iRJi's Tournament Ruleset (Complete)

[Supermodel From Paris]

To continue, would any of the other nj community like to comment?

I usually go to NJ tourneys, I live in NYC.

lol idiot. its usually the people that dont get anything done in this game who talk like this. figures.

Hey, how about arguing against my point instead of insulting me? Thanks. This sort of thing makes YOU look bad, not me.

 

[_Yes!_]

RJ do you want to bring up my question or should I?

 

[iRJi]

I usually go to NJ tourneys, I live in NYC.

never said that you did not attend them, I just asked does anyone else from the NJ community wanted to add their input.

Hey, how about arguing against my point instead of insulting me? Thanks.

To save time, he does not need to. I said this prior, this is not a debate, a wish, a termination, even an elimination of MK. I please urge you, do NOT bring MK debate comments in this thread about banning him. It is not going to happen, and to properly validate as to why it is not going to is also not necessary. We are not here to eliminate characters from the rules, we are here to talk about the actual rule list it's self "IE: LGL, Stages" and things among those grounds. If you wish to talk about dismissing Metaknight from the game, please take it to either the Metaknight character boards, Tatical discussion, or a general chat thread.

@Yes: I have been actually testing it since last night, and I will talk to you about it soon. Don't bring it up yet plox =].

 

[Supermodel From Paris]

@RJ: That's cool, sorry for the derail.

 

[iRJi]

@RJ: That's cool, sorry for the derail.

No problem man =].

Also, I am still watching out for peoples opinions on what I outlined in the OP. any other thoughts?

 

[iRJi]

Wow, didn't mean to double post >_>

 

[Max Ketchum]

From what I see:

People who play non-MK characters that have strong edge games are arguing against LGLs for their characters (Chibo, Delta). Bias.

People who have had bad experiences with MK's time-out abilities are arguing for severe limits on planking/scrooging or a complete ban of the character (Inui). Bias.

I'm not biased towards MK's timeout garbage at all. I've only once ever abused it (I was misinformed about the legality of that stuff at the tournament) and only three tournament matches I've ever played have gone to time. I do main Meta Knight and have put significantly more work into him than any other character. I am also anti-ban. That aside, this is what I think should happen, take it as you will:

40, 50, 35, whatever--way too high of a LGL. M2K and ksizzle timed out Shadow and Dekar (respectively) with 12 grabs a piece. Yes! is right here, 20 is the absolute highest that should be considered. You can't grab the **** ledge 20 times unless you're TRYING to. This limits planking and also encourages MK to recover to the stage rather than the edge.

As for how it affects ROB, Pit, GW, Yoshi--well, I don't know what to say. Part of me wants to say that bad characters should stick to being bad. All of those characters are ****ed against MK (and other characters) whether they're on the edge or not, and camping there only prolongs the inevitable. Another part of me thinks that they could have an increased amount of grabs (20 for MK, 40 for others), but that only limits one character in particular.

That situation is kind of a mess. Regardless, MK's planking needs to go, and there is actually evidence behind this. The best compromise I can think of is a universal LGL, but a stricter one on MK (though we already know the logical fallacy with this). It's clear that other characters can abuse the ledge as well, whereas some won't even have to worry about grabbing it 10 times in a set.

People are worrying WAY too much about scrooging. First of all, it's impossible to enforce in a written ruleset, lol. Like someone mentioned, you can just briefly land on the stage with one of MK's awesome recovery or edge options and fly under again to kill some time. Second of all, it...really isn't broken. The only stage I see it being an extreme problem on is Smashville due to the floating platform. Flying under the stage once only burns about 2-5 seconds. Calm the **** down, ****.

Third, it doesn't even have results backing its supposed brokenness up. What notable matches have actually been won due to scrooging? We have M2K vs. Gnes and what else, maybe a match of Orion vs. Inui? It hasn't proven itself to be a problem at this point. Characters can also still hit MK while he glides underneath the stage anyway. Falco can run off and laser, Pit can shoot arrows, Snake can throw grenades, ROB can laser him, etc. If your character can't hit him, well, that just means that MK is capable of avoiding your character's moves.

