EDC vs. IDC

[Tarmogoyf]

Stalling is

ex:

Sonic homing under the stage.

This one doesn't work BTW. You can spotdodge right before it launches, and Sonic will just fall to his death (he has no homing target).

EDC is banned, according ot everythhing Avarice says, and it makes sense to me.

/thread

 

[Tesh]

Sonic doesn't need a target to homing stall. It always launches upward a little before it dives so you will always hit a ceiling if you are right under it.

 

[EvolveOrDie]

A rose by any other name would smell as sweet...
Seems to me that EDC is IDC the inputs and applications may vary but the method is the same.

 

[DanGR]

Stalling: The act of deliberately avoiding any and all conflict so that one may make the game unplayable. Running away from an opponent to reach a better position is not stalling, while doing an infinite grab endlessly against a wall is. Any infinite chain grabs must end quickly after 300% has been reached so as to prevent excessive stalling.

I was told by the big TO in my state not to ATTEMPT to make the game unplayable for my opponent, even if what I'm doing is beatable. Using the IDC/planking/running away all the time/air camping is banned because of those two words, which is completely absurd.

He also interprets "running away" as backing away to reset the position and not running away indefinitely.

 

[Dantarion]

EDC = IDC

Just because you use a different input to cause the same phenomenon doesn't make it different.
You can IDC with the control stick, its just that no one can feasibly do it.

The difference between EDC and IDC inputs is that its much harder to move the control stick from neutral to up and back to neutral repeatedly (What fictions method actually does) when compared to using the c-stick.

 

[UltiMario]

Is it me or is this thread Anti MK?
The IDC is banned for serious, seeing as its used for Stalling, bla bla, no arguement there.
But the EDC Really doesn't seem like a much worse Escape or approach than the 'nado, people are annoyed of that, and its not banned. Its a trade off, EDC makes you invincible for your approach, but you're not hitting anyone like you would with the nado.

If the EDC is banned, then the Nado should be banned with it. Its a trade-off as any move has. Ex Marth's Fair and Bair, do you want to try to chain into another move, or do you want some more knockback?

Really people. the EDC warrents a ban no more than the Nado, and I don't even SEE people abuse the EDC to the point there should be any problem.

 

[CRASHiC]

If the EDC is banned, then the Nado should be banned with it. Its a trade-off as any move has. Ex Marth's Fair and Bair, do you want to try to chain into another move, or do you want some more knockback?

There is no trade off with EDC.
There is no punishable part about it.
It is 100% safe for the user in any situation.

 

[Muro]

people just dont get it... edc = idc with another input (and name), and idc is banned.

 

[UltiMario]

There is no trade off with EDC.
There is no punishable part about it.
It is 100% safe for the user in any situation.

I find it to be a trade-off with the Nado simply because of the sheer veratality on not only the ground, but also the air, the Fact that the Nado, Outprioritises most moves not labeled "Dair" or "high priority explosion/projectile", and gets some decent damage to boot.

But I guess thats just me.

Edit: Also, IDC is just timestalling the match while ahead and your fingers bleeding. EDC is just as much as an Approach or an escape Tactic as any other move. Besides, isn't approaching and escaping what this move was DESIGNED for? Sure, Sakurai didn't plan it quite like this, but its how it is.

Its no more of a design flaw than anything else in this game.

 

[CRASHiC]

EDC is just as much as an Approach or an escape Tactic as any other move. Besides, isn't approaching and escaping what this move was DESIGNED for? Sure, Sakurai didn't plan it quite like this, but its how it is.

But the regular cape was put within a range when used at a poor time, you could get punished for it. He gave it a short range so that MK could only escape a short distance, but giving it the length of the entire field makes it to where MK can completely control the match at any given time.

 

[UltiMario]

No, the cape was built so terribly so no matter what time you use it, you'll get punished for it..... Well.... on the Stage at least, you could sorta use it for a quick recovery... I guess....

EDC turns a move about as useful as Ganon's Utilt into a decent move.

Yes, I know that this is MK we're talking about, with all his other useful moves, but this is something I don't see a valid point on.

Isn't EDC literally IDC except in short enough amounts that its not really bad enough to warrent a disqualification from a match? I'm pretty sure thats what it was supposed to be in the first place.

