infinites and stalling tactics - tournament legal?

[I.T.P]

seeing all the extremely slow damaging infinites in the game(Ice block lock, laser lock, chaingrabs, shine spam) I couldn't help but wondering, would a tactic that slowly but inescapably hurts an opponent and is infinite be considered a stalling tactic?

what I mean is, picture the next scenario:

the game still has 2:30 minutes to go, and it's a Falco vs snake match, they're both at 2 stock, and snake gets caught in a laser lock, the laser lock takes 2 minutes to kill snake, resulting in only 30 seconds to try and even the score, falco starts running all over the field, and wins.


or take a diffrent possibility, a DDD is playing one of the characters that can be infinitely chain grabbed, and is at a %tage loss but on the same stock(could even be the first stock) and starts infinitely chaingrabbing until time is up.

so the bottom line is, how do you draw the line between a normal tactic and one that takes too long?

 

[Froth]

They're all just tactics, either way. So, why are you worried about how long they take?

 

[I.T.P]

They're all just tactics, either way. So, why are you worried about how long they take?

aren't you that casual elitist that said all stages should be legal?

anyway, SSBM had specific tactics that were banned as "stalling", like infinitely peach bombing a wall. but SSBM also had no infinites aside from wobbling which was impossible to keep up infinitely, now that you have much much simpler infinites, that can be used for stalling, where do you draw the line between a legitimate use of the tactic and stalling using it?

 

[Froth]

Well, I mean they put them in the game. If they didn't want people to use them, why put them in the game? And, yes, I did say all stages should be legal.

So, stalling is illegal? Like, you can't just run around the level and dodge? But, usually tournaments are stock and not time. Maybe in your case.

 

[S2]

They're all just tactics, either way. So, why are you worried about how long they take?

Because in tournaments you need to finish matches relatively quickly because tournaments take a long time to do.


That being said, I don't like this stuff. We'll see eventually what the tournament standard is though. If its getting exploited a ton and matches are taking too long that they are vastly extending tournament length... there might at least be house rules against certain things.

 

[Taymond]

They're all just tactics, either way. So, why are you worried about how long they take?

Because tournament matches impose a time limit as well as a stock limit, so that matches do not continue for too long. The player in the lead when the time runs out wins, just the same as if their opponent had lost all stocks.

Through the use of stalling techniques, you could gain a slight lead and simply stall a whole match away if you wanted, and such techniques are more prevalent in Brawl than in Melee. Such a victory would be undeserved, and so steps were taken to ban techniques that were used purely to stall a match indefinitely, like infinite Peach wall-bombing.

Edit:
Brawl has many more potential stalling techniques than Melee did, and so with regard to certain techniques, its harder to distinguish between the use of such potential stallers simply to rack up damage versus intentional stalling. This ambiguity makes this a subject worth consideration.

 

[whisperingtears]

Tactics like chain grabs and laser locks would be used normaly to rack up damage, if some one tries to stall with them i just say dont play with them.

 

[Froth]

I see. I didn't know tournaments used time as well. I just saw that most of them are usually always stock.

 

[I.T.P]

Tactics like chain grabs and laser locks would be used normaly to rack up damage, if some one tries to stall with them i just say dont play with them.

you don't realy get to pick your opponents at a tourney now do you?

and how do you stop a player from playing to win? my question is how can you tell the diffrence between unsportive stalling, and simply racking up damage for a kill. would racking up damage for a kill in a tactic that takes so long it causes matches to allways end prematurely be banned?

this should make for some interesting discussion, and that's why I'm raising this.

Vgamerjoe, I highly doubt that the developers put in stuff like laser lock and infinite chain grab on purpose, most likely they where unaware of them, so that nulls your argument.

and tournaments are allways stock with a time limit, it doesn't matter if they're in Israel, the US or Japan.

 

[Froth]

I was talking about the infinite A attack. Well, all the one's I've been too haven't ever had a time limit. So, I don't know who was in charge of the tournament. They didn't use time limit, though.

 

[I.T.P]

I was talking about the infinite A attack. Well, all the one's I've been too haven't ever had a time limit. So, I don't know who was in charge of the tournament. They didn't use time limit, though.

