Is All-Brawl the future competitive standard?

[Sesshomuronay]

Alright first of all items are random and randomness isnt very good for tournaments and stuff. Secondly there are all these items that are really broken and like a free kill if you hit the opponent with them.

Here is an example:

Player A is a god of competitive gaming and is playing some random scrub(Player B).

Player B is getting crushed horrible but lets say their playing fox and a smash ball appears over their head. The smash ball results in Player A losing a stock and taking some %.

After this player A continues to own player B when all of the sudden a golden hammer appears right next to player B. Player B grabs it and is right next to Player A so Player A cannot get away in time so he ends up dying and losing the 2 stock because of this.


So pretty much items are ******** especially in matches with only like 2 stock because it just increases how much items do in determining the outcome of the match.

 

[Revolver Roosevelt]

I don't let trolls determine how I play.
Oh, and I talked to Keits. I learned that among other things:

stalling is ENCOURAGED
game-breaking glitches such as Rob's infinite final smash are allowed. etc etc etc.

Really, this seems a bit more to me than the "play the game on default" argument. I'm getting the vibe that part of the all-brawl mentality is that smash, without items, is naked and inferior to other fighting games. Honestly, it's more like a small segment of trolls who at best want smash to be a domesticated game that SF players can play friendlies in without worrying about winning or losing. Don't even look at SRK's brawl boards...and don't go to the channel. you're getting trolled just by lurking there.

 

[ftl]

Second video: That was Diddy's up+b, not a bomb spawn.

I don't think he was talking about the start of the match. Later on in the match, there was a time where a crate appeared near MK, Diddy faired MK and the crate, which exploded, hitting both of them but killing Diddy.

 

[Revolver Roosevelt]

I idea is pretty simple: choosing to ban one item but not another makes it a question of an arbitrary degree of what is acceptable. True, if you attempt to define what is acceptable you can make a run for "balance", but in the end the argument for randomness will always exist, so why not simply embrace all of them?

I'm sorry, but I honestly cannot agree with that statement, and I hope you haven't let SRK sway your ideals an inch, because from what I've seen, yours been spot on and their's...well, I'll just say that there are problems there that extend beyond tournament rulings and into the fundamentals of competitive gaming itself

oh, and
http://www.smashboards.com/showpost.php?p=2644956&postcount=1

 

[Animeko]

I don't think he was talking about the start of the match. Later on in the match, there was a time where a crate appeared near MK, Diddy faired MK and the crate, which exploded, hitting both of them but killing Diddy.

Ah. My bad. I was addressing his comment on youtube:

infernovia (2 hours ago) Show Hide
Was the explosion at the start cuz of a random bomb spawn or diddy?

stalling is ENCOURAGED

If I was going to win 150$ by stalling or running away for 30 seconds, you're **** right I would... play to win man.

If you want something banned, win a tournament with it to prove that it's broken. No one has been able to do this yet. The purpose of having all items on is to see whether or not specific items are broken in play, NOT just in theory. Months ago, people thought the dragoon was broken, that the fan was broken, that the landmaster was broken...all just theory.

game-breaking glitches such as Rob's infinite final smash are allowed. etc etc etc.

If you could pull that off on the specific stage (Bridge of Eldin right?) in the alloted time, well then props to you! If you could do that at least 3 times in a row to win the set (assuming your opponent is too stupid to counter pick the stage), well then ****. You deserve it.

 

[Animeko]

I hope you haven't let SRK sway your ideals an inch, because from what I've seen, yours been spot on and their's...

Wow, that's insulting.

He's talking from experience. He's seen it for himself and played it for himself.

....Broken Tactic: Fox can shoot a laser at the start of the match and run away for the remainder, uncatchable by almost every other character.

That link doesn't make sense for All-Brawl rules. The match would go to Sudden Death.
Also, this is theory. There is no evidence to support that Fox would be game-breakingly uncatchable. I'll believe it when I see it.

