Is All-Brawl the future competitive standard?

[Vulcan55]

"When Melee came out, it took 3-4 years for the community to agree to turn items off.

I wasn't exactly around here then, but...Really?
That doesn't sound right.

 

[XienZo]

Melee did indeed have items on for quite a while. Remember that Melee transitioned directly from 64.

 

[Yuna]

I wasn't exactly around here then, but...Really?
That doesn't sound right.

The community was tiny, young and scrubby. It took years for items to be turned off as a standard. But none of the reasons for why they were turned off have fundamentally changed except for the fact that we can now turn off containers entirely.

Neither have enough new elements been introduced to change Items On Smash in such a way that we should turn them back on. We don't have to wait 3-4 years after each Smash is released to decide whether or not items should be turned off!

 

[Korpocalypse]

"The community was tiny, young and scrubby. It took years for items to be turned off as a standard. But none of the reasons for why they were turned off have fundamentally changed except for the fact that we can now turn off containers entirely.

Neither have enough new elements been introduced to change Items On Smash in such a way that we should turn them back on. We don't have to wait 3-4 years after each Smash is released to decide whether or not items should be turned off"

Thank you for reiterating

 

[XienZo]

If each Smash, they have a new way of dispensing items, yes. Otherwise, probably not.

 

[Cyntalan Maelstrom]

"The community was tiny, young and scrubby. It took years for items to be turned off as a standard. But none of the reasons for why they were turned off have fundamentally changed except for the fact that we can now turn off containers entirely.

Neither have enough new elements been introduced to change Items On Smash in such a way that we should turn them back on. We don't have to wait 3-4 years after each Smash is released to decide whether or not items should be turned off"

Thank you for reiterating

Yeah, except that-- here we go again, Cynt is going to have to rattle this on again to each person that doesn't read it the previous time, then have either Yuna or EnigmaticCam go back into the same "*plugs ears* IT'S WRONG!" spiel and then the thread gets closed if I continue to feed the trolls.

Items DID change fundamentally on several levels from Melee to Brawl, and the sole reason the community ever finally came to an agreement over no items in Melee was because containers could not be turned off. Until then, it was still soundly divided (and nowhere NEAR this heated) among regions, with pretty much just the VA region being obstinate about items. Until late 2004, there were items tourneys as a STANDARD. Only when the hard fact that containers could not be turned off without turning all items off did the they drop the idea. Had containers had a switch in Melee, you can believe that items tourneys would STILL exist today. Even I, one of the Smash pioneers, who never truly gave up on items play in Melee, could accept this fact then. Now that it's an option, and the fact that items aren't nearly as devastating (there ARE exceptions) as they could be in Melee due to changes in the knockback and catching and (the list goes on and on, so I'll just stop here), that I can't see a solid reason not to bring them back in some form of tournament. Should they be standard? No. Should they be abolished from competition as a whole? No. Anyone who says the contrary is doing so with plugged ears.

 

[Yuna]

Thank you for reiterating

I said it 10 months ago. It needs to be reiterated because people never learn/are unwilling to learn.

 

[Xenesis]

I'm sorry, have you been here since Brawl was first released? Have you been arguing the pros and cons of items since then and even before that? Have you clocked hundreds of hours of game time with Items on? Do you have experience with items on tournaments? Do you have deep knowledge of how items work and how Brawl works in general?

If you really must know,

1) Yes, I lurk a lot.
2) Yes, but not on SWF specifically
3) Yes
4) Yes
5) Define "deep"

 

[aeghrur]

Yeah, except that-- here we go again, Cynt is going to have to rattle this on again to each person that doesn't read it the previous time, then have either Yuna or EnigmaticCam go back into the same "*plugs ears* IT'S WRONG!" spiel and then the thread gets closed if I continue to feed the trolls.

Items DID change fundamentally on several levels from Melee to Brawl, and the sole reason the community ever finally came to an agreement over no items in Melee was because containers could not be turned off. Until then, it was still soundly divided (and nowhere NEAR this heated) among regions, with pretty much just the VA region being obstinate about items. Until late 2004, there were items tourneys as a STANDARD. Only when the hard fact that containers could not be turned off without turning all items off did the they drop the idea. Had containers had a switch in Melee, you can believe that items tourneys would STILL exist today. Even I, one of the Smash pioneers, who never truly gave up on items play in Melee, could accept this fact then. Now that it's an option, and the fact that items aren't nearly as devastating (there ARE exceptions) as they could be in Melee due to changes in the knockback and catching and (the list goes on and on, so I'll just stop here), that I can't see a solid reason not to bring them back in some form of tournament. Should they be standard? No. Should they be abolished from competition as a whole? No. Anyone who says the contrary is doing so with plugged ears.