Until scrooging proves to be a legitimate issue and has the results backing it up, I disagree with making it a concern. For now, calling a judge over and leaving it to his/her discretion is the best solution.

Atlantic North stagelist is fine, perhaps remove Rainbow Cruise to avoid MK putting his opponents in an auto-loss situation every time he counterpicks. I don't mind the idea of Pictochat in theory, but I hate the stage itself. This game really did not make great stages. Perhaps adding Pictochat and increasing stage bans to two?

 

[Orion*]

I usually go to NJ tourneys, I live in NYC.

Hey, how about arguing against my point instead of insulting me? Thanks. This sort of thing makes YOU look bad, not me.

you dont go to NJ tournies. and if you do you dont say or talk to ANYONE at them you just go lose and then come on SWF and QQ about mk

 

[iRJi]

Thanks for input, gunna comment now.

From what I see:

People who play non-MK characters that have strong edge games are arguing against LGLs for their characters (Chibo, Delta). Bias.

Agreed.

People who have had bad experiences with MK's time-out abilities are arguing for severe limits on planking/scrooging or a complete ban of the character (Inui). Bias.

Agreed, but not fully.

I'm not biased towards MK's timeout garbage at all. I've only once ever abused it (I was misinformed about the legality of that stuff at the tournament) and only three tournament matches I've ever played have gone to time. I do main Meta Knight and have put significantly more work into him than any other character. I am also anti-ban. That aside, this is what I think should happen, take it as you will:

40, 50, 35, whatever--way too high of a LGL. M2K and ksizzle timed out Shadow and Dekar (respectively) with 12 grabs a piece. Yes! is right here, 20 is the absolute highest that should be considered. You can't grab the **** ledge 20 times unless you're TRYING to. This limits planking and also encourages MK to recover to the stage rather than the edge.

Valid. I would like to inform that I am aware of that. However, when a character is not attempting to plank, it becomes a lot easier to deal damage to the opponent. I have stated before that I have tested this with a few people, and have came to a 30 ledge limit, but I personally like 35. By using this, You can use the ledge as a strategy, and at the same time it disables you to properly abuse it. 30 is the lowest I would ever go for an LGL.

As for how it affects ROB, Pit, GW, Yoshi--well, I don't know what to say. Part of me wants to say that bad characters should stick to being bad. All of those characters are ****ed against MK (and other characters) whether they're on the edge or not, and camping there only prolongs the inevitable. Another part of me thinks that they could have an increased amount of grabs (20 for MK, 40 for others), but that only limits one character in particular.

That situation is kind of a mess. Regardless, MK's planking needs to go, and there is actually evidence behind this. The best compromise I can think of is a universal LGL, but a stricter one on MK (though we already know the logical fallacy with this). It's clear that other characters can abuse the ledge as well, whereas some won't even have to worry about grabbing it 10 times in a set.

Personally, i feel that dividing MK from the community with a special set of rules is not the best thing to do. If we have to do that, then it defeats the purpose of even having the character because he preforms beyond the limitations that everyone else needs to abide by. Since we are not trying to ban MK in any sort of way, I feel a universal LGL would be the best option.

People are worrying WAY too much about scrooging. First of all, it's impossible to enforce in a written ruleset, lol. Like someone mentioned, you can just briefly land on the stage with one of MK's awesome recovery or edge options and fly under again to kill some time. Second of all, it...really isn't broken. The only stage I see it being an extreme problem on is Smashville due to the floating platform. Flying under the stage once only burns about 2-5 seconds. Calm the **** down, ****.

Third, it doesn't even have results backing its supposed brokenness up. What notable matches have actually been won due to scrooging? We have M2K vs. Gnes and what else, maybe a match of Orion vs. Inui? It hasn't proven itself to be a problem at this point. Characters can also still hit MK while he glides underneath the stage anyway. Falco can run off and laser, Pit can shoot arrows, Snake can throw grenades, ROB can laser him, etc. If your character can't hit him, well, that just means that MK is capable of avoiding your character's moves.

Until scrooging proves to be a legitimate issue and has the results backing it up, I disagree with making it a concern. For now, calling a judge over and leaving it to his/her discretion is the best solution.