Infinite A attacks aren't really infinites except specific ones and only if there's a wall, and those don't bother me as much because they work up damage way faster than some of the infinite tactics out there, so its pretty clear if a guy is stalling or not.

 

[Froth]

But, about chain grabbing. It was in melee. They could've taken in out if they wanted. So, as I said, if they didn't want it in the game, they could've taken in out. They worked extra months to make the game even better and all these things are in there.

 

[Rapid_Assassin]

Certain things, such as a Jigglypuff hitting his opponent once and stalling under the stage should be illegal. Other than that, tactics should never make the game unfinishable in any way, or prevents normal play. For example, if a glitch was found that would make your opponent freeze in place, and the only way to end the game was to restart the wii, it should be illegal. Also, any glitch that would prevent your opponent from seeing his character on the screen or yours, or prevent normal view of the stage that you are on... Other than that, let them be legal, and we'll see in a tournament if it warrants banning.

 

[ChRed2AKrisp]

Well, I mean they put them in the game. If they didn't want people to use them, why put them in the game? And, yes, I did say all stages should be legal.

So, stalling is illegal? Like, you can't just run around the level and dodge? But, usually tournaments are stock and not time. Maybe in your case.

I see. I didn't know tournaments used time as well. I just saw that most of them are usually always stock.

But, about chain grabbing. It was in melee. They could've taken in out if they wanted. So, as I said, if they didn't want it in the game, they could've taken in out. They worked extra months to make the game even better and all these things are in there.

 

[Rebel581]

Well, I mean they put them in the game. If they didn't want people to use them, why put them in the game? And, yes, I did say all stages should be legal.

So, stalling is illegal? Like, you can't just run around the level and dodge? But, usually tournaments are stock and not time. Maybe in your case.

I see. I didn't know tournaments used time as well. I just saw that most of them are usually always stock.

But, about chain grabbing. It was in melee. They could've taken in out if they wanted. So, as I said, if they didn't want it in the game, they could've taken in out. They worked extra months to make the game even better and all these things are in there.

 

[Froth]

Ironic. Far from "WRONNNGG!!!"

 

[I.T.P]

But, about chain grabbing. It was in melee. They could've taken in out if they wanted. So, as I said, if they didn't want it in the game, they could've taken in out. They worked extra months to make the game even better and all these things are in there.

Chain grabbing is not something that is easy to remove, in order to avoid chain grabbing, you'd have to extensively test each and every grab in the game, and see that the lag for the grabbing and the grabbed character, and the hitbox data works in a way that makes a chain impossible:

since there are 4 grabs per character, and 39 characters, that makes for 156 diffrent grabs to test, now multiply that by the amount of characters to test on, that means times another 39. and you'll get 6084 times a tester is supposed to sit and perform these tests, now if you take DI into consideration, and let's say that DI is digital, meaning it only has 8 possible directions(even though this is not true) then you get 6084 times 8.

all this just to test that no grab in the game can be used as a chain grab, do you really expect them to do that?

there is no excuse for using set knockback grabs that throw you pretty near, if it took Ikki 5 minutes to find DDD's chaingrab, the devs could've found it as well and removed it, this is what you call undertesting

other than all that, thoroughly testing a game like SSB is very very complex, there're bound to be undertested areas, and chaingrabbing is obviously one of them.

 

[Froth]

since there are 4 grabs per character, and 39 characters, that makes for 156 diffrent grabs to test, now multiply that by the amount of characters to test on, that means times another 39. and you'll get 6084 times a tester is supposed to sit and perform these tests, now if you take DI into consideration, and let's say that DI is digital, meaning it only has 8 possible directions(even though this is not true) then you get 6084 times 8.

Why did you multiply the amount of characters twice? And, when has there been 39 characters?

 

[I.T.P]

Why did you multiply the amount of characters twice? And, when has there been 39 characters?

for the purpose of this test, zelda,shiek,samus,zamus,charizard,squirtle and Ivysaur each have 4 grabs, so that makes 39 characters total.

now you have to test each of the 4 grabs, for each of the 39 characters, on each of the 39 characters, with every possible DI(that means 8 if you count it as digital, or 360 if you count it as analog)

so 4*39*39*360 = 2,190,240 diffrent tests to run, MANUALLY. just to make sure there are no chain grabs in the game.

