In Melee, I've played Peach vs Marth before. At a certain point it's not even funny calling that anything except a terrible matchup. The same can be said of Sheik vs approximately a quarter of the cast, since she can just chaingrab them from 0 to 80% or so, finish with a fair, and edgeguard because she happens to be one of the best characters at edgeguarding in the game.
Besides, this is Brawl. If you can't pick up more than one character you seriously need to refamiliarize yourself with your controller. And the matchup against someone counterpicking Dedede solely for the chaingrabs is definitely not "on a whole different level." I'd only be afraid of people who legitimately know how to use Dedede instead of just going for the "easy" matchup.
Peach vs Marth wasn't = to ddd vs any of those 5. It was a bad matchup, but Marth had no 0 to death combos guaranteed from the first hit. And the only infinite in melee was wobbling, Shiek's opponent could still DI and try to throw her off. These are aspects of the ddd matchup that're similar, but not equal in degree to the ddd infinites or the difficulty of those matchups.
And of course there's always counterpicking. The fact is that these 5 now won't win tournaments because they have their ultimate counterpicks. Everytime you select any of those 5 against a smart player, they're always counterpick ddd because of how easy it'd be to score a win. And if this were Melee, I'd agree that playing someone going for the easy win wouldn't be a problem because someone solely going for grabs to get your stock are predictable and can be severely punished.
This isn't the case in Brawl.
Punishment is no where near as heavy as it was in Melee. If someone wants to rely on grabs to win a match, they can. The risks are much less than the rewards.
Exactly. In SF it WAS use Akuma or lose. Since it's NOT use DDD or lose there won't be a ban.
The intent of the posts that you're responding to are examples of how the rules for banning were inconsistent, not for why ddd should be banned. I don't think ddd should be banned, I think that the infinite should be banned because it creates that kind of "Pick X or lose" game for mains of those 5. None of them can win a tournament because of the infinite.
I counter this statement with Fox and Falco vs Marth in Melee. If Marth did his job he could chain grab the spacies to a high enough percent and land a tippered fsmash. This caused a huge upset within the melee community, and a lot of people hated it; however, the fox/falco vs Marth matchup wasn't even close to being unwinnable by the spacies.
Indeed, but this was a very different matchup. DI is still a factor during Marth's CG, and the spacing has to be perfect for a tipper. The reflex, precision, and practice required to pull this off consistently against a good fox or falco was much more difficult than the ddd infinites. The fact is that this was just another con of the matchup for the spacies, but it wasn't a deciding factor of the match. A grab in that matchupd didn't mean the same as a grab in the ddd matchup.
I know its been said that difficulty is inconsequential (I don't know if you share this standpoint), but I believe it is. If the techniques in Perfect Control were as easy to perform as a shorthop, Melee's metagame would be completely different. Different things would be banned, other things wouldn't be, matchups would be different, different stages would be counterpicked, etc. The beauty of competitive gaming, sports, or anything competitive is that skill and practice is rewarded. If someone could perform ICs' infinite on me, I'd commend them for even catching me and maintaining the grab long enough to kill me. ddd's infinite takes no where near as much practice and dedication to learn.
Fox and Falco had much more to work with than the 5 vs ddd. There's no strategy that goes along with "don't get grabbed". As I said, I have no problem with the IC infinite because there are plenty of viable strategies around it. There's no such thing for this matchup.
I do concede to the fact that the 5 characters affected by the standing infinite aren't as good as D3 in most aspects, so that makes it really rough; although, I could see Samus being able to put up a very very good anti grab game.
One last point to make; three of these 5 characters aren't very good. I know that sounds lame, but survival of the fittest. If a good character makes 3 bad characters near unplayable and makes it hard for 2 good characters, then it's not like it wrecks the meta game. Keep in mind, we aren't trying to balance this game for all characters to be playable, as it's impossible for us to do that with tournament rules.
True, 3 of them haven't shown much promise in the competitive scene, and balancing this game with tournament rules aren't the goal, but also keep in mind that the infinite removes them from tournament play altogether. These 5 can't win tournaments like Jiggs or ICs could in melee, even though they're at about the same areas on the tier list. These 5 have ultimate counterpicks. It's either ban the infinite, or ban the 5 characters for tournament play. And if we were to keep the infinite, then we will be banning it either way because how often will they use it in tournament play? They'd eventually never come up against those 5 either way because it'd be stupid to main them with any hopes of winning a tournament.
If you want to play the 5 characters listed, just have a top character as a backup and counter pick with one of the 5, that way you ensure to not be lamed out be D3.
There's no point. Why use those 5 when you have a matchup like ddd? My backup would have a much better chance of winning.
Awful matchups exist in other games as well. If you are Zangeif and they are Guile, unless you are 2x as good as them in the matchup you will never get in. Screw having a chance at avoiding a grab so that you dont lose 1!!stock(1/3rd of your life) you will NEVER EVER get in. You wont hit them, you will never have a chance if they know what they are doing! Zangeif players beat guile players all the time though because they work harder to perfecting their gameplan in the matchup. And even if they plan so hard if someone playing guile planned almost as hard they will still lose. Awful matchups exist in all competitive fighting games, thats why there are other character you can pick in the beginning of the round.
SF =/= SSBB. Bad matchups are such for different reasons in each game because they're completely different games. The only reason SF was ever brought up in this thread was because of the similarities in reasons for banning. And sure, competitive games have bad matchups, but look at ddd vs any of the 5 without the infinite. It's no where near as one-sided. That one technique is what makes them so terrible that it's nearly impossible to win. Bad matchups in any other competitive game are such because of a variety of reasons, be it speed, comboability, weaker attacks, etc.
One difference people need to look at is the things that are banned (stages and Items at times) are customizable options built into the game. When you try banning a character or tech you are admitting your game is bad and should probably be playing something else.
If DDD could grab DK and get rid of ALL of his stocks it still shouldnt be banned. Thats the way it is, you play to win so don't play DK if you are uncomfortable vs DDD or ICs.
So when they tried to ban Akuma in Japan they were "admitting that their game is bad and should probably be playing something else"?
If ddd could get rid of all of DK's stocks with 1 grab, the tech would most definitely be banned. Discrete, enforceable, and certainly warranted. The idea that I'm trying to get everyone to see is that it may not be the characters that are bad, but the tech.