To be honest, I think this isn't the way to go about it. Just because it has not presented a problem, does not mean it isn't a problem. MK can perfect plank someone with about 3 minutes + at the end of the match, and still not go over our current 50 LGL, yet no one has done it. We all know that MK planking on that term is unbeatable, but is not done commonly despite the fact it is unstoppable once started. To go about this, I already proposed that all we do is just land on the stage (Moving platforms IE: Smashville, does not count, and by doing that eliminates platform to platform scrooging) to be enforced. If the rule is broken, you can just make the first offense to call a TO, or a loss of the stock.

Atlantic North stagelist is fine, perhaps remove Rainbow Cruise to avoid MK putting his opponents in an auto-loss situation every time he counterpicks. I don't mind the idea of Pictochat in theory, but I hate the stage itself. This game really did not make great stages. Perhaps adding Pictochat and increasing stage bans to two?

Personally, I think it is ok, but added the 2 stages I suggested as starters would increase the effectiveness. I do want Rainbow cruise dismissed, and picto added, since there is really nothing that bad about picto.

I thank you for your input doom.

Anyone else? Kietaro, I am waiting for your response.

 

[Max Ketchum]

Valid. I would like to inform that I am aware of that. However, when a character is not attempting to plank, it becomes a lot easier to deal damage to the opponent. I have stated before that I have tested this with a few people, and have came to a 30 ledge limit, but I personally like 35. By using this, You can use the ledge as a strategy, and at the same time it disables you to properly abuse it. 30 is the lowest I would ever go for an LGL.

And what exactly is wrong with getting hit for trying to get off the ledge? Every other character suffers this disadvantage, MK having to choose that route to conserve edge grabs in the event of a timeout seems perfectly legitimate.

Personally, i feel that dividing MK from the community with a special set of rules is not the best thing to do. If we have to do that, then it defeats the purpose of even having the character because he preforms beyond the limitations that everyone else needs to abide by. Since we are not trying to ban MK in any sort of way, I feel a universal LGL would be the best option.

My post was in agreement to this.

To be honest, I think this isn't the way to go about it. Just because it has not presented a problem, does not mean it isn't a problem. MK can perfect plank someone with about 3 minutes + at the end of the match, and still not go over our current 50 LGL, yet no one has done it. We all know that MK planking on that term is unbeatable, but is not done commonly despite the fact it is unstoppable once started. To go about this, I already proposed that all we do is just land on the stage (Moving platforms IE: Smashville, does not count, and by doing that eliminates platform to platform scrooging) to be enforced. If the rule is broken, you can just make the first offense to call a TO, or a loss of the stock.

There hasn't been a specifically tailored rule against scrooging and it has not done anything yet. It should be left alone until there is a reason to change it. If it ain't broke, don't fix it.

Personally, I think it is ok, but added the 2 stages I suggested as starters would increase the effectiveness. I do want Rainbow cruise dismissed, and picto added, since there is really nothing that bad about picto.

Pictochat's hazards are absolutely ********. I don't care for more neutrals, I actually would be more in favor of three.



dmbrandon and Ninja Edd crafted an interesting idea for the ruleset. Rather than worry about such things as LGLs and scrooging, what about reworking the entire structure of the ruleset? 1 or 2 stocks, 3 or 5 minutes, only Battlefield/Smashville/FD legal. All sets become best of 5, finals upped to best of 7. If the timer runs, you have to be ahead by 10% or more to win. There would still be a LGL (probably something like 8-12). I'm not 100% sure on all the specifics.

 

[iRJi]

And what exactly is wrong with getting hit for trying to get off the ledge? Every other character suffers this disadvantage, MK having to choose that route to conserve edge grabs in the event of a timeout seems perfectly legitimate.

I think we are agreeing on this. What I meant by what I said is that by doing so, characters have to leave the ledge, therefore creating a bigger chance of them getting hit. This is a good thing lol.

There hasn't been a specifically tailored rule against scrooging and it has not done anything yet. It should be left alone until there is a reason to change it. If it ain't broke, don't fix it.