 

[RDK]

Crashic, how is EDC not punishable? Did you forget the beginning / ending lag?

 

[DMG]

Punishable in what sense?

Also I am gonna explain this again:

IDC IS THE SAME EXACT THING AS EDC/EDC IS THE SAME EXACT THING AS IDC EXCEPT WITH DIFFERENT INPUTS. THEY CAN BOTH GO IN DIFFERENT DIRECTIONS, THEY CAN BOTH GO ON FOR AS LONG AS YOUR FINGERS WILL LAST, THEY BOTH HAVE THE SAME EFFECTS WHEN IT COMES TO BEING INVISIBLE/INVULNERABLE/HOW FAST YOU MOVE/ETC.

It's like being able to use Smash attacks in any direction with the Cstick, and then using Smash attacks with the Control stick and the A button in any direction. DIFFERENT INPUTS, SAME EFFECT.

 

[CRASHiC]

Crashic, how is EDC not punishable? Did you forget the beginning / ending lag?

Because of the distance you can travel. The only thing slightly punishable is the start up lag, which is hardly existent. The MK can choose to go to any spot on the field, including the ledge. The ending lag is irrelevant because of being able to travel to any spot of the field with no visual cue except the camera moving, which is not enough to accurately predict where the Mk will stop. There is essentially no risk involved.

Theoretically, it is possible to continue it in the opposite direction. Though no one with tech skill is really willing to test it.

 

[DMG]

Uh... I posted earlier that I've been able to change directions with it, actually about 4-5 times in a row last time I tried before I kinda got bored and wanted to play slower like Wario lol.

Granted, it's pretty freaking hard to do it even more than once, but it's entirely possible.

 

[Flayl]

That pretty much seals the deal, EDC should be banned along with IDC. Having somebody monitor the controllers is kinda dumb anyway.

 

[UltiMario]

Really, if they're using it to stall a match, it's obvious.
If they use it once or twice in an entire match to escape a bad situation, its obvious.

Common sense isn't so common. You don't need to monitor controllers, you need to monitor the TV <.>

 

[Xerit]

Air-camping isn't stalling.

With stalling, you're trying to make yourself unable to be hit. Stalling would be MKs infinite dimensional cape, Peach's bomber stall in Melee, Jiggs' rising Pound, etc. The only way to hit the opponent in these situations (if you can at all) is to force yourself to SD, and the opponent is still in the lead if they have a stock lead.

With air-camping, it's just like normal camping, except...in the air. Would you call Snake's grenade camping or Falco's laser camping stalling? No. Granted, that's a bad example because they're throwing out projectiles while air-campers like Wario and MK are trying to bait senseless or punishable approaches, but it's generally the same. You wouldn't call out a Marth who only does retreating F-airs for, "stalling," as they aren't stalling, they're just spacing and zoning themselves so well that aside from projectiles, they will rarely get hit and can predict the opponent.

tl;dr: Good spacing and zoning.

Projectiles and punishing predicted moves can punish it. It's difficult, but it's just like in any other situation where you're facing somebody with good zoning, like a Snake who's really good at keeping you out with his disjointed tilts and grenade camping. It's beatable. Read the jumps that MK has left, notice a Wario's DIing habits, do whatever that you'd do to beat any other character with really good zoning; it's just in the air.

Gonna reply to this farther down after Cirno's Quote, since its essentially the same statement.

I fail to see how someone in EDC can deliberately avoid an attack, because that would have to mean that the MKs opponent was trying to attack the MK while he wasn't visible, which doesn't work, and is really just his opponent's fault. The only time that should happen is if the opponent figures that the MK would try to use a regular DC into him (which is silly, given its start-up and cool-down frames), tries to punish where he would be, and the MK crosses up. Even THEN, it may still be punishable depending on what attack the opponent used. And if not, it's obvious that it was an EDC.

Looks like I was unclear this time. What I meant was using it as an escape tactic to avoid a easily punishable situation.

Rules that require someone to watch the game that essentially say, "This tactic is illegal," are either enforceable or not enforceable. I see the argument that EDC isn't enforceable, yet D3's infinite is. The reason I said that was because people use both arguments.