 

[Revolver Roosevelt]

I'm sorry, but if I am provided the option between engaging someone like m2k, Cornell, or Reflex in a fight or retreating for 3 minutes, forcing the match into a sudden death where my odds of victory are borderline 50-50, I'm going to choose the latter. When big name players get punished for there big names by having to fight greifers throughout pools, you KNOW there is a problem

 

[Animeko]

....When big name players get punished for there big names by having to fight greifers throughout pools, you KNOW there is a problem

By all means, go ahead and try. I'll believe it when I see it. If running away does become a problem (which it has not thus far) then the rules will definately change.

 

[Turbo Ether]

I'm sorry, but if I am provided the option between engaging someone like m2k, Cornell, or Reflex in a fight or retreating for 3 minutes, forcing the match into a sudden death where my odds of victory are borderline 50-50, I'm going to choose the latter. When big name players get punished for there big names by having to fight greifers throughout pools, you KNOW there is a problem

Pretty exaggerated reply, no?

I don't feel like debating an issue of which I have a neutral stance, but you do realize the exaggeration you posted, right?

 

[Revolver Roosevelt]

Players such as Plank have won matches on stages withOUT infinite loops via time out, and that's when the time limit is 7 minutes long, and when tie breakers are decided by percent, and without using a projectile character. And honestly, your every post on this forum has been explicitly directed towards defended Keits's all brawl ruleset.

 

[Turbo Ether]

Players such as Plank have won matches on stages withOUT infinite loops via time out, and that's when the time limit is 7 minutes long, and when tie breakers are decided by percent, and without using a projectile character. And honestly, your every post on this forum has been explicitly directed towards defended Keits's all brawl ruleset.

How is Plank winning via timeout by percent relevant to the All-Brawl ruleset in which Sudden Death is played out? Please explain the relevance.

My every post in this thread, is me expressing my distaste for brain-washed idiots that don't know what they're talking about. Don't get me wrong, these people exist on both sides of the argument, SWF and SRK alike. Like I said, i'm neutral. It's not worth arguing over this, because there's always some know-it-all that you abosulely cannot reason with. That's how the internet works. Also, I have the right to defend anyone I **** well please, not that it's relevant.

I said it earlier, but there's zero reason to cry about a ruleset that does not affect you. No ones forcing you to play it.

 

[Revolver Roosevelt]

it is relevant because sudden deaths are decided by a single hit, not a multitude of hits. This is the very reason why best 2/3 is preferred to a single fight: it ensures that there is less variability in the skill test. I could either fight an opponent that I certainly could not defeat, or place my hope on a single, decisive strike.

I never attacked you, so I have no idea why you are on the defensive, but you're coming off as an arrogant man who sees himself above the common poster on both boards.

 

[Animeko]

Players such as Plank have won matches on stages withOUT infinite loops via time out and that's when the time limit is 7 minutes long, and when tie breakers are decided by percent, and without using a projectile character.

I haven't seen anyone in tournament pull off the rob infinite. Sooo... everyone I've seen has won matches on stages without "infinite loops via time out".

Even so, you make it sound like pulling off that infinite would be an easy. If so, walk the talk and enter a tournament with your broke strategy.

[

 

[Animeko]

It is relevant because sudden deaths are decided by a single hit, not a multitude of hits. This is the very reason why best 2/3 is preferred to a single fight: it ensures that there is less variability in the skill test. I could either fight an opponent that I certainly could not defeat, or place my hope on a single, decisive strike.

I never attacked you, so I have no idea why you are on the defensive, but you're coming off as an arrogant man who sees himself above the common poster on both boards.

Indeed.

All-Brawl is 2 stocks, 3 minutes, 3/5 . Not a single fight at all. Read the rules if you're going to debate about them...

 

[Turbo Ether]

it is relevant because sudden deaths are decided by a single hit, not a multitude of hits. This is the very reason why best 2/3 is preferred to a single fight: it ensures that there is less variability in the skill test. I could either fight an opponent that I certainly could not defeat, or place my hope on a single, decisive strike.

I never attacked you, so I have no idea why you are on the defensive, but you're coming off as an arrogant man who sees himself above the common poster on both boards.

You didn't answer my simple question. Plank winning a match by percent has nothing to do with someone winning a match by Sudden Death. This also has nothing to do with playing a set best 2 of 3. I don't even know why you brought this up. All-Brawl is best 3 of 5 anyway.

