DDD's standing infinite should not be banned.

[Sinz]

from the epic solution page

Please ddd banned here in infinity

 

[BluePeachy100]

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

 

[xxmaliciousxx]

Seriously, that ****ing chaingrab is what stops us from being at the top of A Tier

Either that or the fact that DK has no vertical recovery.

 

[Kitamerby]

Either that or the fact that DK has no vertical recovery.

Neither does Falco. I think DK may get more vertical height than Falco anyways.

 

[Nanaki]

But it's also a lot easier to ban an infinite that uses the same move repeatingly then it is to say "You can't ftilt this char. more then x times"

How in the world is this ANY different than the dthrow infinite? You're doing 1 move over and over (dur...infinitely). Both end eventually (stalling rule applies to both), and both end in death for the opponent. I don't see a difference. You're basically saying 'you can't dthrow this character without moving. more than x times.'

You can still ftilt if you ban the ftilt infinite, and you can still dthrow if you ban the dthrow infinite. You just can't do them...infinitely. Both have to be moderated, or they'll be abused (if banned).

What am I missing here?

 

[Kitamerby]

How in the world is this ANY different than the dthrow infinite? You're doing 1 move over and over (dur...infinitely). Both end eventually (stalling rule applies to both), and both end in death for the opponent. I don't see a difference. You're basically saying 'you can't dthrow this character without moving. more than x times.'

You can still ftilt if you ban the ftilt infinite, and you can still dthrow if you ban the dthrow infinite. You just can't do them...infinitely. Both have to be moderated, or they'll be abused (if banned).

What am I missing here?

Nobody gives a **** about Sheik. That's the difference. =D


But seriously, Sheik is much less popular a character choice than DDD in tournaments. <<

 

[¯\_S.(ツ).L.I.D._/¯]

Not sure if anyone brought this up, but it also destroys counterpicking...

Match 1:
DDD player calls for Double Blind Picks
DDD infinites X character, wins.

Match 2:
DDD player stays DDD
Other player switches to Falco
Falco player wins/loses

If DDD player wins, then bam he wins.
If DDD player loses, then:

Match 3:
Falco player stays Falco
DDD player switches to Marth, gets his/her stage
DDD player wins.

So "oh you can counterpick" is not a valid argument.

 

[RDK]

Not sure if anyone brought this up, but it also destroys counterpicking...

Match 1:
DDD player calls for Double Blind Picks
DDD infinites X character, wins.

Match 2:
DDD player stays DDD
Other player switches to Falco
Falco player wins/loses

If DDD player wins, then bam he wins.
If DDD player loses, then:

Match 3:
Falco player stays Falco
DDD player switches to Marth, gets his/her stage
DDD player wins.

So "oh you can counterpick" is not a valid argument.

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

 

[BSP]

Not sure if anyone brought this up, but it also destroys counterpicking...

Match 1:
DDD player calls for Double Blind Picks
DDD infinites X character, wins.

Match 2:
DDD player stays DDD
Other player switches to Falco
Falco player wins/loses

If DDD player wins, then bam he wins.
If DDD player loses, then:

Match 3:
Falco player stays Falco
DDD player switches to Marth, gets his/her stage
DDD player wins.

So "oh you can counterpick" is not a valid argument.

Couldn't this be said about any character that has an infinite/zero-death on X person?

 

[SuSa]

How in the world is this ANY different than the dthrow infinite? You're doing 1 move over and over (dur...infinitely). Both end eventually (stalling rule applies to both), and both end in death for the opponent. I don't see a difference. You're basically saying 'you can't dthrow this character without moving. more than x times.'

You can still ftilt if you ban the ftilt infinite, and you can still dthrow if you ban the dthrow infinite. You just can't do them...infinitely. Both have to be moderated, or they'll be abused (if banned).

What am I missing here?

Because the ftilt isn't an infinite, and you can DI+SDI to escape.

If the DDD is doing it correctly, you shouldn't be escaping them. Ever. Unless you are an extremely fast masher. (He only has to pummel once every 4 throws IIRC)

 

[blakinola]

I played a kid at the mall once. He was playing D3.

So I played D3. Needless to say, he quit the match 5 seconds in. If the technique took some shred of skill and timing, I wouldn't have a problem with it. It's a low-risk, low-skill, high-reward matchup that completely shuts down a character because Sakurai is a ******.