Either both are enforceable because both can be monitored/watched, or neither are enforceable because it would have to require a judge with every match at an MK or D3 on it to make sure that they didn't sneak away with a couple, or skip the replay.

If I Standing Infinite someone they could call a judge over and request the replay be saved. if I then skip the replay (and for some reason he does as well) then it could just be assumed i was hiding evidence that would DQ me and they can DQ. If they have a replay, as I said before it would be very obvious I cheated and I would get DQ'd.

Can't do that with EDC/IDC.

I wasn't talking of it being any less legal or bannable (I said multiple times in my other posts in this thread and in the MK ban thread that ANY extension of MKs dimensional cape is banworthy and it clearly says so in the rules, because it says that the glitch itself is banned, not the infinite stalling tactic, but the glitch itself).

Which is what I have been saying too. I guess I misread your argument and thought you were after something else.

My argument here though is HOW we go about banning it not whether or not we should since I think that argument has already been made.

I was using that example to counter your statement that a ban of EDC isn't enforcable while a ban of any other move is. People can get away with these things in tournament.

Like? DDD's infinite? Debunked already, got anything else?

"No Items" is technically a subjective rule because it's under the belief that items shouldn't be played in competitive gameplay. There is no official, clear-cut, no questions asked statement that says that "Items should always be banned." It was a decision made by the majority of the community and SBR and the TOs of tournament.

That wasn't where I was getting at at all nor was it a point I was trying to make, but you ignored the main point of my paragraph and instead targeted five words of my argument.

Note that subjective means opinionated, and objective means factually-based.

The decision to not let M2K and Armada play the 4th and 5th games of their set in Genesis had subjectivity in it. The fact that they even had a panel vote on the Dojo vs. DEHF match had subjectivity in it. The Magus DQ rule has subjectivity in it. The rule of Tournament Host X to DQ or not DQ player Y for being five and 1 second late to a pools match has subjectivity in it. Much tournament ruling is subjective, and EDC is not unique in this aspect.

OK I guess we misunderstood eachother again.

When I think of a subjective rule i'm thinking of rules which require a subjective ruling to be taken into effect. IE: Stalling which requires a judge to watch and decide whether a given player is stalling or just playing really defensively.

Rules which are not objective would be like "Items Off" which require no such "on the spot" judgement calls.

Your point was that planking was an MK tactic that we banned. It wasn't an MK tactic, as quite a few characters can do it as well. Simply because MK can arguably do it best, does not mean that it's his tactic.

It is a MK tactic. You can keep saying "GW can do it, Marth can do it etc etc" but the fact is the character doing it and winning with it is MK. That makes it a MK tactic.

Dojo didn't break any current rules by camping out the timer on DEHF, yet there was a panel to vote on whether he should have been DQd. Granted, UTD Zac didn't break any rules on planking, but they're similar situations with different outcomes. On one side, no one seemed to care. On the other, there's a bunch of controversy because he did something legal, but it won.

Also, the original Plank (I'm going to guess that you're talking of the original Brawl Plank, A.K.A. SK92 vs. Plairnkk in like late September of last year) didn't break the ledgegrab rule either. He used a combination of edgegrabs and a very safe playstyle in general.

Because people hate MK. People hate MK because 55+% of this community want him banned for being broken and the minority still keeps him in and players abuse him to do better than they would without. Thats why no one cares when a G&W planks and wins, and everyone does when MK does it. Is it fair? No. Then again though, in the majority opinion neither is MK so, meh.

I don't want to go back and count but if the Plank match your talking about is a MK v Falco on Battlefield match i'd be very suprised if 6+ minutes of ledge stalling didn't go over the current 70 ledgegrab limit. (Though i agree that "At the time" there was no rule against it, if thats the point you were making, can't think of why you would make that point though)

Air-camping, the perfectly legal zoning defensive tactic? I honestly don't see how it's barely legal. The air-camper gets a percent lead, and they start camping. The opponent can approach and hit them. It's harder, because they're in disadvantageous positioning, but they can do it all the same.

Addressed later.

EDC is banned, I don't know why you're bringing it up as a legit tactic.

IDC is banned, EDC is being put forward by some as a "different move" which techniqually isn't banned because its done with different inputs.