For the most part, people choose not to. Just because it's not being used, does not mean it is not a problem.

Pictochat's hazards are absolutely ********. I don't care for more neutrals, I actually would be more in favor of three.

That significantly limits the characters in the game. I never agreed to 9 when people suggested it because I feel it does the same as 5, or even 3. 7 seems to be the optimal choice. I did, and still testing this to this day, and have been doing it for quite a while. Pictochat is also a fine stage when you learn how to properly play on it.

dmbrandon and Ninja Edd crafted an interesting idea for the ruleset. Rather than worry about such things as LGLs and scrooging, what about reworking the entire structure of the ruleset? 1 or 2 stocks, 3 or 5 minutes, only Battlefield/Smashville/FD legal. All sets become best of 5, finals upped to best of 7. If the timer runs, you have to be ahead by 10% or more to win. There would still be a LGL (probably something like 8-12). I'm not 100% sure on all the specifics.

It's to short, to be honest. It limits any potential of a secure lead, or a significant come back. As for the stages, I also said above that it limits the characters in the game by a significant amount. Small steps before drastic ones always work better. My proposal is more relative to what we currently have, therefore the change to it won't be as hard to adapt to as implement this. The one you started also has not been tested, while I have been testing this for quite a while. I also have used many variations of tests and rules, and I have also tired a 3 stage selection, and it does not work well at all. I don't want to be close minded, as I am a very optimistic person. I just ask of you to do the same and look at benefits this can in-tale if you, and others, would try this ruleset for a bit.

 

[Turbo Ether]

dmbrandon and Ninja Edd crafted an interesting idea for the ruleset. Rather than worry about such things as LGLs and scrooging, what about reworking the entire structure of the ruleset? 1 or 2 stocks, 3 or 5 minutes, only Battlefield/Smashville/FD legal. All sets become best of 5, finals upped to best of 7. If the timer runs, you have to be ahead by 10% or more to win. There would still be a LGL (probably something like 8-12). I'm not 100% sure on all the specifics.

Yup. Brawl matches take too **** long. Other games finish winner's/loser's finals in about the time it takes to complete one Brawl game.

 

[_Yes!_]

As far as 2 stock best of 5's go. It didn't work out too well. We did it once at Rot8's rutgers weeklies. dm/edd should remember those.

 

[iRJi]

Yup. Brawl matches take too **** long. Other games finish winner's/loser's finals in about the time it takes to complete one Brawl game.

The thing is, as games go, it should never be comapred to any other fighting game. Brawl carries 100's of more variables then any standard fighting game, therefore, it will take longer for it to finish. This is normal, and fine for a game that is in it's own class.

Edit: What do you think about the rulseset I outlined?

 

[Max Ketchum]

RJ, I understand that you're trying to take a conservative approach to changing things here, but your ruleset is...hardly different at all. 35 LGs is still a large excess, just like 40 and 50 are. 7 neutrals will still result in the first stage coming down to Battlefield or Smashville every time. I really see no difference.

 

[Turbo Ether]

Brawl carries 100's of more variables then any standard fighting game, therefore, it will take longer for it to finish. This is normal, and fine for a game that is in it's own class.

If the game mechanics slow the game down, you simply adjust the duration of the games by adjusting the format. Just like back in Spring 2008 when it was decided that 3 stocks should be the standard, instead of the 4 that Melee uses.

Edit: What do you think about the rulseset I outlined?

I disagree with a Scrooging rule existing and I disagree with the banning of infinites. I'm not fond of LGL, but I can let that slide.

 

[iRJi]

RJ, I understand that you're trying to take a conservative approach to changing things here, but your ruleset is...hardly different at all. 35 LGs is still a large excess, just like 40 and 50 are. 7 neutrals will still result in the first stage coming down to Battlefield or Smashville every time. I really see no difference.

Not really true, actually.