Why are you even arguing? You agree they won't/should not be the new standard play right? Well, then we agree. No one is saying you can't have side tournaments; we're just saying it won't be the standard. Or... so I'm saying. =/

 

[Yuna]

5) Define "deep"

Do you know the intricacies of DI? Do you know how sweetspots work? Do you know frame data? Do you know stuff like "Bowser's recovery recovers these many Piplups horizontally vs. Peach's which recovers these many piplups horizontally"? Etc., etc., etc.

In other words, stuff other than what you've discovered on your own (unless you're some kind of fighting game genius) and that goes deeper than "In my experience through observation and playing". Some of this you need to do deep analysis and/or pull up frame data to know.

 

[Xenesis]

No one is saying you can't have side tournaments; we're just saying it won't be the standard. Or... so I'm saying. =/

If the Old Guard is anything to look at, using items and non-standard SBR-shiny approved rules apparently makes you an evil person who decapitates kittens and babies or something.

Why are people so threatened by the idea of All-Brawl style side tournaments?

Edit:

Do you know the intricacies of DI? Do you know how sweetspots work? Do you know frame data? Do you know stuff like "Bowser's recovery recovers these many Piplups horizontally vs. Peach's which recovers these many piplups horizontally"? Etc., etc., etc.

In other words, stuff other than what you've discovered on your own (unless you're some kind of fighting game genius) and that goes deeper than "In my experience through observation and playing". Some of this you need to do deep analysis and/or pull up frame data to know.

Yes, but that's because I'm a glutton for knowledge.

 

[Calixto]

Ha-Haa.


Items.

 

[Yuna]

Why are people so threatened by the idea of All-Brawl style side tournaments?

I'm sorry, I thought the thread topic clearly states "Is All-Brawl the future competitive standard". I don't know about you, but when I enter threads, I kinda argue what the thread is about, not random related topics.

Yes, but that's because I'm a glutton for knowledge.

Really? How do you best DI Marth's Up-Tilt if you're standing in front of him when hit in order to not get comboed? How about for survival? Do it off the top of your head.

 

[kr3wman]

I think that ''All-Brawl'' will be in the shadow of the Competitive smash scene and while huge Melee and Brawl Tournaments continue to happen, Keits and his band of jolly little fellows congratulate themselves in less than 100 people attending tournaments that they deemed are ''huge success''.

Of course, if those fellows actually tried Melee before, I don't think this thread would have been created and the amount of noobishness on the SRK Brawl boards would be less than it is now.

 

[Xenesis]

I'm sorry, I thought the thread topic clearly states "Is All-Brawl the future competitive standard". I don't know about you, but when I enter threads, I kinda argue what the thread is about, not random related topics.

Of course, there can only ever be one competitive standard and one alone.

Really? How do you best DI Marth's Up-Tilt if you're standing in front of him when hit in order to not get comboed? How about for survival? Do it off the top of your head.

I'm not interested in proving anything to you because you'll simply keep pulling contrived examples in an attempt to find things I don't know and yell 'scrub' or something similar.

 

[Smooth Criminal]

I'm not interested in proving anything to you because you'll simply keep pulling contrived examples in an attempt to find things I don't know and yell 'scrub' or something similar.

Doesn't seem at all that contrived to me. If you really were a glutton for knowledge, you'd know.

Or you're just trolling.

Smooth Criminal

 

[Xenesis]

Doesn't seem at all that contrived to me. If you really were a glutton for knowledge, you'd know.

Or you're just trolling.

Smooth Criminal

It's more the fact I'm more interested in the conversation instead of playing around Yuna's bully-boy tactics.

 

[Smooth Criminal]

It's more the fact I'm more interested in the conversation instead of playing around Yuna's bully-boy tactics.

It IS a legitimate question, though. Either answer it and demonstrate some knowledge of the game or not answer it and humbly concede to the fact that you simply do not know.

Bottom line: If you're gonna argue for something, know all sides of the argument.

And grow thicker skin, Xenesis. Yuna's nowhere near as bad as some of the other posters on this board.

Smooth Criminal

 

[Xenesis]

It IS a legitimate question, though. Either answer it and demonstrate some knowledge or not answer it and humbly concede to the fact that you don't know.

And grow thicker skin, Xenesis. Yuna's nowhere near as bad as some of the other posters on this board.

Smooth Criminal

It's a legitimate question yes. And no, I don't know the answer to that particular question. Cue Yuna calling me a scrub.

I have a plenty thick skin - I'm not bothered by this at all, I just don't like the way Yuna tackles discussions. Besides, I wouldn't post here if such things bothered me - despite being full of much delicious information, SWF is a melting pot of hate and anger at most times.