Technically:

IDC is the name of the tactic that uses MK's Dimensional Cape glitch to stall a match infinitely. Has to be used by rapidly tapping C-stick up.

EDC is the name of the tactic that uses MK's Dimensional Cape glitch to gain extra distance. Can be used by either the C-stick up way or the control-stick way.

Thats not how many define it though. In fact this whole thread is full of different definitions which leave EDC banned or legal depending on whose you follow.

The latter two are banned and illegal. Perfect recovery is just false.

How about a different wording. Ungimpable recovery? Near-perfect? "Requiring an absolutely horribly miscalculation by the MK player in order for it to not work" Recovery?

Legally?
No character.


Illegally, sure MK as he is the only one who can use DC.

But that's like saying which other character can Plank/air-camp/ chaingrab/ Swallowcide/ 5 jumps/Super armor recovery/ Infinite chaingrab/ And Down B charge across the stage.

When you list individual traits of a character you can really only get that character.

Now any character can plank and air camp. Marth can plank extremely well, and air-camping is a big part of his defensive game. DDD and Kirby both have 5 jumps and DDD can plank pretty well too. Not to mention dair and bair camping, which are ofcourse in the air.Those two characters, aswell as any one else in the game can air camp, and no one does it better than Wario. DDD has his own specific banned tactic, and every character has a specific move/tactic which MK has no access to in the same way only he has access to the DC and it's perks. And there is no such thing as a perfect recovery.

See above on perfect recovery.

Any character can plank, not any character can do it well, and none do it as well as MK. Wario is probably the only one who can compete for best "air camper", but he sucks at planking.

Every character may have a down-b, not every characters down-b makes them invisible/invulnerable and has the potential to transport them across different distances depending on what the player wants.

The point wasn't to list a set of random moves that could only be attributed as a group to MK. The point was to list a set of extremely potent moves who only MK has access to as a group.

Camping is the act of moving to a far corner of a stage, or to a lonely, safe place to evade the opponents.

In Smash Bros

It can have several purposes, including:
* Using a spammable projectile
* Charging a move that needs charging
* Wasting time
* Leading the opponents into a mine or Pitfall.
* (in battle with multiple fighters) wait until the enemies have taken more damage.

So by simple definition air camping is just doing any of this in the air.

ex:

Wario air dodging around until the chance to aerial or bite.

MK dairing just above you .

Marth fairing right in front of you but not approaching.


Stalling is

Stalling is defined as any action that deliberately avoids all conflict as to make the game unplayable. It involves the player using a move or technique to waste time, usually done in time matches or timed stock matches. Stalling is banned in tournaments, as tournaments use timed stock matches.

ex:

Sonic homing under the stage.

MK/Kirby/Jiggz/ Wario (multiple jumpers/great aerial movers) continuous jumping away from you/gliding under the stage from one side to the other.

ICs/DDD Infiniting past 999 or the set limit (300 I believe it is) to run the clock.

So let me get this straight.

Stalling = "any action that deliberately avoids all conflict as to make the game unplayable."

And Air Camping = "moving to a far corner of a stage, or to a lonely, safe place to evade the opponents."

Evade =

1. To escape or avoid by cleverness or deceit:

However air camping is not stalling?

I can understand camping if you play a projectile character because you are engaging the enemy, your just doing it from range. However camping as a melee character where you run away every time someone tries to engage you sounds EXACTLY like the definition of stalling.

EDIT:

@above- I can monitor my match all I want. I still can't DQ the person I'm playing against. So either you're suggesting a judge at every MK match or your purposely not exercising your own common sense in order to make your earlier point.

 

[RDK]

If I Standing Infinite someone they could call a judge over and request the replay be saved. if I then skip the replay (and for some reason he does as well) then it could just be assumed i was hiding evidence that would DQ me and they can DQ. If they have a replay, as I said before it would be very obvious I cheated and I would get DQ'd.

Can't do that with EDC/IDC.

Which is why if it happens once you can call a TO over to watch the rest of the match.

It is a MK tactic. You can keep saying "GW can do it, Marth can do it etc etc" but the fact is the character doing it and winning with it is MK. That makes it a MK tactic.

No it doesn't. By your logic any universal move that some characters may use to win make that tactic a(n] [insert random character here] tactic. Planking is no more an MK tactic than it is a G&W tactic.