Metaknight vs Lucario (1-2-2-1) striking

FD
Smashville
Lylat
YI
BF
Castle
PS1

MK strikes
FD

Lucario strikes
Smashville/BF

MK strikes

YI/Castle

Lucario strikes

Lylat

End: PS1

I used Lucario since this is what I would so, and I do play this character alot, but lets use another character with MK

MK vs Diddy

MK strikes
FD

Diddy strikes
YI, Castle

MK strikes
BF/ Smashville

Diddy strikes
Lylat

End: PS1

If you get rid of diddy's strongest stages, you will get him on ps1, which is ok for him, but better for Metaknight by a decent amount.

Snake vs MK

Snake strikes

Ps1

MK strikes
FD/Castle

Snake Strikes
YI/ BF

Mk strikes
Lylat,
End: Smashville

This is one of the cases where it might remain the same.

As you can see by the paper theory, if you pick the choices properly just by character, it can end up on different stages. I kinda did this for a lot of the characters just to see how it would ban out, but I can't find that **** txt file =/. This of course does not add in player preference on stages, so ya.

I also used metaknight since this has became the main issue apparently. But this is also for one character variable, and not the other 30+. I can tell you safely, that this varies a good amount to what stage ends up at the end. This is only just the bare surface of it.

 

[BleachigoZX]

So how long can MK stay under the stage before having to grab the ledge?

 

[Ninja Edd]

Put Smash Balls on and make it 7 minutes 4 stock, lets see people plank and scroog then.

Only problem would be the stickers and idk if you can change that.

 

[Max Ketchum]

Uh...I think a lot of your strike choices are kinda ludicrous. Why would Lucario be striking Smashville against MK? Why is MK striking Castle Siege or Yoshi's against Lucario? Why is MK striking Battlefield against Diddy?

I'd much rather get rid of PS1 against both of those characters.

Why is Snake getting rid of PS1 or MK getting rid of Castle Siege?

 

[iRJi]

From Yes!

(4:14:11 PM): Your hte snake
(4:14:12 PM): I am the MK
(4:14:18 PM): I will go first
(4:14:26 PM): its a 1-2-2-1 striking system
yes2good 4:14 pm
(4:14:30 PM): kk
RJ Rawrr 4:14 pm
(4:14:34 PM): So i will strike FD
yes2good 4:14 pm
(4:14:41 PM): lylat yoshies
RJ Rawrr 4:15 pm
(4:15:13 PM): Castle Smashville
yes2good 4:15 pm

(4:16:05 PM): i'd take it to ps1
(4:16:08 PM): i like more running room

 

[_Yes!_]

Doom, I clarified what Snake would do with RJ. He's fixing it now.

Doom, RJ beat me to it.

 

[Max Ketchum]

That's...basically what I just said. Why would Snake get rid of PS1? <_<

 

[iRJi]

Uh...I think a lot of your strike choices are kinda ludicrous. Why would Lucario be striking Smashville against MK? Why is MK striking Castle Siege or Yoshi's against Lucario? Why is MK striking Battlefield against Diddy?

I'd much rather get rid of PS1 against both of those characters.

Why is Snake getting rid of PS1 or MK getting rid of Castle Siege?

It varies.

YI is Lucarios best stage overall in the game. Also I CP MK on castle, and I have only lost once out of the 14+ times I have done it thus far. Also on PS1 it is easier to maintain metaknight in an area while not compromising the space you need between you and your opponent in the Matchup, the goal is the try to limit movement, while at the same time have breathing room to do what you need to do as him.

For diddy, PS1 is the better choice because of the amount of stage control diddy loses for a good portion of the time. I take this from wyatt, since we talked about how PS1 if it was a neutral would be the best choice against a diddy in this format.

For snake, it will vary as well. If snake has the lead on castle, outside the first part of the stage, snake can control the stage really, really well.

I also posted what YES! would do in that situation of striking.

Like I said, it will differ from player to player, as some players also have preferred stages they will want to play on over others because how they maintain the stage.

For example, I don't use YI at all because no matter what character I play on it I do bad. I can't properly utilize the stage to its full potential, no matter what situation i am in.

 

[_Yes!_]

Max I said I'd take it TO ps1.

 

[Max Ketchum]

I know, Yes!. RJ said he would strike PS1 first as Snake, which makes limited amounts of sense to me.

