't ban it because it hasn't proven itself banworthy. Yet we should ban it so that TOs make more money and more people can play this game.

 

[Kewkky]

Ban it in your tourneys if you want to, BCD, but don't expect the anti-bans (not like it's being heavily considered for banning, unlike the MK discussions) to ban them from their tourneys. Sooner or later, you'll run into a tourney where it's allowed and you'll still be forced to change your character...... Only that you won't know who to pick or what to do because you decided you were going to ban the infinite at your tourneys.

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

BPC. I don't run tournaments (in germany, not enough players). But I do want to be able to use characters without getting totally gayed out.

 

[Kewkky]

BPC. I don't run tournaments (in germany, not enough players). But I do want to be able to use characters without getting totally gayed out.

Why did I write BCD...

It's going to be hard going DK-solo (or any of the other doomed characters solo)... And getting gayed out? A lot of characters in the roster get gayed out by MK (and Snake), yet the SBR decided not to ban MK (and Snake has some glaring weaknesses, like cypher grab, or getting gimped while cyphering/c4 recovering...). I'd really suggest you should learn a character that can outdo DDD better than DK (or any of the other ones) can... It'll even help you in a tourney (or friendlies) where the rules allow the infinite, even if it's banned regularly where you live.

I heard that in Texas, MK is banned. Texans aren't asking other states to heavily consider banning MK because of this, so just like the infinite, other regions will probably never ban it. You'll still be forced to choose a different character so you don't get infinited (or have a better MU against MK if you're a 'texan' and show up at an MK-allowed tourney).

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

I use MK on DDD because it makes me win. Does that solve the problem? Nope.

 

[Kewkky]

I use MK on DDD because it makes me win. Does that solve the problem? Nope.

Yes it DOES solve the problem. Did you win? Yes. Problem solved. Otherwise, you would've lost against DDD while using DK.

Including MK, there are a number of characters who do well vs DDD, so you have an array of choices to choose from... I myself, use both ZSS and Kirby (although I prefer Kirby) against DDD, and as you said, you use MK. That's already 3 characters that go even or better against DDD.

 

[N.A.G.A.C.E]

as a person who does not play any of the characters affected by this chain-grab (this counts ddd) i think it should be banned. not only does it stop at least 2 characters from being tourney viable but it gets rid of competition (and whats a tournament without competition). Saying you can counter pick if the person you are playing against uses ddd does to really hold water it puts the player getting grabbed one game behind which in a best 2 out of 3 is a big deal. The only way a counter pick would be fair is if the guy playing the (dk, mario etc) is told that his opponent uses ddd and thats a stupid solution. plus since the ddd will still be able to do the running chain-grab which will rack up some good dmg any way sure it would last forever but a good ddd has more then just a grab.

 

[Kewkky]

as a person who does not play any of the characters affected by this chain-grab (this counts ddd) i think it should be banned. not only does it stop at least 2 characters from being tourney viable but it gets rid of competition (and whats a tournament without competition). Saying you can counter pick if the person you are playing against uses ddd does to really hold water it puts the player getting grabbed one game behind which in a best 2 out of 3 is a big deal. The only way a counter pick would be fair is if the guy playing the (dk, mario etc) is told that his opponent uses ddd and thats a stupid solution. plus since the ddd will still be able to do the running chain-grab which will rack up some good dmg any way sure it would last forever but a good ddd has more then just a grab.

And as a person who isn't chaingrabbed at all by anything DDD can throw at him, I say don't ban it (but go for it if it's your own tourney)...

If you're so concerned about entering a match and randomly your opponent picks DDD while you pick DK (or anyone else), leave your main for counterpicking and start the match with a secondary.

I heard that there are some good characters in the S Tier, try starting there...

EDIT: If it really DOES make the character unviable like you guys say, why are you still using him when the official rules say the infinite is allowed? It's not going to be banned by the SBR (it's not even being considered at all right now) so hurry up and grab a secondary and start playing. Most that's happening in this thread is you guys are letting off steam and hoping the eyes of the SBR catch this and agree... Which won't happen.

 

[DMG]

People complain about DK not being viable in tournament because of the Infinite, but honestly what would change if the matchup became 15-20 points easier for DK? His matchups would be the same EXCEPT the Dedede one where it would go from "lol" to 70:30 or 65:35. Is that small of a change REALLY going to propel DK from a non viable character into a viable one?

Infinites don't always make a character unviable. What's more important in the big picture is their overall matchup spread. Now obviously having an infinite against you is gonna hurt a bit (unless you're cool like Wario and beat most of the characters who can infinite you anyways), but if the character is already not that hot against the rest of the cast, then it doesn't really matter if you take away an infinite on them or make 1 single matchup slightly easier. They are still going to struggle against the rest of the cast, hence they were probably unviable from the start.

Furthermore, our goal is not to help out a few characters in a SINGLE matchup for them. Honestly if we ban Dedede's Infinite, we might as well ban MK cause getting rid of him would benefit a LOT more characters than just DK, Bowser, Mario, Samus, and Luigi.

 

[DanGR]

Honestly if we ban Dedede's Infinite, we might as well ban MK cause getting rid of him would benefit a LOT more characters than just DK, Bowser, Mario, Samus, and Luigi.

Hmmmm... about that...

Seriously though, DMG. I remember you saying standing infinites should be banned because it stalls the game. Can't the ICs do the same thing? They can grab release chaingrab.