Draft Banning in Smash 4

[Jiggly]

As everyone has been complaining, the smash 4 scene has been getting a little stale with the constant Diddy Kong dittos and such. A mechanic such as Draft banning could fix this.

What is Draft Banning?

Draft Banning is a character striking system. After the first round, loser will get the first strike. Player 1 would choose a character to ban, and then both players couldn't play that character for that round. Then Player 2 would get to strike another character to be banned for the following rounds as well.

Why would we do Draft Banning?

This makes it so characters that are felt to be too much can be taken out by a simple strike. This will also force more diversity in play, and make people explore with several characters, as they don't know which characters will be avaliable to them.


As another note, this was not my idea. This was an idea that was bein discussed on Japan Time, a twitch podcast by @RogersBase and friends. The idea was from @Warchamp7, and he needs the credit for this idea, not me. I am simply a messenger who thought this idea was kickass.

THE PROS AND CONS OF DRAFT BANNING

Every Game 2, both players ban one character each for Games 2 and 3. Game 1 is left the same

PROS:
- More interesting gameplay for watchers (Not constantly the same tournament winning characters, etc)
- Higher skill-cap to be good at the game (You would need to learn more than 1 character, and be good at both in order to be good at the game)
- Disallows newer players to simply select the "Best" character and start winning tournaments/beating higher levelled players.
- Generally more fun for the majority of players, as they don't have to learn a specific matchup that bothers them, while also having to learn almost double the amount of normal matchups due to having a second character
- Gives tournaments more variety in winning characters
- Allows newer players to have more footage of a variety of characters to study, rather than the same 5 winning all the matches
- You would be able to play your main for at least one game, same with the other player
- If you play your secondary in Game 1, you will likely be able to play your main for the rest of the games

CONS:
- In order to be good at the game and win, you would need to learn at least 2 characters.
- Players who are known for who they play would be banned against commonly
- We shouldn't be forced to learn more than one character
- May cause more disputes based on order of ban (As usual)
- Some players may fake out the first game, then ban a counter to another character in order to bait a bad ban
This one is the most interesting to me and probably the most relevant. Someone good may purposefully lose game 1 so they can ban (let's say) a counter to Diddy, then trick Game 1's winner into banning the character they used in game 1. Then the player successfully tricked them, and now they can play diddy freely as long as they did not play him in Game 1.
- People would not be open to having a change like this, due to the magnitude
- More strict players would find it unnecessary to change rulesets like this
- "We didn't do it with Brawl's MK, so why do it here?"

COUNTERPOINTS:
- There's a lot of characters to choose from in this game, for every character there is a SIMILAR character, the excuse "But I only main one character!" is almostinvalid.
- There's a strategy to this, making it so that you can play your secondary in order to trick your opponent into banning them. Then playing your main and doing as good as you can. Simultaneously, you could ban a counter to that main in order to get the upper-edge.
- New players would see this and know that it means they'd have to learn 2 characters, this would become a natural thing rather than a giant change
- We did not do it with Brawl's MK because we've done nothing but shove in a similar ruleset to Melee in every Smash game. Even though games like Smash 4 are CLEARLY different by a large margin.


PLEASE SUPPORT REASONS FOR YOUR ARGUEMENTS, THIS ISNT A RANT THREAD

So what are your thoughts? Would draft banning be helpful to the smash scene?

 

[ChronoPenguin]

Gets brought up ocassionally.
I believe the concensus is that picks/bans aren't desired in Fighters when it comes to fighters.

 

[LancerStaff]

I really don't think it's necessary at this point. Maybe after it's been ears since the last patch perhaps, but now's not the time.

 

[ATH_]

I was watching Roger's stream when they were talking about this on Japan Time. I personally am all for at least testing it, but only with a 2 total ban type of thing (each player bans one character during the startup of the second game, and they stay banned for games 2 and 3. No bans in game 3.)

I think people are not open to change like this because people want to shove the similar rulesets to melee's ruleset, even though a game like this is VERY different. Something like this may make tournaments more hype and interesting.

 

[EllietheOctopus]

No, jesus christ no. If you can just ban characters that piss you off then you'll never learn. Smash is game of two thing; Knowledge and Application. If you know how to play your character to the best of your ability then matchups don't matter, it's skill. I've beaten plenty of Marths with Falco and lost to plenty of Marths as Falco. If you lose it's not the character's fault it's yours.

 

[ATH_]

No, jesus christ no. If you can just ban characters that piss you off then you'll never learn. Smash is game of two thing; Knowledge and Application. If you know how to play your character to the best of your ability then matchups don't matter, it's skill. I've beaten plenty of Marths with Falco and lost to plenty of Marths as Falco. If you lose it's not the character's fault it's yours.