Bottom line: If you're gonna argue for something, know all sides of the argument.

I generally prefer to use debate and argument as a vehicle to learn things and push for the acquisition of more knowledge by experiment and testing, but that's just me.

 

[Hoser]

That sounds like a great idea! Nothing banned. Actually, I have a better idea, let's play rock-paper-scissors to decide who wins the match.

 

[kr3wman]

I think that ''All-Brawl'' will be in the shadow of the Competitive smash scene and while huge Melee and Brawl Tournaments continue to happen, Keits and his band of jolly little fellows congratulate themselves in less than 100 people attending tournaments that they deemed are ''huge success''.

Of course, if those fellows actually tried Melee before, I don't think this thread would have been created and the amount of noobishness on the SRK Brawl boards would be less than it is now.

I mean, I'm pretty sure there's more people interested in having Brawl+ or whatever as a competitive standard than All-brawl.

 

[Smooth Criminal]

It's a legitimate question yes. And no, I don't know the answer to that particular question. Cue Yuna calling me a scrub.

No. That's not scrubdom; that's just a lack of knowledge. There's nothing wrong with that. You are able to read and play the game, right? If you can do either of those things, problem solved.

I have a plenty thick skin - I'm not bothered by this at all, I just don't like the way Yuna tackles discussions. Besides, I wouldn't post here if such things bothered me - despite being full of much delicious information, SWF is a melting pot of hate and anger at most times.

1) Too bad for you that Yuna has a hands-on, visceral approach to discussions. At least he has the decency to back up his assaults with solid points.

2) The rest of the internet says "hi" btw. Just about every forum in existence has the potential to be a melting pot of hate and anger.

Smooth Criminal

 

[Yuna]

Of course, there can only ever be one competitive standard and one alone.

The topic is "Will All-Brawl be a Competitive standard?" - We're arguing "No it won't". This does not equal "It cannot ever be played!". It's a free world, do whatever you like.

I'm not interested in proving anything to you because you'll simply keep pulling contrived examples in an attempt to find things I don't know and yell 'scrub' or something similar.

Those were basic questions. Anyone who knows how to DI would know the answers to these questions just like that. Just answer them. I won't pull out any other questions, I swear. You claim to have knowledge, I'm putting you to the test.

What, am I supposed to just take your word for it?

It's a legitimate question yes. And no, I don't know the answer to that particular question. Cue Yuna calling me a scrub.

You seem to have the wrong definition of "Scrub". And if you don't know the answers to those very basic questions about DI (which you pretty much answered "Yes, I have extensively knowledge on it" to), then you don't really have a deep knowledge in how Smash works, now do you?

I would never call you a Scrub for not knowing that. I don't know what alternate universe Smashboards you've been reading, but that's not even how I define a Scrub.

I wouldn't even call you a n00b. I'd say that you'd exaggerated your knowledge in Smash if you don't even know the answers to those very basic questions. Don't accuse me of things you've never even seen me do.

And on at least 15 separate occasions in the past year or so, I've specifically stated that there is nothing wrong with not being knowledgeable since not everyone has to know everything about everything. But it's wrong to enter debates where such knowledge is required without possessing it.

You scoffed at me scoffing at the All-Brawl rules. I challenged you to prove that you possess the necessary knowledge to determine that I'm wrong for scoffing at what I perceive to be ludicrous rules.

I have a plenty thick skin - I'm not bothered by this at all, I just don't like the way Yuna tackles discussions.

I asked a question. You answered it. I asked you to prove it. It's all very legit. It's not bullying at all. If you'd known the answer, you'd have proven yourself knowledgeable and I would've acknowledged that you do have the knowledge to back your opinions up.

Because when it comes to opinion-based debates or superior Competitive rules, having the knowledge to back your opinion up instead of just "I like it!" is called for.

I generally prefer to use debate and argument as a vehicle to learn things and push for the acquisition of more knowledge by experiment and testing, but that's just me.

I use debates for a lot of things. None of them what you've just pretty much lied about me doing (either you're lying or making things up, that or you truly believe in what you're saying despite it being untrue. Either way, it's bad).

1) Too bad for you that Yuna has a hands-on, visceral approach to discussions. At least he has the decency to back up his assaults with solid points.

Which definition of "visceral" are you going by here (as there are several, some conflicting or at least largely dissimilar).

 

[kr3wman]

Yuna pretty much gets to the ****ing point while everyone is worried about sounding intelligent. He could work on his social skills a bit, but that's not really the point.

 

[Smooth Criminal]

Which definition of "visceral" are you going by here (as there are several, some conflicting or at least largely dissimilar).

5. characterized by or dealing with coarse or base emotions; earthy; crude: a visceral literary style.

