Browny
Smash Hater
As per usual a post by a person in authority here has got me annoyed to the stage I write down all my thoughts and prepare an argument I would like to see beaten with proof. Todays example; keeping surgical bans out of brawl entirely. For people who have been here a while, yes this is very similar to my first blog about HA/Infinite CG's/Planking, however things have changed since then with the LGL now in place and discussions no longer focus on the brokenness of said tactics, merely how it is wrong to ban them on principle. This is long and only a draft, if its tl;dr then too bad. However if you have the time and are bored, please let me know what you think about it
-----
Firstly, the arguments for and against the LGL can be summarised in my opinion as follows;
For – Planking leads to time outs and can render even very viable characters near useless once a % lead has been established and the other player is dead set on not losing that lead. This also applies to scrooging by the way. The game deteriorates into pure stalling as attacking the planking character directly is very risky. Countless other competitive games have similar rules against broken tactics when used in combination (in FPS, the attacking team in bf2142 had pod surfing banned, in dota/hon many hero/item combos are soft banned, even in Goldeneye64, Oddjob was banned lol) so the game is no less legitimate with this rule in place.
Against - It is part of the game, some characters were designed with overpowered ground games (snake, olimar), some with untouchable aerials (G&W) and some with amazing ledge games (mk, pit). Limiting a tactic for certain characters is just unfair while others can abuse their broken strengths as much as they want. At the end of the day it is simply one character putting themselves in an advantageous position. Anyone can use this tactic and it is quite beatable by a range of characters, add to this the fact that sets are out of 3,involve multiple counterpicks and require a % lead to achieve, it can be negated to a large extent.
Now theres no need for me to do another for and against comparison for HA under the stage, I’ll prove that in a minute. We only need the for (banning it).
For – Homing attack under the stage leads to time outs and can render even very viable characters near useless once a % lead has been established and the other player is dead set on not losing that lead. This also applies to scrooging by the way. The game deteriorates into pure stalling as attacking Sonic directly is very risky. Countless other competitive games have similar rules against broken tactics when used in combination (in FPS, explosives on objectives are banned, in dota/hon many hero/item combos are banned) so the game is no less legitimate with this rule in place.
Interesting... Hence why I don’t need to go into the against argument.
But I can’t compare apples and oranges, these two tactics are very different! The only argument I ever hear in regards to this, which is unbelievably weak, is that one is considered pure stalling while the other is simply advantageous positioning. So let me get this straight... A pit/mk planking on the edge is nothing more than the character putting themselves at an advantageous position, no different to a G&W pressing jump. Ok thats fair. Yet Sonic choosing to put himself at an advantageous position is banworthy? Remember planking is prevalent on far more stages, almost all legal ones in fact. The only difference between the two is a pure subjective opinion on who is actually stalling, stalling being the act of making no effort to fight and running down the clock.
So how is planking with unbeatable aerials like MK’s not stalling? I would honestly like to know what constitutes this not being stalling. Unfortunately, if the only answer than anyone can come up with is that the other character can simply make an effort to attack them (unlike circle camping) and thus end the stall, you have proven my point I am about to make; the only player who makes planking not a stalling technique is the one who attacks them on the ledge.
Consider the two situations, a character like Marth on the stage while MK sits on the edge spamming uair etc and him vs a sonic using HA under the stage. In both situations, the MK/Sonic have put themselves in a highly advantageous position where attempting to hit them is very risky. Marth can quite easily go after both characters and hit them but still risks a possible gimp if he messes up. So Marth has 2 options, attack them or leave them. This leaves 4 situations;
1. MK planking/scrooging - Marth does nothing
2. MK planking/scrooging - Marth attacks
3. HA under the stage - Marth does nothing
4. HA under the stage - Marth attacks
As it stands, 1 and 2 are perfectly legal while 3-4 are banned. Now what I want to know is how 1 and 3 are different. So different in fact, that one tactic is legal while one gives you an outright DQ. Can anyone here prove that for as long as Marth refuses to attack in situation 1 and MK keeps on planking with his aerials, this is not stalling on the MK’s behalf? I’m afraid the answer to this question cannot be situation 2 (as in Marth is creating the stall, not MK) because in that case, that would render situation 4 legal. There is absolutely no difference whatsoever between the two. The argument that HA under the stage is done without intent of fighting and purely running down the clock is void for as long as situation 1 is legal, they are the same.