This is understood, however, many times a player who was better than the opponent lost due to matchup in RECENT tournaments. It's more relevant right now where Diddy can be picked up for a month and then win Tournaments without ANY prior Smash experience. There is an ACTUAL guy who has done this very example and beaten a player with years of experience due to literally matchup. He played the most basic Diddy. I understand your point of needing to know a matchup, and that makes sense. There is not a lack of cons to this, however, there's just as many cons with NOT having it be a thing. That's what the other side is arguing for. I personally don't think it should be a "Let's definitely do this!" but more of a "I'd like to see this tested." because it may offer more fun and hype. Which Fun of which, is the more important thing of the community.

The reverse is that someone may enjoy something in a different way. Which is also understandable. I personally want to take a "Neutral but Testing" stance.

 

[EllietheOctopus]

From what I've seen so far Diddy is the only character to have this metaknight-like dominance. One of the great things about the new Smash is that all the characters are subject to nerf/buff and changes which means that Diddy's reign won't be for long

 

[Jigglymaster]

Sure would be fun for my main/best character to never be useable in any tournament match ever. That's basically whats happening right here. Kind of unfair for players who are known for what characters they play as.

"Oh, you're that really good Marth player that specializes in the character? I'll ban him"

I understand that you have good intentions with this by trying to make players not pick top tier characters like Diddy, but I don't think this is the right solution. It will just end up forcing players to not play as their main anymore because they'll be banned every single time.

 

[ATH_]

Sure would be fun for my main/best character to never be useable in any tournament match ever. That's basically whats happening right here. Kind of unfair for players who are known for what characters they play as.

"Oh, you're that really good Marth player that specializes in the character? I'll ban him"

I understand that you have good intentions with this by trying to make players not pick top tier characters like Diddy, but I don't think this is the right solution. It will just end up forcing players to not play as their main anymore because they'll be banned every single time.

Yeah, this is my main reason for wanting to test it and in the startup of the second game. This way, no matter what, you have the opportunity to get 1 game off of them with your actual main, then you can ban their main as they ban yours. But you're still ahead.

 

[ChronoPenguin]

Sure would be fun for my main/best character to never be useable in any tournament match ever. That's basically whats happening right here. Kind of unfair for players who are known for what characters they play as.

"Oh, you're that really good Marth player that specializes in the character? I'll ban him"

I understand that you have good intentions with this by trying to make players not pick top tier characters like Diddy, but I don't think this is the right solution. It will just end up forcing players to not play as their main anymore because they'll be banned every single time.

They can Ban shulk.
But there defeat will only be worse and their tears only saltier when they lose to my pockets pocket, secret pocket Sword Fighter.

 

[Jiggly]

Sure would be fun for my main/best character to never be useable in any tournament match ever. That's basically whats happening right here. Kind of unfair for players who are known for what characters they play as.

"Oh, you're that really good Marth player that specializes in the character? I'll ban him"

I understand that you have good intentions with this by trying to make players not pick top tier characters like Diddy, but I don't think this is the right solution. It will just end up forcing players to not play as their main anymore because they'll be banned every single time.

But it's also a strategy thing too, ban characters who counter yours, ban their main, ban whatever you don't like to face. It's a strategy approach as well, not just "diddy OP PLZ ban"

 

[Ryu_Ken]

This would probably prove problematic. Some people prefer one character as their main, and if that character is banned, they would have to play a different character they aren't used to. It all comes down to playstyle preference. If you eliminate the character the player prefers, they'll have to find another character with a different playstyle, which can potentially reduce their performance. We shouldn't be restricting the player's skill.

 

[smashmachine]

this isn't a damn MOBA, so stop trying to introduce things from there

 

[ATH_]

This would probably prove problematic. Some people prefer one character as their main, and if that character is banned, they would have to play a different character they aren't used to. It all comes down to playstyle preference. If you eliminate the character the player prefers, they'll have to find another character with a different playstyle, which can potentially reduce their performance. We shouldn't be restricting the player's skill.

The point of it is that new players will see this as common and then know that they should have more than one main. Minimum two.

 

[Jiggly]

This would probably prove problematic. Some people prefer one character as their main, and if that character is banned, they would have to play a different character they aren't used to. It all comes down to playstyle preference. If you eliminate the character the player prefers, they'll have to find another character with a different playstyle, which can potentially reduce their performance. We shouldn't be restricting the player's skill.

I feel it takes a great deal of skill to have more than on character, to stretch your horizons. The point is to introduce new things to the Meta and make the game diverse.

this isn't a damn MOBA, so stop trying to introduce things from there

What's the problem with adapting similarly to other games?