 

[GamerGuitarist7]

VGamerJoe is the dumbest person I have seen on these boards yet. Some of these 2008 members need to mature a little bit. I had my account for 6 months before I started posting a lot, so I got used to the logic used on here.

Now, on topic, the techniques should only be banned in the case that they are solely being used for stalling. As you know, in melee, they banned wobbling if it went on for more than a few seconds in some tournaments, and Jigg's rising pound if it was visually and obviously used for stalling. If Dedede counterpicks corneria and chaingrabs someone on the fin against the wall (if it even works, I dunno cause i don't play dedede.) then there may need to be a limit or a percentage that they must stop. If they chaingrab to 300%, it's obvoiusly stalling since a bthrow would KO on that stage well under 200 since the killzone on the side is small. Laser lock should not be banned on flat stages since it's simply a punishment for a missed tech and the opponent falls out of it at the edge of the stage, but against a wall there should be some sort of limit placed to prevent stlaling but allow damage racking.

off topic again, ITP, thanks for being awesome and giving us info from japan and ikki, i like reading your posts about his discoveries

 

[ChRed2AKrisp]

Well, I mean they put them in the game. If they didn't want people to use them, why put them in the game? And, yes, I did say all stages should be legal.

So, stalling is illegal? Like, you can't just run around the level and dodge? But, usually tournaments are stock and not time. Maybe in your case.

I see. I didn't know tournaments used time as well. I just saw that most of them are usually always stock.

But, about chain grabbing. It was in melee. They could've taken in out if they wanted. So, as I said, if they didn't want it in the game, they could've taken in out. They worked extra months to make the game even better and all these things are in there.

Ironic. Far from "WRONNNGG!!!"

 

[Rebel581]

Well, I mean they put them in the game. If they didn't want people to use them, why put them in the game? And, yes, I did say all stages should be legal.

So, stalling is illegal? Like, you can't just run around the level and dodge? But, usually tournaments are stock and not time. Maybe in your case.

I see. I didn't know tournaments used time as well. I just saw that most of them are usually always stock.

But, about chain grabbing. It was in melee. They could've taken in out if they wanted. So, as I said, if they didn't want it in the game, they could've taken in out. They worked extra months to make the game even better and all these things are in there.

Ironic. Far from "WRONNNGG!!!"

 

[I.T.P]

VGamerJoe is the dumbest person I have seen on these boards yet. This is why I hate all these 2008 members, especially the March ones.

Now, on topic, the techniques should only be banned in the case that they are solely being used for stalling. As you know, in melee, they banned wobbling if it went on for more than a few seconds in some tournaments, and Jigg's rising pound if it was visually and obviously used for stalling. If Dedede counterpicks corneria and chaingrabs someone on the fin against the wall (if it even works, I dunno cause i don't play dedede.) then there may need to be a limit or a percentage that they must stop. If they chaingrab to 300%, it's obvoiusly stalling since a bthrow would KO on that stage well under 200 since the killzone on the side is small. Laser lock should not be banned on flat stages since it's simply a punishment for a missed tech and the opponent falls out of it at the edge of the stage, but against a wall there should be some sort of limit placed to prevent stlaling but allow damage racking.

off topic again, ITP, thanks for being awesome and giving us info from japan and ikki, i like reading your posts about his discoveries

Thanks for the complements guitarist, I'm allways glad to see I'm appriciated, it's too bad Ikki hasn't gone online much lately, I wanted to have a long chat with him as to the Japanese tier list...

though you need to tone down your anger, not everyone who joined 2008 or march 2008 is dumb, some people aren't adjusted to the competetive logic, and have a hard time understanding it or relating to it, dissing them or trolling them isn't going to do anyone any sort of good.

and the rest of you guys, lay off the 4chan stuff, serioiusly, you're turning a discussion thread into a noobfest.

 

[himynameisruss]

VGamerJoe is the dumbest person I have seen on these boards yet. This is why I hate all these 2008 members, especially the March ones.

quoted for undeniable truth

 

[FalconPunch]

C-C-C-C-Combo Breaker!!!!
Edit: 2 sloh

 

[GamerGuitarist7]

Thanks ITP, i fixed my post a little bit to make it sound less angry about 2008 members, but still, that dude needs to get his stuff straight before arguing with someone who's been around on here a lot longer than he has.