EDIT: I had never played D3 before

and my tech skill is terribad

 

[Circa]

If we assume that Brawl devlopes like most fighting games have in the past, this will continue for a good while, then we will see people branch out. Melee players are 'branching out' to an extreme now, like Mango going C. Falcon.

Mango is actually one of the few to have picked up three or four different characters, used them in competitive play, and still done rather well. And this is just because it's Mango. He sandbags just about every match he plays to an extent (or so I've lurked to find; he may be joking though), and he still wins. Thus, one could then say that he just picks up Falcon to have fun (and I can vouch, Falcon is VERY fun to use). He still goes Puff in an extremely serious match though, because that's the character he is best with and plays seriously with.

And the only other people I can think of to pick up numerous amounts of characters or to pick up very different characters and still do well with are Azen and Taj. Azen isn't a newer player, and Taj has been using Mewtwo for a while. I know there are others, however, but they're the only ones I can think of off the top of my head. :\

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

No this isn't rocket science, but that is about the stupidest thing I've ever heard. Seriously, why should we learn entirely new characters that are little to nothing like the ones that we've been playing as for over a year now when D3 players could just, ya know, move when doing the CG as opposed to standing still? I don't really need any type of science to tell you which answer makes more sense.

Couldn't this be said about any character that has an infinite/zero-death on X person?

No, not really. The majority of the others who have a 0-death against a specific character also have a lot more disadvantageous match-ups, and these match-ups can't just be covered with a single secondary (correct me if I'm wrong). D3, however, covers every single disadvantageous MU he has (short of MK) with a single character (Marth); all but one of these being at least 60-40. and the one that isn't is against the character that is said to take the longest time to be good as (ICs).

 

[Ray_Kalm]

Again: so what? When's the last time something was banned over something so trivial?

Banning is a major step to take in any competitive community. Characters get boned; anyone who plays fighting games knows this. Just get over it and pick someone else. The terrible logic pro-ban is using is astounding. If you have your way with D3's infinite, who's to say I can't whine about how my favorite character gets gayed out by some other move slightly lower on the broken scale?

How broken does a move have to be? I've asked this once already, but nobody's provided any solid data yet. Until you do, you're drawing an arbitrary line in the sand.

So, basically, you're saying that they should keep 1 viable character over 2? Makes perfect sense to me.

 

[chic]

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

i use luigi because hes the only char i've used since 64 and i enjoy using him. i dont understand why i should have to learn an entirely new char just because of one dumb move

edit: oh writer said just about the same thing -_- not copying you! :D

 

[Luigi player]

ddd also infinites wolf, ddd and wario

wolf and ddd on the ledge, wario by grab release into pivot grab on the ledge. and he can easily set up all three with proper cging

not going to post an opinion, just going to correct you in saying that it's 8, not 5, and has been for a while

One question... Wario gets pivot grab grab release infinited by Dedede? Why only on the ledge? Wouldn't it work somewhere else too? The ledge shouldn't change anything... does it really work? >.< Why is the matchup still ~50:50 then? One grab would still be death, if you're not playing on a stage with platforms at the edge or smashville, at least if Wario has > 80 %...

 

[Sinz]

Only if the wario doesn't have any jumps left IIRC

 

[#HBC | Red Ryu]

One question... Wario gets pivot grab grab release infinited by Dedede? Why only on the ledge? Wouldn't it work somewhere else too? The ledge shouldn't change anything... does it really work? >.< Why is the matchup still ~50:50 then? One grab would still be death, if you're not playing on a stage with platforms at the edge or smashville, at least if Wario has > 80 %...

Try grabbing a good Wario.

 

[Circa]

One question... Wario gets pivot grab grab release infinited by Dedede? Why only on the ledge? Wouldn't it work somewhere else too? The ledge shouldn't change anything... does it really work? >.< Why is the matchup still ~50:50 then? One grab would still be death, if you're not playing on a stage with platforms at the edge or smashville, at least if Wario has > 80 %...

I can't answer the first part (as I don't main D3 or Wario and have hardly even played as them), but I do know why the MU would still be 50:50. It's basically the same reason why a lot of characters have grab release stuff on Wario, yet Wario is still ranked 3rd on the tier list. Simply put, Wario has the tools to avoid ever getting grabbed.

EDIT: ninja'd by Red Ryu. D:

 

[Zankoku]

Unless the Wario is just that much better than you, he will inevitably have to be on the ground in a grabbable situation if he ever wants to actually kill you.

 

[Ray_Kalm]

Unless the Wario is just that much better than you, he will inevitably have to be on the ground in a grabbable situation if he ever wants to actually kill you.

and doing that could be a problem as well.

