The entire point of a tournament ruleset is to make it so the most skilled players win and do so based on how much more skilled than their opponents they are. It is not "remove all random events", which is what you're defending it as.
Properly set up items don't actually interfere with this goal, with ISP results as proof -- this is what you have to disprove.
What I read here is "random events are automatically bad and must be minimized." Which is a completely unsupported claim.
Summary: The burden of proof to show that items are bad is to show that items (Properly set up) make it so that player skill no longer has as much impact on the results. Use ISP run tournament results as evidence that items are not bad, if you want something concrete to start against.
There's several things I see wrong here that have been repeated numerous times, so I'm just going to mention it and leave it at that, since I think this thread has reached it's potential for discussion.
1. Removing random elements does ensure more solidly that the more skilled player will win. This is pretty basic, and most of the arguments against this haven't been to the contrary of "random elements don't effect the games outcome", it's been "random elements don't effect the games outcome
that much, and
the items themselves add depth to the game while resolving present problems." That is not good enough. To add to that, the perceived depth added by items has not only been challenged by me and others in this thread appropriately, there is no specific evidence that's been posted by you or anyone else to support the contrary outside of broad statements, and not in game examples, scenarios, or tournament footages. You lack counterargument.
2. Random elements in the context of Smash
that can not be reasonably accounted for but can otherwise be removed through the in game options should be minimized. The claim is not unsupported, as plenty of arguments to the contrary have been given.
3. The burden of proof
does not fall on us. lol You need to understand this. A precedent has been set, and has been for a long, long time now. Items have been turned off in nearly every large scale tournament to date. You and a small minority are trying to convince this majority of your opinion. Whenever you try to change the perception of peoples beliefs, particularly when it is based on long time experience, facts, and evidence that can be accounted for, the onus is on you to convince the mass majority of your opinion. The current paradigm of Smash was established before you, and numerically you are overruled.
This is no different than in any other facet of society. If the population of the earth still believed the planet was flat today, and I knew otherwise, regardless of how stupid everyone else may be, it's still my responsibility to prove otherwise. That's the only way change will take hold.
You need any references, I suggest you reread the posts in the thread carefully.
Just to start, I wasn't saying that items WOULD do that, just to clarify. But the idea that there is more to this world then us, and only thinking about ourselves when creating a ruleset sets us up to being closed to only ourselves, which is general is a bad idea. Many reasons people don't have that majority of people wanting certain things they ask for in arguments, is because those people would never come near things we run. We alienate them and sometimes 100% outright ignore or belittle people, so obviously we're not going to see many differing opinions, the people here the longest generally try to get rid of the people with them be it consciously or subconsciously.
I don't think that the rules are put in place to just make us happy and **** the rest of the playerbase, casual and all. It's to facilitate what is both fair and enjoyable in competition on all levels of play for anyone who wants to compete with anyone who enjoys Smash. It's also to preserve the integrity of the game. You can't please everyone all the time, and that's the price that comes with decisions. But some decisions will alienate specific groups that don't agree with your decisions, while others will ruin the experience in the long term for the vast majority and nobody wins. It's precisely why game developers like those at Riot don't patch every single little thing that's complained about by the community in League of Legends.
)
![[Corn]](/data/avatars/l/219/219175.jpg?1363907352){kind=avatar}