 

[deepseadiva]

Where is the hell no option.

 

[Jiggly]

Where is the hell no option.

The red X at the top right of your screen

 

[kyxsune]

They can Ban shulk.
But there defeat will only be worse and their tears only saltier when they lose to my pockets pocket, secret pocket Sword Fighter.

Lol getting beat with the absolute last character to get banned. Like getting killed by a soraka adc.

Of course, I would have also accepted Zelda.

 

[EllietheOctopus]

One trick ponies wouldn't be able to play at tourneys ever again

 

[FireOfExile]

I'd enjoy playing like this. However, I don't see how it could be very fair for the simple reason that someone might only ever use one character.

 

[Funen1]

It hasn't even been a month since v1.0.4. Can anyone really say the metagame has become "stale" at this point? Overpopulated with Diddys, possibly, but we haven't had nearly long enough for people to get comfortable with how to consistently counter him. Diddy may be the best character in the game, but if you can't beat him, then it is your responsibility to learn the matchup and figure out how to do so. A system that prevents your opponent from playing a character that you refuse to learn how to fight against is taking the easy way out, as far as I'm concerned, and is unhealthy for both individual players' development and for the overall skill level of tournaments (people forced to play characters other than their best).

I'm also a bit hesitant to rely on the whole philosophy of "oh they can just patch this troublesome thing", because that implies "oh then I shouldn't worry about putting in the work for this matchup". I, like many others, am confident another balance patch will be applied at some point in Smash 4's lifetime, even if it's years from now or something (though most likely sooner). But that doesn't mean we as a community should be lazy in our approach to the current game.

 

[MachoCheeze]

Honestly it sounds to me that people would abuse this to just get rid of the top tier characters. "Oh, I don't wanna fight Diddy or Rosalina, well, they're gone then." Yeah, it might freshen up the character variety a little bit, but it doesn't promote people getting better and developing the metagame against the top tier characters.

It sounds interesting in theory, but for a fighting game like Smash I do not see this working at all in the long run.

 

[ATH_]

It hasn't even been a month since v1.0.4. Can anyone really say the metagame has become "stale" at this point? Overpopulated with Diddys, possibly, but we haven't had nearly long enough for people to get comfortable with how to consistently counter him. Diddy may be the best character in the game, but if you can't beat him, then it is your responsibility to learn the matchup and figure out how to do so. A system that prevents your opponent from playing a character that you refuse to learn how to fight against is taking the easy way out, as far as I'm concerned, and is unhealthy for both individual players' development and for the overall skill level of tournaments (people forced to play characters other than their best).

I'm also a bit hesitant to rely on the whole philosophy of "oh they can just patch this troublesome thing", because that implies "oh then I shouldn't worry about putting in the work for this matchup". I, like many others, am confident another balance patch will be applied at some point in Smash 4's lifetime, even if it's years from now or something (though most likely sooner). But that doesn't mean we as a community should be lazy in our approach to the current game.

This post is great. Thank you for being the first truly intelligent poster who is against it yet is willing to be detailed at to why.

This is one of the main problems, yes. The fact that it means you can pick one matchup to never have to learn technically. The thing about this though, is that there are so many characters in the game that it's stressful for newer players to get into the scene. I think this is solid for testing.

Not to mention, it seems that everyone is coming up with some scenario of Good player v. Bad player where the Bad player doesn't want to learn. The thing about this, is that you too get to ban one of their characters. Which could make them regret their ban choice, or even not have a good character to go to.

In short, it supports at least 2 mains, but also supports not having to learn one matchup TOTAL. This allows the more skilled players to truly shine, as they have gotten good with TWO characters instead of just one.

 

[deepseadiva]

Some other possible things to implement in Smash:

1) Once a match you can move the king two squares towards a rook on the player's first rank, then move the rook to the square over which the king crossed.

2) Chanting slowly, 3 to 30 times, chant "Bloody Mary" thirteen times.

3) You cannot build a settlement one space away from another settlement.

 

[ATH_]

Some other possible things to implement in Smash:

1) Once a match you can move the king two squares towards a rook on the player's first rank, then move the rook to the square over which the king crossed.

2) Chanting slowly, 3 to 30 times, chant "Bloody Mary" thirteen times.

3) You cannot build a settlement one space away from another settlement.

You sir are the least productive and supportive person to this community. That is all.
You can disagree and still be supportive you know. It's not a hard thing.

 

[EllietheOctopus]

You sir are the least productive and supportive person to this community. That is all.
You can disagree and still be supportive you know. It's not a hard thing.

It's called a ****ing joke

 

[ATH_]

It's called a ****ing joke

Anyone with common sense understood this, I know.
I was not wrong though. Joke or not.