That definition. Nothing against you or your style, Yuna. That's just how you are (edit: ON SMASHBOARDS). But like I said, you illustrate your points very well.

What, you think I'd be talking about organs and stuff? Lol

Smooth Criminal

 

[Yuna]

That definition. Nothing against you or your style, Yuna. That's just how you are (edit: ON SMASHBOARDS). But like I said, you illustrate your points very well.

What, you think I'd be talking about organs and stuff? Lol

Smooth Criminal

No, there was the "unreasoning"-part according to the Merriam-Webster dictionary which I was hoping you weren't referring to, as well.

I'm not so much crude as I'm blunt and simplistic. This is Smashboards, after all. If you blind your opponents with big words and fancy logic, you might lose them. And I despise sugar-coating things.

Yuna pretty much gets to the ****ing point while everyone is worried about sounding intelligent. He could work on his social skills a bit, but that's not really the point.

I'm perfectly friendly and a good friend to those I deem are deserving of my being so. I have no need to be everybody's friend.

 

[ph00tbag]

The topic is "Will All-Brawl be a Competitive standard?" - We're arguing "No it won't". This does not equal "It cannot ever be played!". It's a free world, do whatever you like.

I think this in particular should be paid attention to, and it's something that's bothered me about the rhetoric from the All-Brawl side of this thread. The competitive community on SWF is asked whether they think this ruleset has any potential as a competitive standard, and when we give our answer, supplemented with reasons why, suddenly we're threatened by it?

To be honest, the thread has made me reconsider several points in the SBR ruleset. Far from threatened, I think there is some room for experimentation, even with the SBR ruleset having been released. Nevertheless, I still think All-Brawl is far more flawed than the SBR ruleset, but there are some good points to be seen on both sides.

 

[kr3wman]

I'm perfectly friendly and a good friend to those I deem are deserving of my being so. I have no need to be everybody's friend.

That's also why nobody wants to be your friend.

Joking Joking.

 

[Cyntalan Maelstrom]

Why are you even arguing? You agree they won't/should not be the new standard play right? Well, then we agree. No one is saying you can't have side tournaments; we're just saying it won't be the standard. Or... so I'm saying. =/

The reason I made my post is to both stop the misinformation of Melee's past and because we aren't in total agreement here. I don't believe All-Brawl should be standard. But I also don't believe it should be treated as the circus freak sideshow. All-Brawl should get the respect it deserves by being treated on equal ground. My goal is for a return of the way Melee was pre-2004 in Brawl - both types of tourneys run with mutual respect for the other's opinion (well, 'cept for VA, they never gave items any respect) and understanding the legitimacy of both rulesets. Something akin to the DH in MLB. AL/NL don't agree on it, but will agree to disagree and play on each other's terms on quite the occasion. Those of All-Brawl have done this. The majority of those that don't like All-Brawl rules don't meet us on that common ground.

Also, for those who balk at how Keits never played Melee competitively, this may be true, but he's had the support of the majority of the original Melee players that were in competitive play when items were actually in to know what the game was like before the banfest. We might not all be in total agreement with him at this point, but we all pretty much agree that items in concept have done nothing but improve from Melee to Brawl in terms of their legitimacy as an equally competitive option.

 

[Yuna]

The reason I made my post is to both stop the misinformation of Melee's past and because we aren't in total agreement here. I don't believe All-Brawl should be standard. But I also don't believe it should be treated as the circus freak sideshow. All-Brawl should get the respect it deserves by being treated on equal ground.

Why? Why can't we treat it like a freakshow if, in our opinion, it's a freakshow? Why do we have to give it equal grounds with the SBR ruleset?I don't insult the proponents of All-Brawl, I just insult the rules themselves, which is within my every right to.

My goal is for a return of the way Melee was pre-2004 in Brawl - both types of tourneys run with mutual respect for the other's opinion (well, 'cept for VA, they never gave items any respect) and understanding the legitimacy of both rulesets.

That sounds very revisionist history. From what I hear, in 2004, Items On were almost extinct. They had been on the down-turn for quite a while... and a lot of people hated them. It's just that in our infancy, the scene had yet to come to such a point where they could conclusively state "Off with your head!" to items.

In 2004 came the final nails, but Items On had been on the decline for quite some time. Also, All-Brawl is stupid just for having items on. All-Brawl is stupid for what items are on and a bunch of other BS.

Besides, again I ask: why must we give everything equal respect? All-Brawl has every right to exist, people are free to use what rulesets they want to use. I'll try to talk them out of it if I encounter such a tournament but not by demeaning the TOs. But if the TOs ultimately use All-Brawl, then it's their every right to.

But it's also my every right to scoff at All-Brawl. I don't like it, I think it's preposterous. So shoot me.