Because people hate MK. People hate MK because 55+% of this community want him banned for being broken and the minority still keeps him in and players abuse him to do better than they would without. Thats why no one cares when a G&W planks and wins, and everyone does when MK does it. Is it fair? No. Then again though, in the majority opinion neither is MK so, meh.

I don't think anyone actually believes MK is a fair character; it's quite obvious he's BS. The point is whether or not he's bannable, and in this case, no, he's not. 55% of people posting on a forum is not good enough reason to ban an entire character, something that hasn't been done in the history of Smash.

Thats not how many define it though. In fact this whole thread is full of different definitions which leave EDC banned or legal depending on whose you follow.

It's not that hard. IDC is done using the C-stick; EDC is done using the joy. The former is humanly impossible using just the joy, so it's not that hard to monitor a match for use of the C-stick in employing IDC.

 

[Xerit]

Which is why if it happens once you can call a TO over to watch the rest of the match.

So I can use it as much as I want until a TO gets called to watch, whereas other banned things (Standing infinite, 70 ledge grab etc) just get caught the first time you break them and you get DQ'd. K, that sounds fair.

No it doesn't. By your logic any universal move that some characters may use to win make that tactic a(n] [insert random character here] tactic. Planking is no more an MK tactic than it is a G&W tactic.

Actually it may not be exclusively a MK tactic, but it is moreso his than it is other characters. Since its a more viable tactic for him than it is for any other character.

I don't think anyone actually believes MK is a fair character; it's quite obvious he's BS. The point is whether or not he's bannable, and in this case, no, he's not. 55% of people posting on a forum is not good enough reason to ban an entire character, something that hasn't been done in the history of Smash.

This forum is the center of the brawl community. If 55% of the brawl community believe something is worthy of a ban, even if that isn't enough reason to ban it (obviously its not), it does mean something is deeply troubling about that item. Troubling enough to split the community in two.

Who cares if it hasn't been done in the history of smash? There hasn't been a character like MK before in the history of smash either.

It's not that hard. IDC is done using the C-stick; EDC is done using the joy. The former is humanly impossible using just the joy, so it's not that hard to monitor a match for use of the C-stick in employing IDC.

Thats your definition, let me give you another.

IDC and EDC are the same exact thing. One however is done for excessive periods of time and its only purpose is to stall (IDC) while the other is done for comparatively short periods of time and is used instead as a escape/zoning/spacing maneuver. The inputs used to generate the glitch are as irrelevant as whether you smash control stick + A or c-stick to smash.

Thats another definition being used in this thread that is wildly different.

And what exactly is the point of stopping people from doing the same trick depending on which input they use to pull it off? If I C-stick DC from one end of the stage to the other why should I be banned? It was exactly the same effect as if I had control sticked from one end to the other, I simply used the other stick.

Either both are bannable OR you have to come up with some sort of time limit on the DC. Banning based on how I input the glitch is as stupid as banning c-stick smashes while keeping control+A smashes in.

 

[DZhou]

One guy proposed that if MK used IDC and time ran out, MK would forfeit the match. I thought that was a decent idea but he was uberflamed for making that topic so meh.. w/e

 

[CRASHiC]

It's not that hard. IDC is done using the C-stick; EDC is done using the joy. The former is humanly impossible using just the joy, so it's not that hard to monitor a match for use of the C-stick in employing IDC.

No, its not. DMG did it and reversed directions, making it go forever. Thus BAN. End of thread.

 

[Xerit]

One guy proposed that if MK used IDC and time ran out, MK would forfeit the match. I thought that was a decent idea but he was uberflamed for making that topic so meh.. w/e

With good reason. Thats like when someone suggested that MK players should have to announce when they are going to choose MK for a given fight before their opponent chooses their character. Regardless of who's turn it is to CP.

Half measures do no good and just cause more problems.

EDIT:

@-above

Great, now how do we enforce it without banning the cape in general?

 

[RDK]

No, its not. DMG did it and reversed directions, making it go forever. Thus BAN. End of thread.

With the joystick? Doubt it. Vids or it didn't happen.

 

[RDK]

My bad, I double-posted.