 

[I.T.P]

Thanks ITP, i fixed my post a little bit to make it sound less angry about 2008 members, but still, that dude needs to get his stuff straight before arguing with someone who's been around on here a lot longer than he has.

I agree, but other than stating facts that are either off or based on deficient logic, he hasn't actually done anything wrong, unlike all the spammers on this thread...

what do you guys say about the Ice Lock BTW? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-nvR9x8tm-I , it's an infinite that does 1% and takes a long time to work, isn't that going to stall matches a lot?

 

[Froth]

Just because I registered in 2008 doesn't mean I haven't been here longer than that. You can look at the boards without any registration.

 

[shadydentist]

Infinites are typically not banned.

Stalling is severely frowned upon.

 

[Witchking_of_Angmar]

Infinites are typically not banned.

Stalling is severely frowned upon.

Stalling is typically banned, not just frowned upon.

 

[Twin Dreams]

Don't know if this was covered, though I read the first page.



I'll give a quote from Sirlin. http://www.sirlin.net/ptw/intermediates-guide/what-should-be-banned/




If you don't want the read the article, basically, Sirlin breaks down a ban into three criteria needed in order to ban something. I'll discuss infinite chain grabbing and infinite stalling.



1. Chain Grabbing

Discrete

The thing to be banned must be able to be “completely defined.” Imagine that in a fighting game, repeating a certain sequence of five moves over and over is the best tactic in the game. Further suppose that doing so is “taboo” and that players want to ban it. There is no concrete definition of exactly what must be banned. Can players do three repetitions of the five moves? What about two reps? What about one? What about repeating the first four moves and omitting the fifth? Is that okay? The game becomes a test of who is willing to play as closely as possible to the “taboo tactic” without breaking the (arbitrary) letter of the law defining the tactic.

With this quote from the article...

How many times can you grab before it's banned? Two? Three? What if someone loses count and grabs too many times? Do you ban grabs all together? Do you ban characters with inifinite Grabs?

It is my opinion that Infinite Grabs be allowed as long as it takes at least some skill to use them. As long as there is any chance of the opponent breaking out (via mind game or skill), they should be allowed in the game. A character that can chain throw to 999% with no chance of the opponent ever getting out should be banned for the purpose of tournaments. This will mean that a character cannot DI off the stage while being chain grabbed. (Since DIing off the edge would affectly end the chain grab.)

For characters that can chain grab but have a low chance of getting out, they are legal. It is up to the player to apply his knowledge and metagame when picking his next character in the next match. Perhaps you could pick a character that can infinitely throw him? Perhaps you can use one to make Chain Throwing harder? Tournaments don't only challenge technical skill. Tournaments are a challenge of skill, knowledge, strategy, and predictability.


Infinite Stalling:

Enforceable

Sometimes, a tactic can be hard to detect. If you can’t reliably detect something, you certainly can’t enforce penalties on it. In a fighting game, a trick might make a move invulnerable that shouldn’t be, but actually detecting every time the trick is used might be nearly impossible. Or consider a real-time strategy game, where a trick might give your units a few more hit points than normal, but again, detecting this might be nearly impossible in a real game. If something is to be banned from tournament play, it must be reasonably easy to identify when it happens or to prevent it from ever happening at all.

This one is easy. It's banned. It is easy to tell when someone is infinite stalling. Since it is clearly definable, appropriate action can take place. (Usually immediate forfeit of the match or the round.)

 

[Corigames]

Stalling results in both characters doing nothing. Aside from that, there isn't much to say about that. If you stun lock someone, that's fine. It's like wobbling, which was legal at every tourny I went to.

As for infinites, I would say only some. If it is a freeze glitch where the other person can walk away for a while, come back, and then resume what they did without you being able to do anything since then, then I would have a problem with it. I would also have a problem with a move that can hit from anywhere on the screen, like a glitch that made you grab anywhere which could lead to infinites (just an example). Something inescapeable, even if the other person is doing nothing, is not legal in my moral code.