Something akin to the DH in MLB. AL/NL don't agree on it, but will agree to disagree and play on each other's terms on quite the occasion. Those of All-Brawl have done this. The majority of those that don't like All-Brawl rules don't meet us on that common ground.

"Don't meet us on that common ground"? Like what? All-Brawl is mutually exclusive with SBR rules since one of the fundamental differences is Items On vs. Items Off. Items On is an entirely different game than Items Off (yes, I have clocked 100's of hours of Items On Smash).

If we refuse to play Items On in Competitive play, that's our prejorative. You can play them with Items On if you want to. We've never insulted you for doing so, we just dislike the rules. You have every right to do what you want to do.

Also, for those who balk at how Keits never played Melee competitively, this may be true, but he's had the support of the majority of the original Melee players that were in competitive play when items were actually in to know what the game was like before the banfest.

Name these players. Also, I very much doubt that. The All-Brawl ruleset was scoffed at by the community at large and the scoffing was not primarily due to items being on but by a bunch of other hoopla like arbitrary judgement calls on what constitutes "too much stalling" and stuff.

We might not all be in total agreement with him at this point, but we all pretty much agree that items in concept have done nothing but improve from Melee to Brawl in terms of their legitimacy as an equally competitive option.

That would be true... if Keits hadn't turned Smash Balls on.

 

[Zodiac]

these games have the same fundmentals, brawl wasnt changed so much that items should be allowed. fools

 

[Cyntalan Maelstrom]

Why? Why can't we treat it like a freakshow if, in our opinion, it's a freakshow? Why do we have to give it equal grounds with the SBR ruleset?I don't insult the proponents of All-Brawl, I just insult the rules themselves, which is within my every right to.

Because the people that disagree but DON'T can. If you're too busy whining about the idea to remove the blindfold and actually see it for what it is, then I can't help you.

That sounds very revisionist history. From what I hear, in 2004, Items On were almost extinct. They had been on the down-turn for quite a while... and a lot of people hated them. It's just that in our infancy, the scene had yet to come to such a point where they could conclusively state "Off with your head!" to items.

In 2004 came the final nails, but Items On had been on the decline for quite some time. Also, All-Brawl is stupid just for having items on. All-Brawl is stupid for what items are on and a bunch of other BS.

And this is where you prove that you know nothing about Smash's history prior to your arrival into the scene. Until around TG6, the only legitimate argument (containers are broke) was never thought of. Back then, the VA area had a distaste for it, Washington preferred against but didn't care, as did NY, Florida was actually PRO-items, as was Cali. Chi and TX didn't really have a preference, but typically ran no items. The container argument came up, and it was pretty much universally agreed that items had to go. The support went away because the legitimacy was gone.

Besides, again I ask: why must we give everything equal respect? All-Brawl has every right to exist, people are free to use what rulesets they want to use. I'll try to talk them out of it if I encounter such a tournament but not by demeaning the TOs. But if the TOs ultimately use All-Brawl, then it's their every right to.

But it's also my every right to scoff at All-Brawl. I don't like it, I think it's preposterous. So shoot me.

Fine, dislike it all you want. But don't bash it because some people actually do like it. That's where the respect comes in.

"Don't meet us on that common ground"? Like what? All-Brawl is mutually exclusive with SBR rules since one of the fundamental differences is Items On vs. Items Off. Items On is an entirely different game than Items Off (yes, I have clocked 100's of hours of Items On Smash).

If we refuse to play Items On in Competitive play, that's our prejorative. You can play them with Items On if you want to. We've never insulted you for doing so, we just dislike the rules. You have every right to do what you want to do.

You call our ideas on how the game should be played a joke. That's an insult. You give us no respect for having a different opinion. That's insulting. That's crossing the line. If someone showed up in your area wanting to run an All-Brawl tourney along side one of yours, what would you do?

Name these players. Also, I very much doubt that. The All-Brawl ruleset was scoffed at by the community at large and the scoffing was not primarily due to items being on but by a bunch of other hoopla like arbitrary judgement calls on what constitutes "too much stalling" and stuff.

Off the top of my head? Besides myself, LordLocke, Scamp, Recipherus, and Monte all have been pretty much for items in play as a legitimate option. All of which were around since Melee became competitive, and with the exception of Scamp, pretty much dropped out of the scene not too much longer after items were removed from play. Hell, Mattdeezie would be open about this too if he actually cared about Smash competitively anymore (I still talk with him on occasion, so this is fact, not theory).

As far as this arbitrary nonsense, you're taking it way out of context. ALL events at Evo had a similar rule regarding a TO making a final judgement. It's put in place as a preventative measure, not as an expectation. The fact that this isn't clear to you just shows how biased you can be to attempt to prove your point.