Ok, you didn't attack me, but you mentioned that I defended Keit's ruleset. I'm sorry, did I break a forum rule? Is this somehow relevant?

And yes, I think the majority of people's opinions on the internet are misinformed. I don't make a huge deal out of it, I just ignore them. I have no gripes if people do the same to mine. If you disagree with me, or think poorly of me, trust me, I won't lose sleep tonight.

 

[Smooth Criminal]

hehe.

Anyway.

I'm not naming names, but SWF members have gone beyond this forum to troll SRK, troll his SRK account, and troll his youtube channel. He's been called everything from *** to an elitist ****tard. Someone even made a youtube account "Keitsucks". He doesn't even bother making an account here. Why should he?

Admittedly, some of the members of this forum are petty. But have you actually seen the level of animosity that SRK harbors towards the Smash Community as a whole? And before you say it stems from this whole Evo-Brawl crap, I would like to point out that the roots of this particular conflict go further back than that. SRK-goers have openly ridiculed Smash as a competitive game for the longest time. We've had our fair share of trolls from SRK, too.

Smooth Criminal

 

[Animeko]

Admittedly, some of the members of this forum are petty. But have you actually seen the level of animosity that SRK harbors towards the Smash Community as a whole? And before you say it stems from this whole Evo-Brawl crap, I would like to point out that the roots of this particular conflict go further back than that. SRK-goers have openly ridiculed Smash as a competitive game for the longest time. We've had our fair share of trolls from SRK, too.

Smooth Criminal

I don't disagree with that, not at all. Both sides act like children over the internet. But was it Keits openly ridiculing Smash for the longest time? Has he trolled here at all? I don't think so.

 

[Turbo Ether]

Admittedly, some of the members of this forum are petty. But have you actually seen the level of animosity that SRK harbors towards the Smash Community as a whole? And before you say it stems from this whole Evo-Brawl crap, I would like to point out that the roots of this particular conflict go further back than that. SRK-goers have openly ridiculed Smash as a competitive game for the longest time. We've had our fair share of trolls from SRK, too.

Smooth Criminal

Every relevant fighting game community has ridiculed Smash. It's not just SRK. Lot's of people don't even consider Smash to be a real fighting game. Do you care? I sure don't. One reason why I disregard the majority of internet opinions.

 

[Revolver Roosevelt]

I was not attacking you, I was attacking animeko. my bad

 

[Smooth Criminal]

Every relevant fighting game community has ridiculed Smash. It's not just SRK. Lot's of people don't even consider it a real fighting game. Do you care? I sure don't. One reason why I disregard the majority of internet opinions.

Well, SRK is the major hub for all of those "relevant" fighting games. I don't particularly care for the general opinion either; I'm just pointing out that there's two sides to this. This community has been openly ridiculed by its peers at SRK for years simply because we've tried to make it as close to a traditional fighting game as possible. To say that we're the ones being elitist and "ban-happy" is pretty **** unfair when all we're trying to do is make a fighting game. And in order to make a fighting game, we've pretty much had to cut all of the bull**** (i.e. items) out.

Neither side is the victim, but they're mutually and unreasonably antagonistic towards each other (if you follow).

Smooth Criminal

 

[Turbo Ether]

Well, SRK is the major hub for all of those "relevant" fighting games. I don't particularly care for the general opinion either; I'm just pointing out that there's two sides to this. This community has been openly ridiculed by its peers at SRK for years simply because we've tried to make it as close to a traditional fighting game as possible. To say that we're the ones being elitist and "ban-happy" is pretty **** unfair when all we're trying to do is make a fighting game. And in order to make a fighting game, we've pretty much had to cut all of the bull**** (i.e. items) out.

Neither side is the victim, but they're mutually and unreasonably antagonistic towards each other (if you follow).

Smooth Criminal

Smash can't be a traditional fighting game. It's too fundamentally different. A reason SWF is taking so much flak from pro-item SRK people, is because they believe SWF is trying to strip Smash down and turn it into a makeshift traditional fighter, when you could just play an actual traditional fighter instead.

Personally, i'm fine with standard competitive Smash, but I do understand their cause.

