Infinite Dimensional Cape unban proposal

[metaXzero]

If you don't know what IDC is
http://www.smashboards.com/showthread.php?t=182532

I posted this in the original IDC thread, but no one will truly give a good argument against it (as if saying my proposal can't be argued against). So I make a new thread.

If IDC is used in a match, the MK forfeits the ability to win by time running out.

This takes care of the main reason it was banned (inability to tell stalling from simply using it). It has yet to be proven as broken in other uses, so please don't argue that.

Basically people, tell me what is wrong with this proposal (if anything).

MODS. if you are going to close this, at least tell me whats wrong with my proposal (instead of closing my thread silently like my Tactical Discussion one). And don't just say "its unfair" like Buzz told me.

 

[Skyflyer]

lol.

10lols

 

[metaXzero]

...............-__-

Is their anyone who can debate in the MK boards now?

 

[magikguy]

people only use it to stall , but imo it's pretty hard to keep it up for 8 minutes

 

[metaXzero]

people only use it to stall , but imo it's pretty hard to keep it up for 8 minutes

Guy who discovered wasn't it using it to stall. And people continue to say "its the perfect approach" (despite lack of proof IN PRACTICE). And it can get you out of a bad scenario (if that even happens in Brawl lol).

Also, no one would stall with it for 8 minutes straight. They would use it in moderation.

 

[Maniclysane]

If Metaknight is the best character in the game, why does he need an invincible AT? Theres nothing you can do while he's invisible.

The real question is, what weakness does IDC have?

 

[metaXzero]

If Metaknight is the best character in the game, why does he need an invincible AT? Theres nothing you can do while he's invisible.

The real question is, what weakness does IDC have?

Without the ability to stall, using IDC for attacking puts you into a risky waiting game (miss and you are left open to punishment). And with my proposal, you can't risk dragging out the match with IDC.

 

[Blackbelt]

Putting conditions on things is just a bad idea all around.


It should be an all or nothing basis.

 

[metaXzero]

Putting conditions on things is just a bad idea all around.


It should be an all or nothing basis.

Banning things when their is a viable alternate to it is a bad idea. Banning is for when their is NO OTHER SOLUTION for it.

Plus, stalling is never good for the metagame.

 

[ShenCS]

They should just put a time limit of about 4 seconds on it...

 

[metaXzero]

They should just put a time limit of about 4 seconds on it...

That would require constant monitoring of matches with MK and everyone having stopwatches. That's unreasonable.

 

[Blackbelt]

Banning things when their is a viable alternate to it is a bad idea. Banning is for when their is NO OTHER SOLUTION for it.

Plus, stalling is never good for the metagame.

But is the alternative you're suggesting truly viable?

 

[J4pu]

I came in here with the intentions of flaming but after reading your posts I still would rather it just be banned, but at least you are using reason to argue your point. What about this scenario though:
MK uses the normal cape at some point during the match, then decides some time later on to plank so the clock runs out. the opponent will claim that he used IDC for a very short amount of time and therefore lost the match when the clock ran out.

as you can see this scenario also would require attendants to be present and keeping a close eye on the MK player's controller so that it can be truly determined whether or not it was used.

 

[K 2]

It's a good idea in theory, but as J4pu said, a short IDC is hard to tell from a regular cape.

You have a good argument with a (almost) valid solution for unbanning, but does the already super good MK need an invincible/invisible approach? If MK was allowed to IDC (lets say as an approach against a projectile user), it would give pro-MK banners one more reason to ban MK. Currently, Falco can hang with an MK with his CG and his laser. If MK was allowed to IDC, Falco would have no defence against MK, compared to a non IDC approach, where MK would have to approach while dodging lasers, which might leave MK vulnerable to grabs for follow ups. Projectiles are used to control your opponents movements, and its one of the few advantages certain characters have over MK. If you take that away, MK will definitely be unstoppable.

 

[metaXzero]

But is the alternative you're suggesting truly viable?

All you need to know about a match that ends via time running out is "Was IDC used". Thats actually possible to know unlike "was IDC used over so-and-so amount of seconds"?

I came in here with the intentions of flaming but after reading your posts I still would rather it just be banned, but at least you are using reason to argue your point. What about this scenario though:
MK uses the normal cape at some point during the match, then decides some time later on to plank so the clock runs out. the opponent will claim that he used IDC for a very short amount of time and therefore lost the match when the clock ran out.

as you can see this scenario also would require attendants to be present and keeping a close eye on the MK player's controller so that it can be truly determined whether or not it was used.

Dimensional Cape is pretty useless without infiniting it lol.

Anyway, shouldn't it be obvious when some one is using IDC (extended time in DC, noise of hitting C-Stick repeatedly, DCing when on the stage)?