That would be true... if Keits hadn't turned Smash Balls on.

I'm gonna let you in on something. Part of the reason we see All-Brawl as it is today is because the incredibly thickheadedness from this community has turned Keits almost as stubborn as you. I have a feeling Smash Balls will end up proven to be too good. But I'm not gonna make that call yet. That's where we differ. You "logging in 100s of hours" and actually playing it in a competitive setting are two different things, and as more people actually do this, they recognize that they were under the wrong impression. It doesn't necessarily change their opinion on their preferred play (see AZ), but respect is created. Maybe if you weren't so stubborn and afraid of an alternate opinion you'd open your mind a little more and we could actually see eye to eye.

And this will be the last time I feed this troll here.

 

[IvanEva]

1. The topic is "Will All-Brawl be a Competitive standard?" - We're arguing "No it won't".

2. But it's wrong to enter debates where such knowledge is required without possessing it.

1. Good. On-topic. I'm arguing (barely) that it will eventually. I know that Smash Boards (all message boards?) has a perchant for being negative but with so much Brawl-hate going around, I wouldn't be surprised if players start looking for something "new" in about a year or so. All-Brawl may one day end up on top. It's definitely (well, in my opinion...) more entertaining to watch.

2. What the **** does the direction to DI Marth's up-tilt have to do with All-Brawl!? If you're trying to 'test his knowledge' how about picking something more relevant like how to get out of a fan, avoid a Dragoon, how many hits from certain moves it takes to break the Smash ball, etc. Hey, off the top of your head, how much damage does a Smash attack from the beam sword do? If you don't know does that make you unqualified to post here? No.

I can't remember which post it was but some people (Yuna?) have been talking about All-Brawl and Evo-Brawl as if they were the same thing. They're not and it's very important that we recognize that. Evo-Brawl was an odd amalgamation between All-Brawl and SBR-Brawl. Notable differences between the two (with SBR-Brawl in for comparion):

Evo-Brawl:
- 3 stock, 5 minute timer, 2/3 games
- Some items, some stages
- No Sudden Death
- Initial stage is Smashville

All-Brawl:
- 2 stock, 3 minute timer, 3/5 games
- All items, all stages
- Suddent Death
- Initial stage is random

SBR-Brawl:
- 3 stock, 8 minute timer, 2/3 games
- No items, some stages
- No Sudden Death
- Initial stage is a randomly chosen/stricking stage from a list of 'neutrals'

 

[ph00tbag]

1. Good. On-topic. I'm arguing (barely) that it will eventually. I know that Smash Boards (all message boards?) has a perchant for being negative but with so much Brawl-hate going around, I wouldn't be surprised if players start looking for something "new" in about a year or so. All-Brawl may one day end up on top. It's definitely (well, in my opinion...) more entertaining to watch.

There's no Brawl-hate that I see among people that play Brawl competitively. The only hate I see for it is from people who only play Melee, and they would be more averse to the All-Brawl ruleset than most people who actually play Brawl now. Your argument has been made already, and it's no less silly than it was before.

 

[Cyntalan Maelstrom]

There's no Brawl-hate that I see among people that play Brawl competitively. The only hate I see for it is from people who only play Melee, and they would be more averse to the All-Brawl ruleset than most people who actually play Brawl now. Your argument has been made already, and it's no less silly than it was before.

I wouldn't say that. There has been a lot of heated debate over a number of stages, as well as the growing crowd that wants to ban Meta Knight. Inside of one year of the game's life. With this game, here alone, there's been a lot of anger from those who were never gonna leave Melee, those that had all intentions of leaving Melee, and those that wanted to give Brawl a chance. There is some truth to the belief that a lot of people may ditch this game for others (in SWF's case, Melee), but while the numbers dwindle over the community's split on Diet-Brawl, it would seem All-Brawl is growing in harmony, both with the All-Brawlers and the Diet-Brawlers. There's no proof that the future is All-Brawl, but watching things turn out over here, it's not nearly as far fetched of an idea as you might think.

As a fan of All-Brawl, I neither see it, nor want it, to become the de facto standard if competitive Brawl as it stands under SWF's ruleset peaks early. I want both of 'em to be played side by side. It's hilarious, and a little sad, to see that there's not a single All-Brawler not willing to play Diet-Brawl, but the inverse is exactly that. My hat is off to AZ for recognizing All-Brawl, especially considering he still doesn't like it.

 

[Animeko]

Wow this thread moved fast. Time to catch up… This post is going to be a long one..