I really don't feel as if Lucario is better than MK on Yoshi's. With a platform that covers 80% of the stage, MK can REALLY give Lucario a hard time with up airs and tornado. Barring the second transformation of Castle Siege (which is easily air camped), I think MK wins pretty solidly there, ESPECIALLY on the first part.

MK ***** Snake on the first transformation and can get stupid tornado juggles and Shuttle Loop kills on the second one. Third is difficult but REALLY bad for Snake if he gets hit offstage.

As far as Diddy and PS1 go, I dunno, I hate that ****. Diddy can set up some sick walls there and has gay wall infinite stuff, but he does suffer on most of the transformations. I'd still rather go Battlefield.

 

[iRJi]

I know, Yes!. RJ said he would strike PS1 first as Snake, which makes limited amounts of sense to me.

I really don't feel as if Lucario is better than MK on Yoshi's. With a platform that covers 80% of the stage, MK can REALLY give Lucario a hard time with up airs and tornado. Barring the second transformation of Castle Siege (which is easily air camped), I think MK wins pretty solidly there, ESPECIALLY on the first part.

Sorry to say, but Lucario isn't better then MK anywhere lol. Because of that, you eliminate the stages he preforms best on, and YI is one of them. I hate YI, but I never had a problem fighting anyone on it if I just played a bit more passive then I normally do. For lucario it is a very passive stage, and his character physics enable him to utilize everything really well.

MK ***** Snake on the first transformation and can get stupid tornado juggles and Shuttle Loop kills on the second one. Third is difficult but REALLY bad for Snake if he gets hit offstage.

Yes knows about this more then I do for snake, which is the reason why I pulled his opinion on it. I am not done practicing with snake, so my information can be a bit off on it. Personally from experience, the first stage is the only part where it causes issues, but the 2nd and 3rd transformation work really well.

As far as Diddy and PS1 go, I dunno, I hate that ****. Diddy can set up some sick walls there and has gay wall infinite stuff, but he does suffer on most of the transformations. I'd still rather go Battlefield.

Avoiding them with any character is very doable, since diddys nanas do vanish after a bit, and he is really open in that time when they go. Don't give him too much space, but give him enough space where when he is open you can get to him before he can become really safe again. There is a big window for it to abuse. Also, like you stated, the transformations limit him from moving around a lot more then any other stage without him being safe. It is a decent stage to play him on. He can use it, but their are other characters who can use the stage more then he can.

 

[Supermodel From Paris]

you dont go to NJ tournies. and if you do you dont say or talk to ANYONE at them you just go lose and then come on SWF and QQ about mk

It doesn't matter what I do or where I go, really. It isn't relevant to this thread or to my opinion. Again, attacking my "scene cred" because you disagree with my opinion makes you look ridiculous (which is bad because I don't think you probably are, really). I get that it's an easy complaint to make, and makes it easier for you to disregard the things I say, but you can just do that anyway if you want without insulting me or my intelligence. I'm sure that you're a pretty reasonable person, so try to use said reason. Even though I have a lot of unpopular opinions and they are often very difficult to articulate and I'm frequently wrong, I'm OK with that, and I never insult someone personally in an argument(OK, we won't say "never..." I'm sure you can find a post where I've done that, but I try not to). That doesn't help anyone.

Even though this isn't an MK ban thread, I have been attacked a little for my statement so I feel the need to defend it (sorry RJ, and someone can infract me for this post if they'd like); I do not want MK banned because I lose to MK players (and I frequently do). If ledge invincibility and recovery mechanics were less forgiving in Brawl, I wouldn't care if he was the best character in the game otherwise. This is not about my personal win/loss record, but more about me not seeing a way to keep him legal that doesn't affect other characters without MK-specific rules (which are a bad idea, but are a possibility) or without just dealing with a game that is based heavily on time-outs and stalling, which isn't actually objectively a problem; however, I would say much of the Smash community at large wouldn't agree with that.

By the way, I make every effort to talk to people when I go to tournaments. Admittedly I don't go often, but that's because I usually work weekends. I'm a pretty nice guy in person, but a little shy and awkward (lol internet). I am however totally approachable and always looking to make friends at tourneys. If anything I feel the community as a whole is a bit cliquey, but I'm not complaining.