 

[#HBC | Red Ryu]

Unless the Wario is just that much better than you, he will inevitably have to be on the ground in a grabbable situation if he ever wants to actually kill you.

If Wario has the % advantage he could be a DMG and just run away.

Essentially never needing to kill.

 

[Zankoku]

Playing keep-away on a stage running on nothing more than a % advantage is risky at best.

 

[Flayl]

Unless the Wario is just that much better than you, he will inevitably have to be on the ground in a grabbable situation if he ever wants to actually kill you.

UAir and fart?

 

[Zankoku]

Why are you in the air if you're at a % where he can kill you?

 

[Flayl]

Why are you in the air if you're at a % where he can kill you?

It seems you know very little of UAir's hitbox and landing lag. Also I fail to see what fart has to do with being in the air.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I24bP2akQVc

Point is Wario can kill people while only staying very few frames on the ground.

 

[BSP]

wwouldn't u air take a while to kill? D3 is the most resistant to vertical kills right?

 

[Zankoku]

Uair's landing lag has always seemed plenty punishable as long as you saw it coming; and come on, if the choices of KOing you air-to-ground were uair and fart, how difficult is it to see coming? That said, using fart to KO air-to-ground in anything but punishment of a poor choice in spacing/timing/action is somewhat amusing.

 

[Kitamerby]

Unless the Wario is just that much better than you, he will inevitably have to be on the ground in a grabbable situation if he ever wants to actually kill you.

I don't think anyone can really argue with this point, guys. It's a fact. Wario's matchup with DDD is risky when he wants to kill, and is risky if he wants to win by time (although in theory this is possibly much less risky than killing). iirc it's not 50:50, but rather 60:40 DDD at least...


On a side note, I say we ban the the infinite unless the DDD is fighting Bigfoot. That guy needs to get off his high hourse and be cut down to size.

 

[smashkng]

I don't think anyone can really argue with this point, guys. It's a fact. Wario's matchup with DDD is risky when he wants to kill, and is risky if he wants to win by time (although in theory this is possibly much less risky than killing). iirc it's not 50:50, but rather 60:40 DDD at least...


On a side note, I say we ban the the infinite unless the DDD is fighting Bigfoot. That guy needs to get off his high hourse and be cut down to size.

It's a very stage dependant. As of matchup discussion DDD is ***** in Norfair, advantage of Wario in Rainbow Cruise, Brinstar and Lylat Cruise; even in any non-mentioned stage and the only stage in DDD favour is FD which just need to be banned.

 

[GreenFox]

Two words:

Ice Climbers

Agreed, although I do main D3 so thats a little biased I mean really biased.

 

[#HBC | Red Ryu]

Edit: Nevermind, Ankoku is right.

 

[RDK]

No this isn't rocket science, but that is about the stupidest thing I've ever heard. Seriously, why should we learn entirely new characters that are little to nothing like the ones that we've been playing as for over a year now when D3 players could just, ya know, move when doing the CG as opposed to standing still?

Gee, I dunno, maybe so you don't continuously get ***** in every match you enter because you're not smart enough to stop picking characters that get infinited.

Moron.

 

[ShadowLink84]

Ban the infinite cause it makes 5 character unviable (though 4 can mash out hur hur).
Okay so ban anything MK does that causes Link to become unviable.
Banning based on viability is stupid. Plain and simple.

 

[LuigiKing]

The infinite really isn't that bad, and this is coming from a Luigi main. DK is the only 'real' character that gets shut down that hard by it. One character, one matchup. A mario or samus main probably isn't going to get that far in a tournament setting anyway, and the Luigi matchup is pretty even if you avoid the infinite, which is not impossible. Plus I've been able to mash out <50% anyway since he has to pummel. So it shuts down DK, shuts down 2 characters that don't matter, and sort of hurts the matchup with a character that only sorta matters. Leave it, its fine.

This is coming from someone who was on the other side of the argument before. I changed my mind after I played some good D3s and realized it wasn't really a problem.

/2cents

 

[rPSIvysaur]

If this does end up getting a ban, wouldn't it warrant the ban of many other infinites? I mean, IGR makes the Lucas vs. Marth MU total ****. Yet most people don't address Lucas, we just accept it. So if this does get banned wouldn't it force other things to fit the criteria of banning. I'm not pro-ban or anti-ban I just wanted to add another infinite that fits some of the same criteria.