Of course, if those fellows actually tried Melee before, I don't think this thread would have been created and the amount of noobishness on the SRK Brawl boards would be less than it is now.

and

these games have the same fundmentals, brawl wasnt changed so much that items should be allowed. Fools

*cough* Let me link you both back to post 226 and 228 of the thread: http://www.smashboards.com/showpost.php?p=5646541&postcount=226
http://www.smashboards.com/showpost.php?p=5647868&postcount=228

Melee requires a different set of technical skills that are not needed or present in Brawl. Melee’s a different game. Honestly, it doesn’t matter if people have played Melee or not. I thought we already came to that conclusion.

1 tournament is hardly enough to prove anything. And since we only have on-paper facts for this besides that one tournament with highly flawed rules that ultimately didn't random the results too much, that's really all we can discuss, the on paper aspects.

On-paper facts do not prove anything, either. Do you play Brawl on paper?

Actually, two tournaments have run All-Brawl (MN Meltdown and SB3). A minor All-Brawl tournament was held online ages ago as well. (You should do a little research first before contributing to the discussion). All-Brawl will probably be run at Final Round in Atlanta as well, so we’ll see what happens there.

So far, the best players have won All-Brawl. Also, the bracket results were consistent with regular brawl.

MN Meltdown:

Super Smash Brothers Brawl - 16-man Bracket:
1 DeShane Strong (D. Disciple)
2 Khristopher McDonald (56K)
3 Caleb Anderson (Bubbaloo)
4 Tim Dao (Ravepulse)
5 Adam Heart (Keits)

(note: Bubbaloo did not enter All-Brawl)

All-Brawl - 32-man Bracket:
1 Adam Heart (Keits)
2 DeShane Strong (D. Disciple)
3 Jeff Meidt (Jefe)
4 Jordan LanLu (Guang)
5 Tim Dao (Ravepulse)

Season's Beatings III:
SUPER SMASH BROS. BRAWL (68 players)
1st). Inui - MetaKnight
2nd). Forward - Snake/Pit
3rd). AlphaZealot - Diddy Kong
4th). Dook - Snake/Lucario

(note: Inui and Dook did not enter All-Brawl.)

ALL-BRAWL (30 players)
1.) Forward
2.) AlphaZealot
3.) Pyro
4.) SkiSonic!

(note: SkiSonic did not enter regular Brawl.)

Keits and his band of jolly little fellows congratulate themselves in less than 100 people attending tournaments that they deemed are ''huge success''.

You realize that Season's Beatings III only had 68 entrants for regular Brawl, right? Was that an unsuccessful tournament as well? Even so, what does 100 people have to do with a successful tournament? I could get 100 of my relatives together for a big ol’ game of Brawl and it wouldn’t be much of a showcase of skill. kr3wman, I don’t want to call you out but you’ve been making dumb post after dumb post in this thread. Think about what you're saying before posting, please, you're not really contributing to the discussion.

I think that ''All-Brawl'' will be in the shadow of the Competitive smash scene and while huge Melee and Brawl Tournaments continue to happen

For the most part I agree with that. However, the next major All-Brawl tournament will probably be held at Final Round in Atlanta. From what I hear, the competitive scene in Atlanta has already abandoned Brawl and is now back to playing Melee.

---

It needs to be reiterated because people never learn/are unwilling to learn.

People, like myself, are unwilling to ban something simply because it appears broken. After playing around with items on, most if not all the items I thought were broken were actually pretty easy to deal with. Saying that other "people never or are unwilling to learn" is hypocritical when coming out of your mouth, dude.

And before you suggest that the winner simply kill the loser, I suggest you really do some testing on stages like Hyrule Temple and New Pork City, and tell me that those stages don't make it really hard to KO someone who knows how to run away.

There has been testing on Hyrule Temple, New Pork City, and 75m. If you look at the Minnesota Meltdown and Season's Beatings III videos, there is not that much runaway occuring on those stages (so far). Either players are unable to run away effectively or they are just not aware of that tactic.

There is one really cool instance of runaway, however.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L174gTSrT10
2:33 / 3:42

Sooo hilarious.

Hmm, Deoxsys, Groudon, and Suicune out of a pokeball vs. a munchlax out of a pokeball is so fair right? Not broken at all…

Unfair, hell yes! Broken, no. No one has won a tournament, much less a set, with those items alone. The whole premise behind All-Brawl is to test to see if certain items are truly broken before banning them.

---

I'm sorry, I thought the thread topic clearly states "Is All-Brawl the future competitive standard". I don't know about you, but when I enter threads, I kinda argue what the thread is about, not random related topics.

That’s not random, that is where the thread ended up going after 15 pages, when AlphaZealot said All-Brawl would be a good side tournament.

...determine that I'm wrong for scoffing at what I perceive to be ludicrous rules.