 

[_Yes!_]

Regarding CS, this is what I told RJ.

Part 1: Gay and bad for snake.
Part 2: Circumstantial. If Mk is in the lead, good for mk. If snake is in the lead, good for snake.
Part 3: It's pretty much a neutral.

 

[Kaiber Kop]

It doesn't matter what I do or where I go, really. It isn't relevant to this thread or to my opinion. Again, attacking my "scene cred" because you disagree with my opinion makes you look ridiculous (which is bad because I don't think you probably are, really). I get that it's an easy complaint to make, and makes it easier for you to disregard the things I say, but you can just do that anyway if you want without insulting me or my intelligence. I'm sure that you're a pretty reasonable person, so try to use said reason. Even though I have a lot of unpopular opinions and they are often very difficult to articulate and I'm frequently wrong, I'm OK with that, and I never insult someone personally in an argument(OK, we won't say "never..." I'm sure you can find a post where I've done that, but I try not to). That doesn't help anyone.

Even though this isn't an MK ban thread, I have been attacked a little for my statement so I feel the need to defend it (sorry RJ, and someone can infract me for this post if they'd like); I do not want MK banned because I lose to MK players (and I frequently do). If ledge invincibility and recovery mechanics were less forgiving in Brawl, I wouldn't care if he was the best character in the game otherwise. This is not about my personal win/loss record, but more about me not seeing a way to keep him legal that doesn't affect other characters without MK-specific rules (which are a bad idea, but are a possibility) or without just dealing with a game that is based heavily on time-outs and stalling, which isn't actually objectively a problem; however, I would say much of the Smash community at large wouldn't agree with that.

By the way, I make every effort to talk to people when I go to tournaments. Admittedly I don't go often, but that's because I usually work weekends. I'm a pretty nice guy in person, but a little shy and awkward (lol internet). I am however totally approachable and always looking to make friends at tourneys. If anything I feel the community as a whole is a bit cliquey, but I'm not complaining.

You're a NJ player?

 

[_Yes!_]

It doesn't matter what I do or where I go, really. It isn't relevant to this thread or to my opinion. Again, attacking my "scene cred" because you disagree with my opinion makes you look ridiculous (which is bad because I don't think you probably are, really). I get that it's an easy complaint to make, and makes it easier for you to disregard the things I say, but you can just do that anyway if you want without insulting me or my intelligence. I'm sure that you're a pretty reasonable person, so try to use said reason. Even though I have a lot of unpopular opinions and they are often very difficult to articulate and I'm frequently wrong, I'm OK with that, and I never insult someone personally in an argument(OK, we won't say "never..." I'm sure you can find a post where I've done that, but I try not to). That doesn't help anyone.

Even though this isn't an MK ban thread, I have been attacked a little for my statement so I feel the need to defend it (sorry RJ, and someone can infract me for this post if they'd like); I do not want MK banned because I lose to MK players (and I frequently do). If ledge invincibility and recovery mechanics were less forgiving in Brawl, I wouldn't care if he was the best character in the game otherwise. This is not about my personal win/loss record, but more about me not seeing a way to keep him legal that doesn't affect other characters without MK-specific rules (which are a bad idea, but are a possibility) or without just dealing with a game that is based heavily on time-outs and stalling, which isn't actually objectively a problem; however, I would say much of the Smash community at large wouldn't agree with that.

By the way, I make every effort to talk to people when I go to tournaments. Admittedly I don't go often, but that's because I usually work weekends. I'm a pretty nice guy in person, but a little shy and awkward (lol internet). I am however totally approachable and always looking to make friends at tourneys. If anything I feel the community as a whole is a bit cliquey, but I'm not complaining.

 

[iRJi]

Please keep trolling and picture spam out of this please lol.

 

[_Yes!_]

Sorry RJ. I have this allergic reaction to randoms.

Anyway I'm pretty much waiting on what we talked about to be brought to light.

 

[Delta-cod]

For record sake delta, did you take note on how many times you grabbed the edge?

Plus, the stages.