So I can use it as much as I want until a TO gets called to watch, whereas other banned things (Standing infinite, 70 ledge grab etc) just get caught the first time you break them and you get DQ'd. K, that sounds fair.

Yes, it is fair, since there's no possible way he can stall out the match in the short amount of time it takes for a TO to come review your match. Get over it.

Plus, comparing going over the ledgestall limit and / or the D3 infinite to MK's IDC is beyond dumb.

Actually it may not be exclusively a MK tactic, but it is moreso his than it is other characters. Since its a more viable tactic for him than it is for any other character.

You're still not making any sense. Planking would only be an "MK tactic" if only MK can do it.

This forum is the center of the brawl community. If 55% of the brawl community believe something is worthy of a ban, even if that isn't enough reason to ban it (obviously its not), it does mean something is deeply troubling about that item. Troubling enough to split the community in two.

This forum is also used by people who have no stake in the Smash community whatsoever. If you want random 4chan votes skewing the percentages, fine. But thank goodness you're not making any administrative decisions.

Who cares if it hasn't been done in the history of smash? There hasn't been a character like MK before in the history of smash either.

Oh well. He still doesn't break ban criteria.

Thats your definition, let me give you another.

IDC and EDC are the same exact thing. One however is done for excessive periods of time and its only purpose is to stall (IDC) while the other is done for comparatively short periods of time and is used instead as a escape/zoning/spacing maneuver. The inputs used to generate the glitch are as irrelevant as whether you smash control stick + A or c-stick to smash.

Thats another definition being used in this thread that is wildly different.

No, it's not, because it's already been established that using the regular joy method is humanly impossible.

And what exactly is the point of stopping people from doing the same trick depending on which input they use to pull it off? If I C-stick DC from one end of the stage to the other why should I be banned? It was exactly the same effect as if I had control sticked from one end to the other, I simply used the other stick.

Because there's no reason to use the C-stick when caping other than to IDC. If you simply want to EDC, use the joy.

That's the whole point of this conversation; in order to catch people who potentially try to abuse IDC, you need to differentiate between the different methods used. You can't have your cake and eat it too.

Either both are bannable OR you have to come up with some sort of time limit on the DC. Banning based on how I input the glitch is as stupid as banning c-stick smashes while keeping control+A smashes in.

You're not listening.

Ban the use of C-stick when using cape. Regular EDC need not be banned; doing so is just scrubby.

 

['V']

It's really easy to just ban both. You just gotta be awesome.

 

[Xerit]

@RDK - Sorry i'm tired of the chain quote BS.

@ first comment-

If you banned EDC/IDC any extension of the cape would warrant a DQ. In that case monitoring for extention becomes unreasonable because you would need a judge closely watching each match in order to make sure no one extended their cape. Thats what I was talking about when i said I can use it until a TO comes over and then stop. Not IDC stalling, but EDC usage to escape/evade.

@ second comment-

Its not "JUST" a MK tactic, but it is "a" MK tactic. By calling it a MK tactic I mean to emphasize how powerful a tool it is when its being used by such a broken character, not try to say hes the only one who can use it. Once again we're in an argument of definition.

Just as projectile camping is a Falco tactic, despite Fox also theoretically being able to do it. Any character with a projectile can theoretically do it, but I doubt very seriously people would call projectile camping a valid D3 tactic for instance (unless they are completely unfamiliar with just how open Waddle Dee Toss leaves D3).

@third comment-

So you think that the 4 chan people are all on one side? I would venture to say the majority who voted have some vested interest in the brawl community. The others who don't are probably not all on one side, and furthermore represent a negligible statistical annomaly when you factor in the previous 3 polls which all went pretty much the same way.

Unless you really do think all the 4 chan people are on the same side and have been camping this forum for over a year just to try to screw over poor little MK.

@4th comment

He may not break YOUR ban criteria, I however still haven't seen any official "ban criteria" posted up. Which is why this conversation is ongoing. Your criteria are as valid as mine and mine as valid as your's.

@5th comment

Except apparently not because people are already talking about turning it around IN THIS VERY THREAD.

@6th comment

Maybe its easier for me to C-Stick than control stick in order to extend MK's cape? IDC and EDC are arbitrary labels you decided are best attached to control schemes. I attach them to the amount of time spent in the cape. Your definition, like your choice of ban criteria, is no better than mine.