 

[kyxsune]

Some other possible things to implement in Smash:

1) Once a match you can move the king two squares towards a rook on the player's first rank, then move the rook to the square over which the king crossed.

2) Chanting slowly, 3 to 30 times, chant "Bloody Mary" thirteen times.

3) You cannot build a settlement one space away from another settlement.

4) Recall to Base should be 3 seconds

5) There should be a buffer period between potions uses

6) The middle of the stage should be a jungle with life buffs.

 

[EllietheOctopus]

4) Recall to Base should be 3 seconds

5) There should be a buffer period between potions uses

6) The middle of the stage should be a jungle with life buffs.

7) You do not talk about smash club

8) Thou shall not kill

9) Shuckle is banned

 

[ChronoPenguin]

10) Nerf Geb, rock is OP.

Meno went and killed the thread. RIP.

 

[GeZ]

You sir are the least productive and supportive person to this community. That is all.
You can disagree and still be supportive you know. It's not a hard thing.

Are you for real in support of draft banning in Smash 4? What are you smoking dude? That will literally never happen, for the aforementioned reasons, along with this being a really lame excuse at not wanting to learn MU's. Diddy isn't even that dominant.

Just because something works in MOBA's doesn't mean it's good for fighting games.

 

[Jiggly]

People are saying it shows weakness due to people not needing to know matchups. But doesn this forcce more matchups, due to more variety? Now with more than one main, you need twice the amount of practiced matchups. I see where people are talking about just banning high tiered characters, but the matchups point isn't valid.

 

[ATH_]

Are you for real in support of draft banning in Smash 4? What are you smoking dude? That will literally never happen, for the aforementioned reasons, along with this being a really lame excuse at not wanting to learn MU's. Diddy isn't even that dominant.

Just because something works in MOBA's doesn't mean it's good for fighting games.

The argument about MOBA's is irrelevant.
Also, I never said I was being supportive in a way where I'm all for it. If you look at my earlier posts, I simply am open to testing with it to get a general standing. I do not think it will succeed, but I think it would provide a solid aspect to the game that would allow players to be considered even better than they are.

I am looking at both the pros and cons of this, and I simply want to test it so that we could truly see whether or not it's a terrible idea or great idea. Testing would show it, not doing anything would just keep the argument flaring.

 

[kyxsune]

So I can always ban diddy and yoshi, sweet. Guess i don't need to learn those matchups... but now I need a better tertiary than zelda.....

 

[FlareHabanero]

If needed, experiments should be done in order to see if this would be a healthy solution in the long run. It's one of those type of things that needs actual action to see what problems will appear and how said problems can be fixed.

The most notable issue is that forcing someone to use something else can skew results, since there are people that focus their priorities on a single character and can become hindered from using something else.

 

[Jiggly]

The argument about MOBA's is irrelevant.
Also, I never said I was being supportive in a way where I'm all for it. If you look at my earlier posts, I simply am open to testing with it to get a general standing. I do not think it will succeed, but I think it would provide a solid aspect to the game that would allow players to be considered even better than they are.

I am looking at both the pros and cons of this, and I simply want to test it so that we could truly see whether or not it's a terrible idea or great idea. Testing would show it, not doing anything would just keep the argument flaring.

Exactly this^

I'm not saying to suddenly implement it in all tournaments because it's obviously an improvement. It's just that people have been talking about how the game is getting a little stale, or boring. And it is because we are following the Melee ruleset, and not gettin MELEE results. Why do all the smash games need similar rulesets? If that game is getting stale due to not gettin what we expect, why not expirament with new things? We don't know what will happen, but it may be a good step in the right direction for a fresher smash scene

 

[ATH_]

So I can always ban diddy and yoshi, sweet. Guess i don't need to learn those matchups... but now I need a better tertiary than zelda.....

The ruleset would be that in the second game, both players would only ban one character.
You can still play your main in the first game, and only one character would be banned for the match.

 

[EllietheOctopus]

Another point that we forgot to mention is that there are some characters who will be able to transcend into god tier with their biggest counters banned.

 

[Cyre]

I cannot see this being a thing, you have those people who play solely one character. If someones main, ends up getting banned, well they are kind of ****ed. It's a nice idea, but I feel like this is just too punishing for those people who play one character.

 

[ATH_]

Another point that we forgot to mention is that there are some characters who will be able to transcend into god tier with their biggest counters banned.

Not true.

Let's say there are two characters who will be referred to in numbers.
Character 1 countrers character 2.

The player playing 2 bans 1, now they're "god tier" right?
No?? That's idiotic. Again, people are forgetting that there are TWO bans here. Not one.
Now the other player can ban character 2, and guess who isn't god tier anymore?