 

[BSP]

If this does end up getting a ban, wouldn't it warrant the ban of many other infinites? I mean, IGR makes the Lucas vs. Marth MU total ****. Yet most people don't address Lucas, we just accept it. So if this does get banned wouldn't it force other things to fit the criteria of banning. I'm not pro-ban or anti-ban I just wanted to add another infinite that fits some of the same criteria.

I said that too, and i support what ur saying. but imo, it doesnt matter to me. If it's in, everything stays the same. If it's out, we see a little more luigi and dk, which i dont think they'll rise much. Luigi still has some problems, and dk still gets owned by D3

 

[Brinzy]

"I shouldn't have to pick another character because of one dumb move"?

Hello, if your character is nonviable for whatever reason, you pay the consequences for playing a nonviable character or you get lucky and win it out. Oh no, my main loses consistently to 3/4ths of the tournament population, what am I going to do? Counterpick if I want to win. What if I don't care enough to win but I wanna play with my main? Good ****ing luck, because nobody should be picking up the pieces for me just because I decided to gimp myself. This goes for every single one of you.

"But no, if you counterpick you're just going to lose anyway so that argument is null."

But no, if you have half a brain and if you really, honestly, absolutely fear getting a first match that you can't win, you pick a character that has a better chance to win and then you bring out your main.

"Why should I have to do that?"

Because you're playing in an environment where it's up to the individual as to what they decide to do to you, and if they decide to take advantage of your poor decisions, you have nobody else to blame but yourself.

Does it suck? Sure it does; stuff like this ruins the atmosphere for players. Would it be better off if it were banned completely? Possibly. Should it be banned completely because it's the biggest in-your-face example of why you better have secondaries if you're trying to win? No, that's called being the biggest in-your-face example of why you better have secondaries if you're trying to win.

Go to tournaments that have it banned. Host tournaments that have it banned. Play other characters. Take the risk. Whatever you do, don't whine if you're playing to win and NOT packing characters that will help you win. Every choice has a consequence; if your choice is to stay by that nonviable character, don't whine when you're slapped in the face with the reality that they're nonviable.

 

[Cirno]

There was already a huge thread about this.

It's not banned under the recommended ruleset, but TO's have the right to ban/allow whatever they want.

You don't like it, just don't go. Or better yet host your own.

Our community can never have too many smashfests.

 

[rPSIvysaur]

All this is, is banning an infinite to increase the amount of players coming to tournies and playing a specific character. I have to rough it out with the IGR on Lucas, but I deal w/ it. I mean, I would love to have it banned so the Lucas Metagame could get better, but right now, I'm trying my best to make my boards "undead". Any way, like all things, a temporary ban is always the best comprimise.

 

[swordgard]

All this is, is banning an infinite to increase the amount of players coming to tournies and playing a specific character. I have to rough it out with the IGR on Lucas, but I deal w/ it. I mean, I would love to have it banned so the Lucas Metagame could get better, but right now, I'm trying my best to make my boards "undead". Any way, like all things, a temporary ban is always the best comprimise.

Ok, really this is starting to piss me off.


A) A temp ban is NEVER a good compromise. Either something should be banned or it should not. If you temp ban something, anti-ban is unhappy, and pro-ban is happy until the temp ban is lifted. If we let your metagame evolve, then it will be destroyed again by the same technique if you did not try to find a way around it. Also leanr to Extra inch DI.

B) This does not deserve to be banned, 1st of all, difficulty has little to no impact on as to why we should ban things, because as long as it is within the realms of possible techniques to learn, then it will be learned over time. Either something is broken or it is not, being easy to do just makes it banned faster if it is due to it overcentralizing the metagame faster. The difference between ice climbers infinite and D3s is that ice climber's requires nana near you.


Nonetheless, D3s infinite only works on a select few characters, characters who already are for the most part unviable in tourney. One characters technique making 2-3 more char unviable does not warrant being banned, or else we may have to try and ban marth due to the tons of characters that he make viable.

Your counter argument: We cant ban marths move individually, but we can ban a specific techniques to make the game more balanced!11!1!!!

You are not even answering the question, this debate is about whether the technique being banned is warranted, not if its enforceable/discrete. If D3's infinite grab is banned, then marth's move should be banned under similar conditions. We arent even looking into trying to ban other moves, snake's ftilt alone makes so many matchups a living hell for many chars, more than D3s infinite does, yet we arent looking into ways to nerf snake's ftilt. Why? Because being bannable(enforceable) does not mean it should be banned.