Yes I can, all I have to do is ban the Cape. Don't have to differentiate if I believe both are equally bannable and the only solution is to ban the move entirely.

@7th comment

I am listening, you however aren't making sense and instead are choosing to make arbitrary claims and judgements based on what I assume is overprotectiveness of your broken main.

"control stick" IDC or EDC as you call it, is just as bannable as C-stick IDC used for stalling. If you care to refute that claim with something besides "nuh uh" feel free. I've made my case already however.

Calling it scrubby as some kind of ad-populum attack on the whole notion of banning isn't going to be any more effective on intelligent people here as it was when anti-banners repeated it like a mantra for 500 something pages on the Ban MK poll thread.

 

[master-fresh]

I miss the intelligent probans, what happened to them?
Oh wait, THEY MOVED TO ANTIBAN!

Seriously, quit acting like your side doesn't have and never had idiots.

 

[Alus]

@RDK - Sorry i'm tired of the chain quote BS.


If you banned EDC/IDC any extension of the cape would warrant a DQ. In that case monitoring for extention becomes unreasonable because you would need a judge closely watching each match in order to make sure no one extended their cape. Thats what I was talking about when i said I can use it until a TO comes over and then stop. Not IDC stalling, but EDC usage to escape/evade.

I wonder if it is possible to make TVs face the TO. Not that a TO would watch all at the same time, but not knowing when he will see what you are doing will chill you into.....not doing it?

Its not "JUST" a MK tactic, but it is "a" MK tactic. By calling it a MK tactic I mean to emphasize how powerful a tool it is when its being used by such a broken character, not try to say hes the only one who can use it. Once again we're in an argument of definition.
Just as projectile camping is a Falco tactic, despite Fox also theoretically being able to do it. Any character with a projectile can theoretically do it, but I doubt very seriously people would call projectile camping a valid D3 tactic for instance (unless they are completely unfamiliar with just how open Waddle Dee Toss leaves D3).

Nothing to say here.

So you think that the 4 chan people are all on one side? I would venture to say the majority who voted have some vested interest in the brawl community. The others who don't are probably not all on one side, and furthermore represent a negligible statistical annomaly when you factor in the previous 3 polls which all went pretty much the same way.

Unless you really do think all the 4 chan people are on the same side and have been camping this forum for over a year just to try to screw over poor little MK.

No... he never said this...when did anyone?

He is just saying that people who don't have any say (because it doesn't affect them whatsoever.) voted.

He may not break YOUR ban criteria, I however still haven't seen any official "ban criteria" posted up. Which is why this conversation is ongoing. Your criteria are as valid as mine and mine as valid as your's.

mmm hmm. >__>

Maybe its easier for me to C-Stick than control stick in order to extend MK's cape? IDC and EDC are arbitrary labels you decided are best attached to control schemes. I attach them to the amount of time spent in the cape. Your definition, like your choice of ban criteria, is no better than mine.

Yes I can, all I have to do is ban the Cape. Don't have to differentiate if I believe both are equally bannable and the only solution is to ban the move entirely.

Can't do it? How about don't?

People can do things easier with the turbo button, but that is banned... Oh but why not ban the action in general?

Calling it scrubby as some kind of ad-populum attack on the whole notion of banning isn't going to be any more effective on intelligent people here as it was when anti-banners repeated it like a mantra for 500 something pages on the Ban MK poll thread.

That is because EVERY OTHER ARGUMENT was a complaint and not really a good reason to ban? Also half those arguments were the same single argument.

**** one of your reasons is because MK is a "detriment" to the mid lvl play!

What do you expect us to say? That you are all pro's and that you are right?

I miss the intelligent probans, what happened to them?
Oh wait, THEY MOVED TO ANTIBAN!

Seriously, quit acting like your side doesn't have and never had idiots.

I saw you use my laptop...

If you see this message i'm going to kill you

Also LOL you left yourself logged in XD

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

Suggestion: make it mandatory to softmod all wiis used in tournaments to install infinite replay. And while you're at it, no tripping. :V
That way, if someone extended their cape, you could tell by comparing frame data in the replays.

 

[DanGR]

Hacks will never be the standard in competitive, regular Brawl.