Now what does all this mean... Back to where I was at the start in my comparisons of HA under the stage to no LGL. People against the LGL cite it as a surgical ban which is unnecessary and if you truly have to limit MK, he is broken by definition and should simply be outright banned. You can’t ban a tactic for one character while letting others use it (many characters can plank with varying degrees of success). This is fair enough. However at the same time there already exists a surgical ban in this game, on Sonic and using HA under the stage. So now the people who argue against these bans on principle yet condone the banning of Sonic HA are, quite simply, hypocrites. As I said earlier, these 2 rules cannot exist at the same time. To be blunt, you must ban/allow individual tactics on their own merits. You cannot argue the case against LGL’s on principle of keeping out surgical bans entirely as an example of the exact opposite exist and is widely condoned.
I hope in the above paragraphs I have proved how very similar in nature HA under the stage and planking/scrooging are and why the line in what is banned and what is not is very blurred. At the end of all this however, let me clarify my points.
I do not think Sonic using HA under the stage should be legal. It has been banned on its own merits and rightly so.
Without an LGL, certain characters are free to abuse this tactic and achieve the exact same advantage gained by Sonic using HA under the stage.
With an LGL, the tactic is limited enough to promote actual fighting, the same result as banning Sonic HA. I believe this is the most obvious solution.
The way I see it, if planking/scrooging has been determined to be broken enough to warrant a surgical ban, to avoid being hypocrites, people who argue against this case on account of being against surgical bans altogether must either accept that Sonics tactic is legitimate and should be allowed just like unlimited planking (unlikely) or prove a clear distinction between the two (refer to my situations 1-4) resulting in a complete ban and none. There can be no subjectivity here; that goes against the very essence of not banning tactics on principle.
Again, I don’t want to see HA under the stage being made legal, I just want to see the death of this notion that an LGL should not exist as it is a surgical ban and it harms some characters unfairly while Sonics HA tactic is surgically banned. Finally to re-iterate my earlier point, think about question; ‘If Marth refuses to attack MK while planking, is the MK considered stalling?’ Is the answer to that question no? If it is, ‘If Marth refuses to attack Sonic while using HA under the stage, is the Sonic considered stalling?’
-----
I’ve mentioned this topic multiple times in various threads but people don’t seem to spend any time thinking about what is wrong with the current mentality of banning and limiting these certain tactics. My issue is the notion that applying an LGL is bad because it is a surgical ban. That argument holds weight by itself, but not in Brawl at the moment. But what is the cause for this? The banning of Sonic using HA under the stage. So let’s go right to the start and see why, IMO, these 2 rules cannot exist at the same time.
Firstly, the arguments for and against the LGL can be summarised in my opinion as follows;
For – Planking leads to time outs and can render even very viable characters near useless once a % lead has been established and the other player is dead set on not losing that lead. This also applies to scrooging by the way. The game deteriorates into pure stalling as attacking the planking character directly is very risky. Countless other competitive games have similar rules against broken tactics when used in combination (in FPS, the attacking team in bf2142 had pod surfing banned, in dota/hon many hero/item combos are soft banned, even in Goldeneye64, Oddjob was banned lol) so the game is no less legitimate with this rule in place.
Against - It is part of the game, some characters were designed with overpowered ground games (snake, olimar), some with untouchable aerials (G&W) and some with amazing ledge games (mk, pit). Limiting a tactic for certain characters is just unfair while others can abuse their broken strengths as much as they want. At the end of the day it is simply one character putting themselves in an advantageous position. Anyone can use this tactic and it is quite beatable by a range of characters, add to this the fact that sets are out of 3,involve multiple counterpicks and require a % lead to achieve, it can be negated to a large extent.
Now theres no need for me to do another for and against comparison for HA under the stage, I’ll prove that in a minute. We only need the for (banning it).
For – Homing attack under the stage leads to time outs and can render even very viable characters near useless once a % lead has been established and the other player is dead set on not losing that lead. This also applies to scrooging by the way. The game deteriorates into pure stalling as attacking Sonic directly is very risky. Countless other competitive games have similar rules against broken tactics when used in combination (in FPS, explosives on objectives are banned, in dota/hon many hero/item combos are banned) so the game is no less legitimate with this rule in place.
Interesting... Hence why I don’t need to go into the against argument.