 

[Smooth Criminal]

Smash can't be a traditional fighting game. It's too fundamentally different. A reason SWF is taking so much flak from pro-item SRK people, is because they believe SWF is trying to strip Smash down and turn it into a makeshift traditional fighter, when you could just play an actual traditional fighter instead.

Personally, i'm fine with standard competitive Smash, but I do understand their cause.

And there is nothing wrong with having your own way to play. It's just both sides need to stop being *******s towards each other and respect it. The only reason why I badmouth Keits so **** much is because he doesn't really know anything about the game outside of Brawl, much less anything pertaining to this game outside of his own ruleset made up for Brawl. That's what pisses me off the most and makes me swing on the SWF side of the fence as far as this is concerned.

You are absolutely right about Smash not being a traditional fighter. But is it so wrong to emulate one? No.

Smooth Criminal

 

[SwastikaPyle]

SRK knows a lot about traditional fighting games. However, the Smash series has never been a traditional fighter, there's no HP bars, no edge of the screen that stops you, no selection of fighters with the same weight and hitbox.

 

[-Mars-]

Smash is in a class of it's own when it comes to fighting games.......I think that's one of the reasons why it's so wildly popular. It's innovative.

 

[ph00tbag]

I'm sorry, but I honestly cannot agree with that statement, and I hope you haven't let SRK sway your ideals an inch, because from what I've seen, yours been spot on and their's...well, I'll just say that there are problems there that extend beyond tournament rulings and into the fundamentals of competitive gaming itself

oh, and
http://www.smashboards.com/showpost.php?p=2644956&postcount=1

Don't get the issues confused. No one has said that items play is necessarily a more viable or more fair way of playing. He's making the very true and very defensible position that if you're going to have items on, you can't really have a question of balance, because you've unbalanced the game with the randomness factor to begin with.

 

[Revolver Roosevelt]

I thought the point of the entire post was that AlphaZealot himself supported and continues to support the selective banning of stages.

 

[ph00tbag]

I thought the point of the entire post was that AlphaZealot himself supported and continues to support the selective banning of stages.

And he probably does. That's why he's talking about items in the post you quoted.

 

[Vulcan55]

uh...Animeiko = Keits?

 

[infernovia]

Ah. My bad. I was addressing his comment on youtube:

Yeah, I knew that first explosion was probably diddy's with the no knockback. The only reason I even posted that was because I have never seen a diddy do an up b counter. I wouldn't post evidence that I wasn't sure of.

I wanna see this match.

Edit: I am in two minds about the dragoon.

The dragoon has one function I really like, and that is the autoaim function. Using this (when there is no sandbag), the dragoon essentially becomes a corner trap from SF. Choosing to fire immediately because of auto-aim seems overpowered and will net you 90% of kills initially.

But because of the dragoon morphing animation, the opponent can just spotdodge or aerial dodge as soon as it finishes. The dragoon morphing animation doesn't change from character to character so you only essentially need to practice with it once. Because of this, dragoon firing becomes a 50/50 shot. The user can choose to fire it immediately/delay it a bit to wait for the spotdodge. And it would be fine if that was the only option you had.

However, the dragoon is simply out for WAY too long for this to be actually viable. I watched AZ use the dragoon and I am pretty sure he was trying to get the rhythm of the spotdodge, but in actuality, visual cues could have netted the kill 100% of the attempted spotdodge. Moving invulnerability is OVERWHELMINGLY the better option and actually the only option outside of ledge invincibility. So in essence, I think that the dragoon is more powerful than the video shows.

 

[Revolver Roosevelt]

In all honesty,my post wasn't so much an argument as something to poke fun and present an interesting question: is there a substantial difference between the selective banning of stages and the selective banning of items?

 

[infernovia]

Smash is in a class of it's own when it comes to fighting games.......I think that's one of the reasons why it's so wildly popular. It's innovative.

Actually, whats really interesting is that, I am pretty sure the creator of SFIV said that he wanted SF to be more like smash. As in he catered too much to the hardcore crowd and needed nubs to play the game too.

 

[ftl]

Don't get the issues confused. No one has said that items play is necessarily a more viable or more fair way of playing. He's making the very true and very defensible position that if you're going to have items on, you can't really have a question of balance, because you've unbalanced the game with the randomness factor to begin with.

