Infinites and MU deciding loops - Taking a leaf out of the FGC's book.

[John12346]

Now you're just making arbitrary distinctions. Yes one is stalling and isn't, but that doesn't change the fact that it's on similar level of brokenness. Stalling and infiniting to a KO are just different means to the same end, which is a broken method of play.

And don't respond by telling me that IDC is more broken than standing infinites. Firstly, IDC only works if you already in a lead. Standing infinites work even when you're behind. Regardless of which one is technically worse, it doesn't matter because both break match ups anyway.

The criteria at which you are allowed to start it in order to win does not really count as reasoning for anything, you should know that.

The problem with stalling, which constitutes IDC, continuing infinites past 300%, and to an arguable extent, MK-only planking is that all three cause the game to "end," for a lack of a better term. Once it starts, it's theoretically game over without any external causes.

Infinite grabs to 300- to a kill throw is, as I just said, a really, REALLY gay 0 death, but it is inherent in our gameplay and it's something we have to embrace, as much as we all may hate it(I do >__>). And... if you're serious about this whole infinites must be banned thing, then what of the ICs? Don't tell me that it's fine to keep theirs legal because it's harder to do. Skill barriers should not denote what does and doesn't stay legal...

 

[C.J.]

For what it's worth, if DDD has his dthrow infinite on the entire cast, and consequently beat them all +3/+4, I wouldn't be for banning his infinites. I'd prefer to ban him.

 

[Grim Tuesday]

Now you're just making arbitrary distinctions. Yes one is stalling and isn't, but that doesn't change the fact that it's on similar level of brokenness. Stalling and infiniting to a KO are just different means to the same end, which is a broken method of play.

And don't respond by telling me that IDC is more broken than standing infinites. Firstly, IDC only works if you already in a lead. Standing infinites work even when you're behind. Regardless of which one is technically worse, it doesn't matter because both break match ups anyway.

Oh my god you cannot seriously be this dumb

You heard it here folks, immortalized in print; Dre believes that infinite chain-grabs are more broken than IDC.

Wow.

 

[Flayl]

An infinite-throw on the whole cast might be considered more broken than IDC. IDC requires the MK to have a lead to win and it's easy to avoid being hit by the DC itself, Throw-infinites work no matter what % anybody is at and can be used to stall without the 300% or whatever rule.

But it doesn't matter because nobody infinite-throws the whole cast

 

[Grim Tuesday]

Like you said, no one infinites the whole cast. He was talking about infinites in general, I believe.

 

[Skadorski]

An infinite-throw on the whole cast might be considered more broken than IDC. IDC requires the MK to have a lead to win and it's easy to avoid being hit by the DC itself, Throw-infinites work no matter what % anybody is at and can be used to stall without the 300% or whatever rule.

But it doesn't matter because nobody infinite-throws the whole cast

Like you said, no one infinites the whole cast. He was talking about infinites in general, I believe.

Ice climbers...
Pretty sure someone said them already in this thread.
Unless you're being very literal on "the whole cast" because the only character they can't infinite is themselves.

 

[Grim Tuesday]

I was more talking about normal characters who don't need to meet requirements other than "get a grab" just to do said infinite.

 

[Dre89]

Oh my god you cannot seriously be this dumb

You heard it here folks, immortalized in print; Dre believes that infinite chain-grabs are more broken than IDC.

Wow.

Ok I see you're one of those people who insult those who disagree with them so I'll word this politely-

D3's standing infinite is as broken as IDC. I didn't say every infinite is broken, just that one. If that one is legal because it only affects a couple of characters then IDC could be legal on a couple of chars.

Or you ban standing infinites as well, because they break those MUs as much as IDC breaks MUs.

The counterpicking argument doesn't work because I could say to counter pick MK against unrestricted MK or IDC MK. IDC ditto is technically fair because you both have a fair shot at getting the leas first.

 

[Grim Tuesday]

No, I'm one of those people who insults people who say stupid things. Insulting you matters as much to me as insulting a holocaust denier.

DDD's infinites are not as broken as IDC.

The infinite works on very few good characters (most of the ones he can infinite are invalidated by the traits of other good characters anyway, such as MK's tornado), requires landing a grab with a bad character and only takes a single stock. Not to mention how many legal (albeit counterpick) stages make the CG even less effective.

IDC guarantees that Meta Knight will never lose. If he wants to, he can use it as soon as the game starts and at that point there is no way he can lose if he doesn't want to. Not only this, but if he manages to get the lead even once in the match (which is soooo hard with the best character in the game), then he has a guaranteed victory.

IDC doesn't just break match-ups, it breaks the entire game. If IDC was legal we might as well be flipping a coin to determine results.

 

[Dr. R.O.Botnik]

>implying MK needs IDC to never lose.

 

[Grim Tuesday]

Actually, I wasn't implying that.

 

[Dre89]

Grim- You have me on the same level as holocaust deniers?

You must be very passionate about video games.

Also, saying 'I only insult people who say stupid things' is what every person who insults those who disagree with them says. No one actually says 'I insult everyone who disagrees with me'.