@K2: Using IDC like that will just put MK and Falco into a waiting game until MK comes out (either to attack if ever Falco leaves himself open or to prevent dragging out the match).

 

[Blackbelt]

All you need to know about a match that ends via time running out is "Was IDC used". Thats actually possible to know unlike "was IDC used over so-and-so amount of seconds"?

But the moment a single IDC is used, it will encourage the other player to stall out the match anyway they can, which gives an unfair advantage to the opponent.



And as powerful as MK is, I don't think such a disadvantage is warranted.


Also, what about if two MKs face eachother, both IDC, and it ends by time running out?

 

[¯\_S.(ツ).L.I.D._/¯]

This is an unfair tech! think about this situation:

I'm fighting as Marth vs. MK. I hit MK with a Fair away from me. We are at 1 stock left each, but he has slightly less damage, but both of us are in the mid 100s. The match is close and there are 45 seconds left. he starts IDC. Under the current ruleset approved by the SBR, the winner of a match in which time runs out is first determined by stock, then by percentage. MK has less percent than me, so he'd win. Is this fair? No, of course not! It's like infinite ledge stalling with Sheik in Melee after throwing one needle! That was banned (or soft-banned, I forgot), so why shouldn't this be?

 

[metaXzero]

But the moment a single IDC is used, it will encourage the other player to stall out the match anyway they can, which gives an unfair advantage to the opponent.



And as powerful as MK is, I don't think such a disadvantage is warranted.


Also, what about if two MKs face eachother, both IDC, and it ends by time running out?

No one else has an IDC-esque tech nor the perfect stall maneuver. And MK is basically an anti-camp character. If you can actually stall out a good MK, well.........GG.

And if 2 MKs IDC and the match time runs out, its treated the same as when 2 MKs DON'T IDC lol.

This is an unfair tech! think about this situation:

I'm fighting as Marth vs. MK. I hit MK with a Fair away from me. We are at 1 stock left each, but he has slightly less damage, but both of us are in the mid 100s. The match is close and there are 45 seconds left. he starts IDC. Under the current ruleset approved by the SBR, the winner of a match in which time runs out is first determined by stock, then by percentage. MK has less percent than me, so he'd win. Is this fair? No, of course not! It's like infinite ledge stalling with Sheik in Melee after throwing one needle! That was banned (or soft-banned, I forgot), so why shouldn't this be?

READ THE MUTHA******* OP BEFORE YOU MUTHA******* POST!

-__________-

 

[Blackbelt]

No one else has an IDC-esque tech nor the perfect stall maneuver. And MK is basically an anti-camp character. If you can actually stall out a good MK, well.........GG.

I never said it was easy, but it is possible, and it would encourage stalling.


And anything that encourages stalling is a bad idea in my book.

 

[metaXzero]

Stupid Smashboards. Database error crap. Grrr!.....

I never said it was easy, but it is possible, and it would encourage stalling.


And anything that encourages stalling is a bad idea in my book.

Like I said, if you can actually stall out a good MK in a match, GG. I honestly can't see stalling out MKs after they IDC being an effective practice.

 

[Maniclysane]

Without the ability to stall, using IDC for attacking puts you into a risky waiting game (miss and you are left open to punishment). And with my proposal, you can't risk dragging out the match with IDC.

So, it's only weakness is the users fault? If you practice and get good with it, you won't mess up. When you don't mess up, you're invincible.

 

[metaXzero]

So, it's only weakness is the users fault? If you practice and get good with it, you won't mess up. When you don't mess up, you're invincible.

You are waiting for your opponent to leave themselves open. That's ALL you can do. If your opponent is good, you will be waiting for a while. And you can't afford to drag out the match with this.

And again, being "the perfect approach" wasn't why it was banned in the first place.

 

[Affinity]

@metaXzero: Why do want the IDC unbanned so badly? I don't understand.

 

[Maniclysane]

You are waiting for your opponent to leave themselves open. That's ALL you can do. If your opponent is good, you will be waiting for a while. And you can't afford to drag out the match with this.

And again, being "the perfect approach" wasn't why it was banned in the first place.

Why? Why would you even use the move in the first place? All this idea does is let people do IDC johns when they never IDC'd in the first place.

 

[metaXzero]

@metaXzero: Why do want the IDC unbanned so badly? I don't understand.

Bans should be when their is NO alternative to whatever is considered for ban. I've made a legitimate proposal to unban it. -_-

I just don't like how SBR handled the IDC issue. If their were results proving it broken all around, I'd be satisfied.

Why? Why would you even use the move in the first place? All this idea does is let people do IDC johns when they never IDC'd in the first place.

You are saying it is hard to know if IDC was used in a match? Explain...