But I can’t compare apples and oranges, these two tactics are very different! The only argument I ever hear in regards to this, which is unbelievably weak, is that one is considered pure stalling while the other is simply advantageous positioning. So let me get this straight... A pit/mk planking on the edge is nothing more than the character putting themselves at an advantageous position, no different to a G&W pressing jump. Ok thats fair. Yet Sonic choosing to put himself at an advantageous position is banworthy? Remember planking is prevalent on far more stages, almost all legal ones in fact. The only difference between the two is a pure subjective opinion on who is actually stalling, stalling being the act of making no effort to fight and running down the clock.
So how is planking with unbeatable aerials like MK’s not stalling? I would honestly like to know what constitutes this not being stalling. Unfortunately, if the only answer than anyone can come up with is that the other character can simply make an effort to attack them (unlike circle camping) and thus end the stall, you have proven my point I am about to make; the only player who makes planking not a stalling technique is the one who attacks them on the ledge.
Consider the two situations, a character like Marth on the stage while MK sits on the edge spamming uair etc and him vs a sonic using HA under the stage. In both situations, the MK/Sonic have put themselves in a highly advantageous position where attempting to hit them is very risky. Marth can quite easily go after both characters and hit them but still risks a possible gimp if he messes up. So Marth has 2 options, attack them or leave them. This leaves 4 situations;
1. MK planking/scrooging - Marth does nothing
2. MK planking/scrooging - Marth attacks
3. HA under the stage - Marth does nothing
4. HA under the stage - Marth attacks
As it stands, 1 and 2 are perfectly legal while 3-4 are banned. Now what I want to know is how 1 and 3 are different. So different in fact, that one tactic is legal while one gives you an outright DQ. Can anyone here prove that for as long as Marth refuses to attack in situation 1 and MK keeps on planking with his aerials, this is not stalling on the MK’s behalf? I’m afraid the answer to this question cannot be situation 2 (as in Marth is creating the stall, not MK) because in that case, that would render situation 4 legal. There is absolutely no difference whatsoever between the two. The argument that HA under the stage is done without intent of fighting and purely running down the clock is void for as long as situation 1 is legal, they are the same.
Now what does all this mean... Back to where I was at the start in my comparisons of HA under the stage to no LGL. People against the LGL cite it as a surgical ban which is unnecessary and if you truly have to limit MK, he is broken by definition and should simply be outright banned. You can’t ban a tactic for one character while letting others use it (many characters can plank with varying degrees of success). This is fair enough. However at the same time there already exists a surgical ban in this game, on Sonic and using HA under the stage. So now the people who argue against these bans on principle yet condone the banning of Sonic HA are, quite simply, hypocrites. As I said earlier, these 2 rules cannot exist at the same time. To be blunt, you must ban/allow individual tactics on their own merits. You cannot argue the case against LGL’s on principle of keeping out surgical bans entirely as an example of the exact opposite exist and is widely condoned.
I hope in the above paragraphs I have proved how very similar in nature HA under the stage and planking/scrooging are and why the line in what is banned and what is not is very blurred. At the end of all this however, let me clarify my points.
I do not think Sonic using HA under the stage should be legal. It has been banned on its own merits and rightly so.
Without an LGL, certain characters are free to abuse this tactic and achieve the exact same advantage gained by Sonic using HA under the stage.
With an LGL, the tactic is limited enough to promote actual fighting, the same result as banning Sonic HA. I believe this is the most obvious solution.
The way I see it, if planking/scrooging has been determined to be broken enough to warrant a surgical ban, to avoid being hypocrites, people who argue against this case on account of being against surgical bans altogether must either accept that Sonics tactic is legitimate and should be allowed just like unlimited planking (unlikely) or prove a clear distinction between the two (refer to my situations 1-4) resulting in a complete ban and none. There can be no subjectivity here; that goes against the very essence of not banning tactics on principle.
Again, I don’t want to see HA under the stage being made legal, I just want to see the death of this notion that an LGL should not exist as it is a surgical ban and it harms some characters unfairly while Sonics HA tactic is surgically banned. Finally to re-iterate my earlier point, think about question; ‘If Marth refuses to attack MK while planking, is the MK considered stalling?’ Is the answer to that question no? If it is, ‘If Marth refuses to attack Sonic while using HA under the stage, is the Sonic considered stalling?’