Everyone sees things they perceive to be stupid, they difference is they have the maturity to be curteous. It's not as if you find things more stupid than anyone else.

So you're saying D3's standing infinite doesn't break those MUs? I find that hard to believe seeing as they're -4s, and they're not -4s with out it.

You mention being able to cp chars or stages. Again, by the same logic you could have IDC legal on a couple of chars or stages, and then cp to stages or chars that it's not legal on.

 

[#HBC | Joker]

But you're talking about making a broken tactic legal in certain situations in a very VERY arbitrary fashion. It's easy to decide who D3 can infinite, because it's either possible or not possible. The game decides that for us. If IDC was actually only possible on certain stages or in certain MUs, you might have a case. But that isn't the case at all, so adding artificial criteria for when it's legal and when it isn't would have no rhyme or reason to it. It'd just be really really dumb.

 

[~ Gheb ~]

Dre, just put Grim on your ignore list lmao. The sooner people start the sooner he'll just stfu

 

[Grim Tuesday]

Grim- You have me on the same level as holocaust deniers?

You must be very passionate about video games.

Nope, I have a line and I put both you and holocaust deniers past that line.

Also, saying 'I only insult people who say stupid things' is what every person who insults those who disagree with them says. No one actually says 'I insult everyone who disagrees with me'.

Everyone sees things they perceive to be stupid, they difference is they have the maturity to be curteous. It's not as if you find things more stupid than anyone else.

Sorry.

So you're saying D3's standing infinite doesn't break those MUs? I find that hard to believe seeing as they're -4s, and they're not -4s with out it.

Nope, I'm not saying that.

You mention being able to cp chars or stages. Again, by the same logic you could have IDC legal on a couple of chars or stages, and then cp to stages or chars that it's not legal on.

IDC is broken on every stage in every match-up, though. Just because you might have to stop every now and then on stages like Rainbow Cruise doesn't make the tactic suddenly ok, its weaker for sure; but still balls to the wall broken.

Gheb is cute because he doesn't realize I'm only on the ignore list of like... 3 people.

 

[Neon!]

...He'd move up 1, maybe 2 spots?...

That's not really worth pointing out... lol

My argument that DK would be near the top of mid tier without chain grabs isnt so meaningless now is it?

 

[Dre89]

Joker- The competitive ruleset is also arbitrary. You can't use that argument when everything is arbitrary in competitive brawl.

Grim- That post made no sense. If you limit IDC to only a couple of chars or stages then it can be CPd to something where it's not legal.

Chars who get standing infinited basically have to verse an IDC.

 

[Grim Tuesday]

I see what you are getting at now.

The reason IDC is worse than infinites is because IDC works on every character on every stage. If DDD could infinite every character I'd support an infinite ban. If IDC only worked on a few characters I wouldn't support an IDC ban.

Why? Character/stage selection is a skill. If you picked a character who gets infinite'd and you get infinite'd, you can't blame anyone but yourself when you had the option to avoid it.

No one complains about Ike's forward smash, because you can just play smarter and you won't get hit by it.

 

[Dre89]

Ike's fsmash isn't comparable. The ease of use, the influence on the MU ratio and the risk/reward ratio aren't in the same galaxy.

But I don't see why an MU has to be completely ruined when the community arbitrarily alters other things. It's not as if it's difficult to define either. It just doesn't seem consistent with things like stage banning, char banning, item banning, LGL etc.

 

[Grim Tuesday]

The Ike thing was just hyperbole for the sake of it. You still got the point so it doesn't really matter.

A lot of those things I don't support, so you can argue them to someone else. I agree that with a LGL, there should be an infinite ban.

But hey, can we have a tilt limit for Snake while we are at it? My main gets bodied by his utilt.

Ooooh, I'd also like it if ZSS' had to stop her jab after two hits, its not fair that Puff is one of the only characters it works on.

 

[Claire Diviner]

IDC is banned because it breaks gameplay completely. It can't be counterpicked, it can't be combated, it's easily the perfect defense tool. Meta Knight could inflict 1% damage on the opponent and IDC until the timer runs out and get a win that way. It's far worse than planking, and far worse than any infinite anyone has.

At least Dedede's standing infinite can be counterpicked simply by choosing a character he cannot infinite. My goodness, I can't believe there's a heated debate over something so miniscule.

 

[infiniteV115]

IDC is worse than infinites because only 1 player is necessary to do it. With things like ICs'/DDD's standing infinites, you have to hope that the opponent 'screws up' (eg gets grabbed). So you need both the opponent to make a mistake/do something unsafe AND you need the ICs/DDD to properly capitalize. With IDC, after MK has the lead and is on a stage with flat terrain (pretty easy to get one of these what with everyone pushing for the japanese ruleset) the opponent might as well not even exist.

And it's not like this 100% invincible stalling can only be used by a character like Zelda or Ganondorf, but it's on MK, the one character who people think is banworthy even without it. A character that can string attacks together easily, punish almost everything, is very hard to punish, and the character that can edgeguard better than any other while in turn being very difficult to edgeguard is going to have next to no trouble getting a lead.

MK's IDC is worse than any currently existing infinite. A hypothetical IDC like Zelda's? Maybe not.

 

[Grim Tuesday]

Zelda can IDC?

 

[Verde Coeden Scalesworth]

If you're suggesting we'd only bad IDC if it was used by an already OP/Broken character, you're wrong.

It had nothing to do with the character. It's the fact that it could do nothing but stall. You only need to gain a momentary lead and just spam it. Hell, it's something that Ganondorf could have, or Marth, etc.

But there's nothing like IDC as is. Either way, even if you already pretty much lost, spamming it to time out is still annoying since it quite literally wastes everyone's time, and unlike Infinites, doesn't even END the game or contribute towards it. Planking atleast helps end the game, even if it may be like stalling, although it's closer to camping, really. But hey, you're doing damage, right?

To put it bluntly, if it stalls for time and doesn't do any damage whatsoever, it had no purpose but stalling and can't even be justified for, you know, trying to win the match by using it.

So yes, I'd ban it regardless of what character had it.

 

[The Ben]

Trying to win by timing out is trying to win though, just unconventionally.

 

[Verde Coeden Scalesworth]

Trying to win by timing out is trying to win though, just unconventionally.

As long as you're actually fighting for it and not stalling for time.

The point is that there needs to be interaction, otherwise it's just stalling.

If you're able to win by timing out while still fighting, no problem to me. But if it's just stalling, well, it should be neutered/banned.

Stalling is the problem, not timing out. Stalling to gain a time out is not really just using it for a time out as is. It's just stalling and stops being a game that both players play. That's why IDC is completely banned. Because your opponent has ZERO chance to come back.

You can come back even against Infinites. You can't against IDC, which is why one is an indefinite problem and the other is questionable.

 

[Supermodel From Paris]

Any other southerners read FGC as "Florida Gulf Coast?"

 

[C.J.]

not really. Although I always read IDC (referring to cape) as I don't care.

 

[Kink-Link5]

Trying to win by timing out is trying to win though, just unconventionally.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WAJUelWRWBs

Legit.

 

[PMC66]

Pikachu's down throw isnt an infinite neither is Shiek's F-tilt loop

 

[Bobwithlobsters]

Is this argument about all infinites or only specific infinites and if only specific infinites what is the difference in ok infinites vs bad infinites? what I'm hearing is that ddd's infinites are not ok because they beak matchups but I'm not hearing about ice climbers chain grab being bad for wrecking matchups. It bothers me that ddd destroying dk is bad because of chain grabs but that it is fine that ice climbers destroy ddd for the same reason...

 

[Verde Coeden Scalesworth]

From the looks of it, I think they mean "Only match up infinites".

Which I just can't be behind. All infinites, perhaps... but specific ones? Nah. I don't want to read a giant rulebook to know who I can't use it against.

 

[TheReflexWonder]

If we don't arbitrarily prevent infinites and locks that affect the game in a much larger way (universal infinites, as there are many more situations where it can happen), limiting infinites/locks on certain characters amounts to special treatment and favoritism. That's not something we should condone in our rulesets.

 

[Supreme Dirt]

ftr (I literally made this thread and left it lol), I support the limiting of all infinites and locks in the game.

 

[The Ben]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WAJUelWRWBs

Legit.

Nobody took that game seriously. SxT is garbage, but it has no baggage and Capcom actively supports it. As far as the community is concerned that is unironically legit.

 

[Bobwithlobsters]

ftr (I literally made this thread and left it lol), I support the limiting of all infinites and locks in the game.

So you would support the limitation of ice climbers then? And if so how would you surgically limit them without destroying their core game play structure?

 

[Kink-Link5]

Ice Climbers are pretty good even if they just do that blizzard wall **** honestly.


But then I'm in favour of not removing any tactic besides IDC.

 

[PMC66]

I think DDD should do a run for every character he plays, simply because his standing grab is to me an act of stalling and even though there are percentage caps on it it still eats alot of time on the clock if the grab is early on because of how low his damage out put is when standing grabbing. That and it just makes some matches look completely and utterly boring, IC's have a smaller grab range and require timing for each characters. Chain grabbing with Ice climbers takes skill, infinite grabbing with DDD doesn't to the same degree it's just standing still pressing the R button over and over again. I know it's only for a small percent of matchups but i'm in favor of keeping DDD's chain grab as just a run on every character. It's not like it deteriorates his meta game, because lets be honest without his chain grab he isn't that good of a character anyway.

 

[Napos]

Infinites are not a problem. They are sexy as hell, learn them in you main the character that has one. Avoid them if your brawling against one. Play Brawl!

 

[xDD-Master]

Everything that a player can theoretically avoid shouldnt be banned.
That is the fact for every Infinite brawl has.

You cant avoid IDC though as you dont have the control over getting IDC'd or not.
You can dodge grab / infinite / lock set ups though, therefore they shouldnt be banned and are part of the game, just like normal chaingrabs / combos.
And IDC should be banned.

/thread