All the matches went to time. We went on SV first, where he won, then I took him to Lylat, where I won, and then he took me to Frigate, where I won. The first two matches are saved to what I believe to be ksizl's Wii. After the set ended and we reported the results, P_wii had the idea to count ledge grabs, but the replay wasn't saved and we had already closed the results away. I'm fairly certain I didn't use the ledge THAT much against him game 3 merely based on the fact that he was punishing me for it EXTREMELY well the entire set.

From what I see:

People who play non-MK characters that have strong edge games are arguing against LGLs for their characters (Chibo, Delta). Bias.

Yoshi's edge game isn't even that good. It's SO open and incredibly punishable, the fact that I'm not consistently punished for it is AMAZING. The only thing it's good for is to retreat to temporarily and to soften up the opponent before getting back on stage. That's it. I can't even camp from there the entire game, and even if I could, it's not even that effective. Having it limited because of some other character's problem is dumb.

 

[_Yes!_]

Who needs to punish a planking yoshi? Just hold down b....

 

[Supermodel From Paris]

From what I seeeople who play non-MK characters that have strong edge games are arguing against LGLs for their characters (Chibo, Delta). Bias.

Hey, there. Overall I'd say this is a good post, but this caught my eye. This is not actually bias. "I don't want anti-MK rules affecting my character" isn't bias. If you live on a large piece of property and the government is going to annex it to build a park so that everyone can enjoy it, and you don't really want them to, that isn't bias; it is perhaps a little selfish (although in my opinion it is justified) but it isn't bias (this isn't a perfect example, I know). It's actually sort of a statement of fact; anti-planking rules affect characters that aren't MK, and who aren't broken on the ledge. This is obviously not ideal.

Bias is from the hypothetical guy who sees the evidence that planking is only broken for one character and sort of ignores it because he secretly just thinks all ledge-play is lame (I'm not pointing any fingers, just giving an example).

Bias is a hard thing to define. Technically it is just that your personal stake in things affects your opinion to a large degree, which it definitely looks like these guys are doing, but they aren't, not exactly; it is a very fine distinction though.

 

[Max Ketchum]

SFP: If you notice, Delta and Chibo (namely the latter) continuously mention in their posts that a MK-specific LGL is the "right" thing to do and try to dodge mention of their character's names as much as possible.

Chibo removes the LGL at his tournaments and is notorious for hardcore planking. Pretty biased, imo.

 

[Kaiber Kop]

Hey, there. Overall I'd say this is a good post, but this caught my eye. This is not actually bias. "I don't want anti-MK rules affecting my character" isn't bias. If you live on a large piece of property and the government is going to annex it to build a park so that everyone can enjoy it, and you don't really want them to, that isn't bias; it is perhaps a little selfish (although in my opinion it is justified) but it isn't bias (this isn't a perfect example, I know). It's actually sort of a statement of fact; anti-planking rules affect characters that aren't MK, and who aren't broken on the ledge. This is obviously not ideal.

Bias is from the hypothetical guy who sees the evidence that planking is only broken for one character and sort of ignores it because he secretly just thinks all ledge-play is lame (I'm not pointing any fingers, just giving an example).

Want a cookie?

 

[_Yes!_]

I want a cookie, Kai.

 

[Supermodel From Paris]

SFP: If you notice, Delta and Chibo (namely the latter) continuously mention in their posts that a MK-specific LGL is the "right" thing to do and try to dodge mention of their character's names as much as possible.

Chibo removes the LGL at his tournaments and is notorious for hardcore planking. Pretty biased, imo.

There is actually no proof that his rules are for his own benefit. It might be that he is simply taking advantage of rules, that yes, he had a hand in creating.

To Chibo's credit, R.O.B.'s planking strategy is very beatable and not at all even in the same realm that MK's is, so it is natural that he would feel a bit like, "wait! I use that strat and it isn't even that good!" Have you ever been in the same room as someone who does something illegal or (in school, maybe) against the rules and were punished for it? It isn't a very good feeling.

That feeling isn't really a biased thing, it is just self-preservation; the guys who want LGL rules included because they feel it is the only thing keeping their character from being banworthy when it could potentially breaks a bunch of other characters are closer to being biased.