 

[The Real Inferno]

There is a massive misconception that the IDC was banned because of Stalling when the actual reason given was that the IDC doesn't just stall, it can be used to essentially reset the match. IS Meta Knight getting zoned by that pesky Marth? No problem, he just need to IDC and Marth is forced to go to the other side of the stage and reset to neutral so Meta will "uncloak". No character should have the ability to get himself out of any situation and reset the match. It's just silly and broken at the same time.

 

[metaXzero]

There is a massive misconception that the IDC was banned because of Stalling when the actual reason given was that the IDC doesn't just stall, it can be used to essentially reset the match. IS Meta Knight getting zoned by that pesky Marth? No problem, he just need to IDC and Marth is forced to go to the other side of the stage and reset to neutral so Meta will "uncloak". No character should have the ability to get himself out of any situation and reset the match. It's just silly and broken at the same time.

Quotes or it didn't happen. Because when I was in the ruleset thread few months backs, it was said to be banned for being
1. A perfect stall
2. Inability to tell stalling from simply using it.

 

[Affinity]

Quotes or it didn't happen. Because when I was in the ruleset thread few months backs, it was said to be banned for being
1. A perfect stall
2. Inability to tell stalling from simply using it.

InfernoRage is right; the SBR took the rule page down but they explained all of that in the original topic.

 

[metaXzero]

InfernoRage is right; the SBR took the rule page down but they explained all of that in the original topic.

Again, plz bring a quote or something. Because I saw an explanation of it being an unbeatable stall.

BRB, Code Geass is on now.

 

[Deoxys]

There is a massive misconception that the IDC was banned because of Stalling when the actual reason given was that the IDC doesn't just stall, it can be used to essentially reset the match. IS Meta Knight getting zoned by that pesky Marth? No problem, he just need to IDC and Marth is forced to go to the other side of the stage and reset to neutral so Meta will "uncloak". No character should have the ability to get himself out of any situation and reset the match. It's just silly and broken at the same time.

This is why it should be banned. If Captain Falcon had the Dimensional Cape instead, it would be a different story.

 

[metaXzero]

This is why it should be banned. If Captain Falcon had the Dimensional Cape instead, it would be a different story.

If IDC alone is truly broken even without stalling, then NO character should be able to use it. That includes Falcon.

 

[Affinity]

If IDC alone is truly broken even without stalling, then NO character should be able to use it. That includes Falcon.

Exactly. Leave it banned.

/thread

 

[metaXzero]

Exactly. Leave it banned.

/thread

I didn't say it had been proven as truly broken. It HASN'T been proven as truly broken -_-

 

[Blackbelt]

I didn't say it had been proven as truly broken. It HASN'T been proven as truly broken -_-

Than why is it banned?



PARADOX!


Seriously though, IDC is fully deserving of its ban.


It has too many entirely safe Offensive and Defensive applications.

 

[metaXzero]

Than why is it banned?



PARADOX!


Seriously though, IDC is fully deserving of its ban.


It has too many entirely safe Offensive and Defensive applications.

I posted it in this thread (inability to tell stalling from simply using it).

It was deserving of its ban when their was no way to tell stalling from simply using it. With my proposal, you CAN'T stall with this (and win). If it is broken in all other uses, it should be proven in PRACTICE.

 

[The Real Inferno]

If Captain Falcon had IDC every character could just Jab in place and outprioritize him when he reappears anyway.

 

[Blackbelt]

I posted it in this thread (inability to tell stalling from simply using it).

It was deserving of its ban when their was no way to tell stalling from simply using it. With my proposal, you CAN'T stall with this (and win). If it is broken in all other uses, it should be proven in PRACTICE.

Once again, I bring up the fact that it encourages the other player to stall, and you still haven't answered my "IDC MK vs IDC MK" matchup yet.


And while I don't have any videos of the sort, I have seen what a proper IDC is capable of.



MK can, quite literally, go untouched. He can IDC in, get some hits, then IDC away once the opponent gets a chance to counter attack.

 

[metaXzero]

If Captain Falcon had IDC every character could just Jab in place and outprioritize him when he reappears anyway.

Hitbox appears before MK does (in this case Falcon) and jabs don't cover your entire body...

 

[The Real Inferno]

Hitbox appears before MK does (in this case Falcon) and jabs don't cover your entire body...

...your detection of humor astounds me.

 

[metaXzero]

Can't edit quotes in. DP

Once again, I bring up the fact that it encourages the other player to stall, and you still haven't answered my "IDC MK vs IDC MK" matchup yet.


And while I don't have any videos of the sort, I have seen what a proper IDC is capable of.



MK can, quite literally, go untouched. He can IDC in, get some hits, then IDC away once the opponent gets a chance to counter attack.

AGAIN:
1. if you can stall out a MK, the anti-camp character with a near-godly approach with or without IDC, GG.
2. And I said 2 MKs using IDC is treated as if the 2 DIDN'T IDC (percentage lol).

InfernoRage1:..........my humor senses are numb I guess?