All I’ve seen you post is preconceptions. Theories are worth nothing compared to evidence. Show me example videos, show me example brackets that prove these rules are ludicrous. Better yet, enter an All-Brawl tournament for yourself and tell me what you experienced, as you are this “Yuna” that “has a hands-on, visceral approach to discussions”.

Why? Why can't we treat it like a freakshow if, in our opinion, it's a freakshow? Why do we have to give it equal grounds with the SBR ruleset?I don't insult the proponents of All-Brawl, I just insult the rules themselves, which is within my every right to…my every right to scoff at All-Brawl. I don't like it, I think it's preposterous. So shoot me.

At this point, I don’t think you have the right. You have shown no concrete evidence as to how All-Brawl is preposterous.

---

That sounds like a great idea! Nothing banned. Actually, I have a better idea, let's play rock-paper-scissors to decide who wins the match.

SO exaggerated... If you think it's that simple, then enter All-Brawl. You could win some cash with that kind of confidence.

If I stab someone in the chest and they don't die from it doesn't mean I can declare that it's safe to stab people in that particular spot.

Dang Yuna, what's with all the grim analogies lately?

My thoughts exactly.

Don't you think you're being a little irrational?

 

[Bocom]

"Fine, dislike it all you want. But don't bash it because some people actually do like it. That's where the respect comes in."

"You call our ideas on how the game should be played a joke. That's an insult. You give us no respect for having a different opinion. That's insulting. That's crossing the line."

Oh you mean how people insult(s/ed) us for playing without items? Or that we didn't "play the game as it was meant to be played"? Respect is given where respect is due. (Not targeted at you or anyone, just a general remark)

On the topic of All-Brawl. I don't hate it, but I don't love it. When I got into the scene in Melee, I adapted to no items. In Brawl, it's more or less not true anymore, because only some of my friends like playing with items off. That being said, most of the time is without items, because that's how I like it.

Offtopic: With THAT being said, I still like to play items on matches. In fact, one of my most epic moments was a items on match. (It was on Mushroomy Kingdom Overworld, I was Marth, and my two other friends were Pit and Pikachu. I had lost some other matches before, and I decided to take it more seriously. The results? I three stocked them all without losing a single one. I first killed my friend playing Pit with three carefully planned Football KOs, and the Pikachu playing one with first a Smart Bomb that I threw to kill him and to get the Smash Ball, the second kill was the Final Smash, and the third one using a Hammer and a Giant Mushroom. The match ended after about 1 minute and 5 seconds. Random? Pretty much. Skillful? A little, but it was mostly only the last two Football kills and Smart Bomb KO/Smash Ball break that was carefully planned. Awesome? Hell yes!)

EDIT:

"At this point, I don’t think you have the right. You have shown no concrete evidence as to how All-Brawl is preposterous. "

He should show evidence for how he thinks?

Wait, let me reiterate:

He need to show evidence for his own opinions in order to actually have the right to think so?

Call me a moron, but I think that's a little unfair.

Also, online isn't comparable to "real-life" matches. In my opinion, but I think people agree with me.

 

[Animeko]

He should show evidence for how he thinks? He need to show evidence for his own opinions in order to actually have the right to think so?

He can think whatever he wants, I guess. You can think the world is flat and I couldn't stop you. I guess what I meant to say is that he doesn't have the right to state that All-Brawl is a joke. A good argument has evidence to back it up, not feelings- and at this point, his opinion IS based on feelings, not reality. An opinion based outside of reality and fact is not an opinion I am going to care about, and I don't think I'm the only one that feels that way.

Call me a moron, but I think that's a little unfair.

Erm alright, you're a moron...? I've backed up my opinion with videos and brackets as evidence. I've done my part. It would be fair to have the 'no items' side of the argument do the same.

 

[kr3wman]

Playing with items on is stupid if the results aren't different enough to warrant an actual reason to add those random factors.

That's how I see it.

Oh yeah, and this :

Skill determines matches for the most part, but items can spin things around, giving players advantages or disadvantages they didn't deserve.

However, when two players are evenly matched (close in skill), the items CAN determine matches. They don't necessarily help both players evenly, even when both players are equally skilled with them.

 

[Animeko]

Playing with items on is stupid if the results aren't different enough to warrant an actual reason to add those random factors.

Without them, Brawl is really plain compared to Melee. They add a layer of complexity and entertainment without changing the results.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wolf Pup TK View Post
Skill determines matches for the most part, but items can spin things around, giving players advantages or disadvantages they didn't deserve.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ftl
However, when two players are evenly matched (close in skill), the items CAN determine matches. They don't necessarily help both players evenly, even when both players are equally skilled with them.

Again, show me the video or bracket evidence. Those statements are empty without examples.