They help, but not everyone has access to them.

 

[DMG]

RDK, trust me you can change directions with EDC using only the control stick. Once you identify the pattern used to make EDC work, you just change in the middle.

I'll give you an example:

You start EDC going to the right on FD. So you are doing quarter circle inputs from Top Right down to Bottom right, and then back up. (I've not tested it yet, but It might be possible that the Pure Right input is not needed, leaving Up Right and Down Right.) Inputting Up Right moves MK's cape off the ground slightly, and inputting Down Right will make him touch the ground, thus extending it a bit.

SO... after you input Down Right, you can go to either Pure Left or Up Left. From what I can tell, you cannot go directly to Down Left and then try to move upwards. I'm also not sure if it's better to go to Pure Left or Up Left, I think Up Left might be better but I've not tested it that in depth lol.

So basically, after you make the input to extend the cape, you use that additional time to quickly change directions.

 

[adumbrodeus]

Suggestion: make it mandatory to softmod all wiis used in tournaments to install infinite replay. And while you're at it, no tripping. :V
That way, if someone extended their cape, you could tell by comparing frame data in the replays.

No.

If you want hacks to be standard, play Brawl+. We shouldn't be requiring modded wiis, ever.

Especially no tripping, gameplay effecting mods should never be tournament legal except in explicitly hacked tournaments.

RDK, trust me you can change directions with EDC using only the control stick. Once you identify the pattern used to make EDC work, you just change in the middle.

I'll give you an example:

You start EDC going to the right on FD. So you are doing quarter circle inputs from Top Right down to Bottom right, and then back up. (I've not tested it yet, but It might be possible that the Pure Right input is not needed, leaving Up Right and Down Right.) Inputting Up Right moves MK's cape off the ground slightly, and inputting Down Right will make him touch the ground, thus extending it a bit.

SO... after you input Down Right, you can go to either Pure Left or Up Left. From what I can tell, you cannot go directly to Down Left and then try to move upwards. I'm also not sure if it's better to go to Pure Left or Up Left, I think Up Left might be better but I've not tested it that in depth lol.

So basically, after you make the input to extend the cape, you use that additional time to quickly change directions.

Ok, so there you have it, EDC and IDC have the same infinite stall ability.

Ban, game over.

 

[Afropony]

Just ban anything that extends the cape.

 

[Alus]

I would prefer that...

Key word being prefer.

 

[DMG]

The problem with banning ANYTHING that extends the cape is that you slightly extend the cape duration when touching the ground (which is how IDC and EDC work, you quickly touch the ground, hover slightly above the ground be pressing up, and then go back to the ground quickly to extend the cape further and repeat the cycle). This means that if anyone uses it in the air and aims it into the ground and touches the ground before DC ends, that technically the duration of DC HAS been extended.

 

[Cirno]

Well, being that the entire problem with IDC and EDC are that they have potential for infinite stalling, would an unnoticeable extension be a problem?

 

[DMG]

What defines "an unnoticeable extension"? Not just that, but how far can they take that extension before they "cross the line"? 1 extension, 2, 4, 6, etc?

(To clarify for some of you, IDC and EDC involve multiple quick extensions of the cape, so it would take multiple extensions to get across a stage instead of just one smooth motion).

 

[Cirno]

Unnoticeable.

Even without the sound of the c stick or the analog going crazy to extend the cape, you can generally tell when it is being extended since it's normal animation isn't very long.


If it reaches a point in your brain where you think that it's unnatural for your opponent playing MK to stay invisible/invulnerable that long, wouldn't it be obvious for most people that the cape is being extended?


Although in all truth, seeing the cape go anywhere on stage but up, makes me think "Here comes the IDC." Since it's such a high risk-low reward move.


And as far as how far they can take it, they shouldn't be purposefully extending it anyway since EDC is rightfully banned under IDC means. There's only so much accidental extension one can do with the cape.

 

[DMG]

What I am asking is would you honestly be able to tell the difference between 2 extensions and... 4 or 6?

Not only that, but what would be the guideline number of "accidental" extensions allowed (per DC initiation)? Just 1, maybe 2 to give a more lenient room, or 3 or possibly more because it's not a big deal at that low of a number?