Again, I'll repeat my stance that randomness isn't a binary thing. It's not whether "is there any randomness or not". It's how much randomness there is.

Fox only no items final destination is one extreme. If you want NO randomness at all in-game, well, you have to ban dashing so there's no tripping, ban DDD and G&W and Luigi because they have moves with a random component, ban any stage with any randomness at all...

But we don't do that, because the amount of randomness that DDD's gordos (and G&W's 1-in-9-chance-of-lighting, and some random motion on some legal stages...) add to the game is worth the added variety.

Items are the same as stages, in that respect. We COULD play on ONLY stages with no moving or random parts. That would leave what, FD and battlefield? It would be less random. What if the balloons on smashville get in your way once... but we don't, the SBR has some criteria to decide which stages are okay for competitive play and which ones aren't, and there's a counterpicking system to balance it out further.

All-brawl is like deciding that if we allow SOME stage choice, it's hypocritical unless we allow ALL stages. I disagree with that.

I'm not going to take a stance on whether the ISP rules are any better than all-brawl in terms of decreasing the effect of randomness. I suspect they are, but I haven't played either so I don't know. But I don't want to throw out the very concept of ISP out of hand because "Well, once we allow some items, we should allow all of them", because that argument is, I think, fundamentally flawed.

 

[SamuraiPanda]

I'm not naming names, but SWF members have gone beyond this forum to troll SRK, troll his SRK account, and troll his youtube channel. He's been called everything from *** to an elitist ****tard. Someone even made a youtube account "Keitsucks". He doesn't even bother making an account here. Why should he?

That was his own fault. Keits continued to claim over and over again that we're "stripping down the game," that his way is the "correct" way to play, that we're not "good" at our own game because we don't play on all stages, etc. Keits antagonized and instigated a community that is far larger than his own, so what did he expect to happen? I do not condone the actions of those SWF members, but don't make Keits out to be some sort of saint in this issue.

Also, this didn't happen just because of his stance on items. It is simply the way he went about doing things. Look at how people treat Jack Keiser's ISP project. He didn't antagonize anybody, and made it clear from the start that this is simply an alternative that isn't "better," just different. Keits has definitely toned it down recently, but its going to take awhile for his reputation to get any better with the people he deliberatly belittled before.

 

[Revolver Roosevelt]

Keits belittles people to this day. He gave me a bad rap the moment he said he was going to become "a top level pro" in a matter of months. He has johns for everything, man, and if you disagree with him about the game, he will pass himself off as a martyr, probably ban you, or call you names. The pattern is unchanged.

 

[SothE700k]

keits Belittles People To This Day. He Gave Me A Bad Rap The Moment He Said He Was Going To Become "a Top Level Pro" In A Matter Of Months. He Has Johns For Everything, Man, And If You Disagree With Him About The Game, He Will Pass Himself Off As A Martyr, Probably Ban You, Or Call You Names. The Pattern Is Unchanged.

HEIL KEITS!! HEIL KEITS!!
*Gives Nazi salute*

 

[infernovia]

And ANOTHER discussion that proves that as the arguments increases, the probability of a reference to Nazi Germany becomes 1.

Thank you for your comment.

 

[SothE700k]

And ANOTHER discussion that proves that as the arguments increases, the probability of a reference to Nazi Germany becomes 1.

Thank you for your comment.

You're most welcome

 

[AlphaZealot]

http://www.allisbrawl.com/news/newspost.aspx?id=183

 

[Xanthus]

I think Items could be neat. People say it adds a lot of luck, and I can agree with that to a minor extent. I was a competitive quake player for a number of years, so the concept of item control and the skill it requires is really familiar with me.

If you're consistently knocking somebody away and you're able to get items as they spawn, then items just increase your lead as you play well. What I don't like is that maybe you'll be able to get a weaker item when you're doing well, then they get something like a smash ball or a really great item when they're the one knocking you around.

If there was a way to make it like quake, where the items spawn based on a strict time scale (as to give it consistency), I think it could be interesting to see where it goes.

But items aren't quite as RANDOM as you guys seem to think they are.

 

[kr3wman]

The problem is not that items are random, or that it lets noobs win over pros.

It's just that we want to get rid of that little chance of a major ****-up.