• Welcome to Smashboards, the world's largest Super Smash Brothers community! Over 250,000 Smash Bros. fans from around the world have come to discuss these great games in over 19 million posts!

    You are currently viewing our boards as a visitor. Click here to sign up right now and start on your path in the Smash community!

Canada [Jul 26, 2014] B.C. Brawl Monthlies - Back in business, now featuring Smash 64! (Burnaby, BC)

Alacion

Alacion

Sunny skies
Premium
Joined
Oct 6, 2009
Messages
8,061
Location
Vancouver, BC
NNID
Alacion
3DS FC
0216-0918-5299
Blue Yoshi said:
Kev, I'll Puff vs Zelda mm you. They're two of the worst three characters in the game.
Click to expand...
I accept. Bo5 because I want my money's worth, haha.

I'll MM everybody, but I'm not willing to throw out as much money for characters such as Snake, ROB, Falco, and Olimar.
 
Jason!

Jason!

Smash Lord
Joined
Nov 13, 2011
Messages
1,725
Location
BC, Canada
Courier said:
I accept. Bo5 because I want my money's worth, haha.

I'll MM everybody, but I'm not willing to throw out as much money for characters such as Snake, ROB, Falco, and Olimar.
Click to expand...
Ok fine MK v Zelda 10 dollars letsss goooooooooooooooooooooo LOL
 
Blue Yoshi

Blue Yoshi

Smash Master
Joined
Mar 3, 2008
Messages
4,410
Location
Jake is definitely dropping Yoshi
Kev, I was just joking. I know how much you hate Puff, and you said everyone plays top tiers, so I just said Puff vs Zelda as a joke.

If you REALLY want to mm me, then sure, but I'm just saying it was meant to be a joke lol.

Oh, by the way, it was meant to be a joke.

And Asa, I was about to say that lol.
 
Alacion

Alacion

Sunny skies
Premium
Joined
Oct 6, 2009
Messages
8,061
Location
Vancouver, BC
NNID
Alacion
3DS FC
0216-0918-5299
Honestly I don't mind MM-ing but given who I use and my skill at the game it's not exactly... fun knowing my chances of winning are next to none.
 
Arcansi

Arcansi

Smash Champion
Joined
Jul 9, 2011
Messages
2,545
Location
BC(Vancouver Island) Canada
Kantrip said:
So the problem is that chaingrabs are more "popular"?
Click to expand...
It's not that I don't want them limited either.

It's that most of the brawl community is really, really stuck in their ways (see: old people) and there is a line that can't be crossed when suggesting something, where people will all out ignore you because 'lolol you just suck' etc etc.

In fact, OPTIMALLY, I would only limit the stupidly 'overpowered' chaingrabs like DDD on DK, etc.

People would be way too against this for it to ever happen, although it is the smartest move.

It's one of the worst things I've ever seen, but it exists.

This crosses that line, currently.

Kantrip said:
I would like you to describe to me what it is about a chaingrab that you feel should be disallowed.
Click to expand...
The fact that getting a grab honestly should NOT reward someone with that much value. It lacks competitiveness, balance(this is before matchups are considered, mind you.), and other such things.

Captain L said:
With regards to Arcansi's post

I'm not 100% sure of what your rule is, but by the sounds of things it's a regrab limit that only lets me do 3 regrabs?


I am terrible at fighting spacies. For some reason I feel I get ***** way harder than I would if it was like MK or someone. Maybe it's a lack of legitimate experience since I tend to CG them whenever I fight them? I don't know. And yet, my saving grace in those matchups is chaingrabbing. I don't want to have Falco Fox and Wolf become problem matchups for me. I'm quite happy with them being write-offs for my opponents.

This is all on top of the fact that I'm opposed to surgical nerfs on principal.
Click to expand...
1. (No Offence Intended) I read this as "Waah, my +3 matchups get nerfed!" (Note that this is a good thing for the game, a counterpick should be around +2 at best)

2. If your opposed to surgical nerfs, why aren't you opposed to the LGL(or haven't done anything to change it?) I mean, the LGL surgically nerfs some characters strong ledge games.

Blue Yoshi said:
My main reason for disagreement with the chaingrab rule is you are picking 5 characters that have a similar quality, and saying they are no longer viable. All I see is someone who walked into one too many chaingrabs, and now wants them removed.
Click to expand...
Falco would stay viable, just move down. Pika idk about. DDD would DEFINITELY stay viable. Doesn't affect IC's. Idk who the fifth is.

You have no way to infer that given what you've been given, other then a blind guess.

I would appreciate it if you didn't insult me on blind guesses.

Blue Yoshi said:
I've dealt with this in the 64 forums. There was a tournament being held online where Kirby was going to be banned due to his up-tilt being broken. Some questioned it, while others were indifferent since they don't use Kirby. Me, as a Puff main at the time, said if you ban Kirby, I'm not entering, and half the 64 boards followed behind me. Kirby was later unbanned from that tournament, and it went on fine.
Click to expand...
You opposed the rule without reason and won due to the unreasonableness of those around you. Why are you proud? All you did in essence was prove how much the Smash Community feels like stereotypical elderly people.

They just don't want what they have taken away, no matter how much it would benefit them.



Blue Yoshi said:
Not to mention chaingrabs add another element into the game, giving it more depth and adding more complexity to the game.
Click to expand...
And yet they remove skill definition overall. They are also uncompetitive by nature.

