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

[Kink-Link5]

If you are fighting Dedede with any of the bad characters he infinites you probably deserve to be stalled against.

Play Brawl!

Hahaha, this guy.


We don't play Brawl here.

 

[Dre89]

Master- IDC stalling is only good if you have the lead, and the opponent can technically avoid losing a lead.

And the 'if you play a char that can get infinited by D3 against D3 then you deserve to get stalled' is stupid because if it was banned it wouldn't be a stupid idea in the first place.

 

[xDD-Master]

Master- IDC stalling is only good if you have the lead, and the opponent can technically avoid losing a lead.

That doesnt change anything.
IDC makes this game unplayable and you cant do anything about it.
DDD doesnt make this game unplayable (Some may disagree), but even if it would, you can do something about it.
It would make this game kinda unplayable if there wouldnt be that 300% rule. But there is.

 

[#HBC | Joker]

Umm, infinites can only win 1 stock at a time, so you gotta land it 3 times. IDC wins you the game by doing it once. Clearly that **** is way worse, I'm just saying.

 

[Strong Badam]

I just like how IDC was banned before anyone even used it. Literally the only time I've seen it used in tournament was when M2K was in 1v2 at APEX against the Japanese team that won (Otori & Nietono? Kakera?) and it was only for a few repetitions. Plenty of things in this game that would be quite problematic if used to their full extent, but it's largely irrelevant if it can't actually be done consistently enough by people to even matter, so a rule against it is a bit silly. Super Theory Bros. all you want though, Smashboards.

 

[Dre89]

That doesnt change anything.
IDC makes this game unplayable and you cant do anything about it.
DDD doesnt make this game unplayable (Some may disagree), but even if it would, you can do something about it.
It would make this game kinda unplayable if there wouldnt be that 300% rule. But there is.

It only makes the game 'unplayable' if you lose the lead.

You seem to think that because D3's infinite isn't as broken as IDC, then that somehow means it's not broken.

The cut-off point for what we consider banworthy is arbitrary. People are delluding themselves if they think they non-arbitrarily banned IDC and kept standing infinites legal.

 

[TheReflexWonder]

It only makes the game 'unplayable' if you lose the lead.

You seem to think that because D3's infinite isn't as broken as IDC, then that somehow means it's not broken.

The cut-off point for what we consider banworthy is arbitrary. People are delluding themselves if they think they non-arbitrarily banned IDC and kept standing infinites legal.

What counts as a standing infinite, in that case? Do we just decide that characters can't do repetitions of certain moves (ZSS D-Smash -> footstool infinite on R.O.B., for instance)? Do we take away the Ice Climbers' ability to chaingrab entirely? Do we ban Jab locks for being potentially infinite (Squirtle can cross up with his and make it last forever, and I totally try to do it when I can)?

What do you feel is the problem with standing infinites? Too much damage for one move? Changes matchups too heavily? A lack of necessary effort/skill? A need to add more information to the stalling rule?

 

[xDD-Master]

It only makes the game 'unplayable' if you lose the lead.

It makes the game unplayable as you cant do anything about getting IDC'd.

 

[Kink-Link5]

Give DeDeDe a grab hitbox that covers the whole stage and his D-throw is comparable to IDC.

 

[Life]

Give Ganondorf a side-B grab box that covers the whole stage and Flame Choke is comparable to IDC. What's the point?

 

[salaboB]

Give DeDeDe a grab hitbox that covers the whole stage and his D-throw is comparable to IDC.

And teleports DeDeDe next to his target whether it hits or not.

But I still don't see the point of the comparison

 

[Verde Coeden Scalesworth]

Want to know what's comparable to IDC?

Being Wario Man, Super Sonic, or a Landmaster. No, wait, bad comparison. Atleast they END the game and not stall it. And they don't last forever.

There is no actual comparison to that broken technique. Also, for people using it as an excuse to ban MK, or even to say "if somebody else had it...", you only need to ban the technique. That's it. It's beyond easy to ban and follow as is. Even more specifically, banning it does nothing bad for the game at all.

Banning Infinites, since Combos are pretty much non-existent... as anything usable, is not such an easy thing. For starters, not every character is affected equally like with IDC.(all the more reason the comparison is borked) Another is that not every character has it.

However, it could be maybe fine if they were gone. I mean, different meta and all. It's a legitimate idea. As long as it's not a "You can't infinite this guy", it's not an issue.

 

[1048576]

So how many d-throw regrabs does D3 get? And what happens when a competitive player pushes the rule to its limit and accidentally does one more. Or what happens if he throws another attack in there, like a jab? What if it whiffs? What if he just stays still long enough to give them a few frames to jump out (against a wall)? IDC is easy to ban. No c-stick down during dimensional cape. Infinites are not so easy.

 

[TheReflexWonder]

So how many d-throw regrabs does D3 get? And what happens when a competitive player pushes the rule to its limit and accidentally does one more. Or what happens if he throws another attack in there, like a jab? What if it whiffs? What if he just stays still long enough to give them a few frames to jump out (against a wall)? IDC is easy to ban. No c-stick down during dimensional cape. Infinites are not so easy.

If you really wanted to, it wouldn't be -that- hard to enforce (especially with infinite replays, which is a standard at AL tournaments). Something like "Dedede must use a dash between grabs, or he forfeits a stock; failure to do so results in an automatic loss of the set." Accidentally do one more, and you lose. That's what I'd do if I saw M2K use IDC at a tournament I was running.

Jabs can be SDI'd and therefore shouldn't be an issue. In the event of giving people a few frames to jump out of an infinite, leaving it to a TO's discretion is okay as long as you're not an *******, in which case, people will be itching to use a technicality against you.

I disagree with the banning of any infinite, but, I don't think it's as difficult to enforce these rules reliably as you make it sound.

 

[The Ben]

That's what I'd do if I saw M2K use IDC at a tournament I was running.

It's good to know this is about player bias and has nothing to do with making the game better.

 

[TheReflexWonder]

It's good to know this is about player bias and has nothing to do with making the game better.

The point of that is that people often let top-level players get away with rule-breaking, simply because it can be ambiguous or seem more like "rule-bending" than rule-breaking. I use M2K as an example because he is the poster-child for top-level Meta Knight. I'd switch it with "a Meta Knight player" if I didn't think the point deserved to be made. It shouldn't matter how good or respected, or well-liked a player might be--Rule-breaking is rule-breaking.