 

[I.T.P]

Infinite Stalling:




This one is easy. It's banned. It is easy to tell when someone is infinite stalling. Since it is clearly definable, appropriate action can take place. (Usually immediate forfeit of the match or the round.)

but here's the problem, what if using an infinite combo tactic that requires skill and cannot be broken out of takes so much time, that games allways end before time because of it? what if the technique is purposely overused as a stalling technique? because you're actually hitting your opponent, but this has no way to be broken out of, should it still be legal?

that's the whole point of this topic.

 

[Twin Dreams]

If it's an infinite combo that cannot be broken out of then that would be similar to my post on Chain Grabbing, and I'm going to have to say that...



1. The tactic is definable.

The tactic is banned.

2. The tactic is not definable, and a few characters have it.

The characters are banned.

3. The tactic is not definable, and all characters have it.

The game cannot progress further into "high level" tournaments. Since every match would be a game to get into the infinite stall.



This is of course, assuming that there is NO WAY to get out.

 

[I.T.P]

If it's an infinite combo that cannot be broken out of then that would be similar to my post on Chain Grabbing, and I'm going to have to say that...



1. The tactic is definable.

The tactic is banned.

2. The tactic is not definable, and a few characters have it.

The characters are banned.

3. The tactic is not definable, and all characters have it.

The game cannot progress further into "high level" tournaments. Since every match would be a game to get into the infinite stall.



This is of course, assuming that there is NO WAY to get out.

the tactic is definable and character specific(only for ICs, but on all characters, or only for falco, but on all characters) but how do you define between legitimate use of the tactic, and overuse of it for stalling purposes? that's my question

 

[Twin Dreams]

the tactic is definable and character specific(only for ICs, but on all characters, or only for falco, but on all characters) but how do you define between legitimate use of the tactic, and overuse of it for stalling purposes? that's my question

Ok, no mater what it is or who the character...


If there was a SURE FIRE infinity combo that when perfected allowed an infinite stall. Then, I would expect every smart tournament goer to have this in their arsenal. Why would anyone do anything else EXCEPT this sure fire infinite combo stall? This would lead to the three things I mentioned in the last post.


The tactic is banned if definable.


The characters are banned if undefinable.


The game does not progress very well in tournament levels.



This, of course, is assuming that it is game breaking. Which, unless I am misunderstanding you, sounds like it is.

 

[kackamee]

Well some chain grabs arent that bad. I think they should have a limit to how many times it can go on. Because no ones chaingrab is SO slow that it will take up most of a match. Stuff like the laser lock/ IC block lock might but you should really only use it to rack up enough damage for a 1-hit kill which might take about 30sec-1min tops. and there are usually aboout 8min per 3-4 stock so that leaves plenty of time

EDIT: oh and when I draw the line is if it takes more than a 1min 30sec
EDIT2: Oh and if your so worried about it, know your opponent and don't get grabbed

 

[TechnoMonster]

To settle this, using time is a "legit" (although homosexual) way to win a match, however, using any tactic that makes it impossible for an opponent to hit you without putting them at a ridiculous disadvantage, and that impedes reasonable gameplay, should be banned.

Infinites like Wall Grab and Shine Wall Infinite: There's a clear distinction between using it to stall a timed match, and using it to build damage and KO. These are distinctly banned in almost every tournament.

Basic chain grabs like Falco and Pika's D-throw; These are always escapable after a fixed period of time, and therefore not banable. Basically it's just a long combo.

If someone executes an inescapable combo that will last the remainder of the match to win by time, but this combo would normally be escapable, this is totally "legit," and that someone might just like dudes.

 

[Witchking_of_Angmar]

@Twin Dreams: Why are you so keen to ban characters if the tactic can't be defined? Banning characters should only occur if pretty much their every move is broken and they are undefeatable. Not because of a silly infinite.

 

[theONEjanitor]

@ itp
its not likely that someone uses an offensive manuever to stall the game. its not really smart or effective.
and at any rate, i don't think its possible in Brawl...and i think you can smash di out of the laser lock, but even if you can't you'll hit a wall and tech, die, or hit and edge before long.

as mentioned above, if such a broken tech existed, it would either be banned (ice climbers freeze glitch e.g) or the character that could use it would be banned (akuma in super turbo e.g) or no one would take the game seriously as competitively viable (umm x-men: next generation? lol)