MarioMaster2005 said:
Also, why are you for all this "balancing" but yet you want the LGL removed?

The LGL should be lowered, what, get at me.
Click to expand...
The LGL is a surgical nerf to some characters ledge games that only serves a purpose in preventing stalling which is uneffective in a very large portion of matchups. I do not see how it is a good thing.

Would you care to provide your reasoning?

T-block said:
I wonder, if Arcansi wants a re grab limit because chain grabs lower depth, is he okay with allowing gimping?
Click to expand...
See Below

Captain L said:
he'll probably say that gimps require reads and aren't 100% guaranteed all the time like chaingrabs are.
Click to expand...

Blue Yoshi said:
I know he has more than just that, but essentially, it boils down to "I don't like chaingrabs, they must be banned".
Click to expand...
How can you say it boils down to this? What reasoning is going through your head?

Blue Yoshi said:
The thing I find the funniest is he thinks he is convincing people that his way is better. Yet nobody cares about his rules at all, and (sorry to disappoint you Arcansi), lots of people are even making fun of the rules.
Click to expand...
The people don't want to be talked too, it would seem. I would back down, if I was logically proven wrong. I haven't been, so far.

Just proven to be in a slightly grey area atm.


Blue Yoshi said:
I also support a reduced ledge grab limit. You are never going to reach 50 ledge grabs unless you are trying to DQ yourself.
Click to expand...
Why?

:fluttershy:

DeLux said:
People are more or less going to run what their tourney attendance tells them, what other TO's tell them or what top players tell them.
Click to expand...
This shouldn't be true, but it is. It's like the community is lazy or something.
 
Arcansi

Arcansi

Smash Champion
Joined
Jul 9, 2011
Messages
2,545
Location
BC(Vancouver Island) Canada
T-block said:
getting a grab requires a read too

but with a gimp, you get the entire stock off a read. when falco CG's you, most characters only take 50% =o
Click to expand...
Gimps are universal, grab's aren't

If grabs did universally 50% damage, I wouldn't want them limited.

:fluttershy:

Why will most people in the smash community listen to what they feel like more then what balances the game out? Why are people okay with their character having new techniques found that make it horrible, but not okay with putting new rules in that make it slightly worse?
 
Blue Yoshi

Blue Yoshi

Smash Master
Joined
Mar 3, 2008
Messages
4,410
Location
Jake is definitely dropping Yoshi
Arcansi, I am no longer reading your argument posts, and will instead just skip them, because they are mostly illogical and pointless to read.

One of the things I hate the most that people do is say that their way is the best way, and try to force people into that way. You are coming in and saying your way is ideal and the best way, and that we are idiots for not wanting to see it your way. Well, sorry, but if that is the attitude you are going to bring into the debate/argument, then sorry, but I'm not interested in dealing with it, and good luck getting anyone to go on your side. Everybody here is freely willing to try a new ruleset. We even had allbrawl, a ruleset that completely contradicts almost every aspect of the Unity ruleset. If you were to debate in such a way that you are accepting of other people's opinions, then maybe BC's rules can somewhat be modified in a way that makes you and everybody happy. However, for whatever reason, you are dead set on making your ruleset THE ruleset to the point where not many people even care about what you say anymore.

There is no "correct" or "ideal" ruleset. It is all subjective. However, when it comes to the brawl community, BC or world, majority rules. You may not like some rules that are in place. If this is so, then fine, state your disagreements. If a majority disagrees, then drop it and deal with it. There are several rules in the ruleset that I disagree with (e.g. ledge grab limit being too high), but a majority of BC wants it where it is or wants it removed entirely, so due to majority rules, I don't get my way, and I have to deal with it. Why don't you do the same, save us this trouble and just adapt.



I don't mean to be rude or mean in any way, but I hate it when people talk like that (I'm right, you're wrong, and that's that), and that is exactly how you are arguing, and I had enough, so sorry, but I'm skipping your posts for now until you change your argument style or stop arguing entirely. Sorry, but I had enough.
 
Arcansi

Arcansi

Smash Champion
Joined
Jul 9, 2011
Messages
2,545
Location
BC(Vancouver Island) Canada
And this is where my reality becomes different then Rob's

He types this nice emotional post and I look at it, look at my post, and wonder what he read because it probably wasn't what I typed.

Rob seems to be able to get reasoning out of nowhere, and is fine with not explaning it while claiming everything.

I can learn very little from what he writes, because he proves very little.

Am I expected to just assume what he says is right? Am I expected to prove it myself?

I don't understand. I am accepting of your opinion, and I don't see how you see what you are seeing.

But you don't want to tell me how, or you would've. You just want to say your piece and leave, kinda like how Aisight ragequit my thread when I was completly willing to change the way I was arguing based on his local ruleset...

People keep assuming things and acting like it's okay. Is It?

I ask so many questions because I know I think differently from you guys. And I'm trying to understand, but my way of thinking just keeps ending up superior. It keeps me away from emotional outbursts that lead to insanely wrong conclusions, etc.

And that's all the proof I've got.

:fluttershy:
 
Kantrip

Kantrip

Kantplay
Joined
Jul 11, 2010
Messages
10,188
Location
B.C. Canada
We should ban smash attacks. Some do like 7% damage and some do like 26% damage.

This is your logic at the moment, Arcansi.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom