Ness Question and Answer Thread, Ask Ness questions Here!

[Uffe]

That's the first time I've ever seen that. But it'd be great if you could do that on all stages with Ness.

 

[thesage]

I like this better...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5liUEc6QTKQ&feature=channel

 

[Uffe]

He felt the rage of thesage. I want to play Melee now.

 

[Winnar]

Hey here's a question

Why are grab release infinites not banned? What possible argument is there for keeping them legal in tournaments?

At least Ice Climber infinites take practice...

 

[Levitas]

The most prominent argument I've heard is that it doesn't significantly impact gameplay :x

Second most is that it would be somewhat difficult to determine what to ban, as banning grabbing and pummelling would be silly, and banning grabbing pummelling regrab x2 would be hard to enforce. Not exactly a clincher, but a legit point.

That said, I view it as an inconsistency in the philosophy in ruleset condoned by the SBR, which kinda sucks.

 

[Winnar]

The most prominent argument I've heard is that it doesn't significantly impact gameplay :x

Second most is that it would be somewhat difficult to determine what to ban, as banning grabbing and pummelling would be silly, and banning grabbing pummelling regrab x2 would be hard to enforce. Not exactly a clincher, but a legit point.

That said, I view it as an inconsistency in the philosophy in ruleset condoned by the SBR, which kinda sucks.

It DOES significantly impact gameplay. If you have ever played a squirtle, charizard, marth, etc. then you know how futile it is to play Ness.

And it's not even hard to draw the line. You just say no grab release to regrab more than once or twice. After the second time it's clear that they're just going to infinite you. Just pause the match, tell them to stop because it's banned, and if they continue or do it again then call the TO or a judge and DQ them. Easy.

This is literally the reason I stopped playing Ness. He's such a beast, but this ******** thing completely subverts everything good about him.

Edit - there are other characters/matchups too, like wario vs yoshi (yoshi's standing grab release infinite), DDD vs DK/Samus/etc. that would follow under this same category

 

[Uffe]

Hey here's a question

Why are grab release infinites not banned? What possible argument is there for keeping them legal in tournaments?

At least Ice Climber infinites take practice...

The Ice Climbers' infinite takes practice, but then after that it's just second nature, which to the IC main makes it seem like a regular infinite. The only reason I see that not ever being banned is because their grab is very very short and possibly the worst. As for characters like Squirtle and Marth, I see no reason for them to infinite Ness since they still have a better outcome on the match against him anyway. I can see them being forced to use it if they're losing, because that'd be the only reason I'd ever infinite someone. And I hate hearing people talk about how King Dedede must use his infinites on various characters otherwise he's a bad character. But I disagree with that.

 

[Delta-cod]

Hey here's a question

Why are grab release infinites not banned? What possible argument is there for keeping them legal in tournaments?

At least Ice Climber infinites take practice...

How difficult something is to do should not effect whether or not it should be banned. If it's humanly possible, it should be considered done.

Anyways, the argument for keeping it legal is that it only affects Ness/Lucas, and by banning it we're artificially rebalancing the game. Now, if EVERYONE could be regrabbed by anyone for an infinite, we'd ban it, since it breaks the entire game.

It DOES significantly impact gameplay. If you have ever played a squirtle, charizard, marth, etc. then you know how futile it is to play Ness.

And it's not even hard to draw the line. You just say no grab release to regrab more than once or twice. After the second time it's clear that they're just going to infinite you. Just pause the match, tell them to stop because it's banned, and if they continue or do it again then call the TO or a judge and DQ them. Easy.

This is literally the reason I stopped playing Ness. He's such a beast, but this ******** thing completely subverts everything good about him.

Edit - there are other characters/matchups too, like wario vs yoshi (yoshi's standing grab release infinite), DDD vs DK/Samus/etc. that would follow under this same category

It only significantly affects Ness. Nobody else but Wario has problems with Grab releases, but have you TRIED to grab a Wario? I main Yoshi, it's **** hard to grab him. Also, he air releases straight up, meaning there are very few viable places to perform the infinite. Final Destination is banned, meaning you have the center of Battlefield, and maybe some places on some CPs, though Wario makes most CPs his playground.

 

[Winnar]

The Ice Climbers' infinite takes practice, but then after that it's just second nature, which to the IC main makes it seem like a regular infinite.

Guaran-****ing-tee you that you are wrong about this

As a former IC main who can perform the infinites (or could at the time of maining), I would NEVER say that the IC infinites are like a regular infinite. That's like saying drill shining against a wall in melee is comparable to DDD's dthrow wall infinite

As for characters like Squirtle and Marth, I see no reason for them to infinite Ness since they still have a better outcome on the match against him anyway. I can see them being forced to use it if they're losing, because that'd be the only reason I'd ever infinite someone.

This doesn't make sense

This isn't about personal moral choices. This is about taking the path of least resistance. If Marth or Squirtle grab Ness, that is the stock. It is at least 99% guaranteed.

And I hate hearing people talk about how King Dedede must use his infinites on various characters otherwise he's a bad character. But I disagree with that.

Fairly positive I never said that, but to address the argument... I THINK you're misinterpretting "DDD is not as strong a character without infinites/CGs" for "DDD is worthless without infinites/CGs"

How difficult something is to do should not effect whether or not it should be banned. If it's humanly possible, it should be considered done.

This is wrong. Saying that you should treat IC infinites and grab release infinites the same because theoretically they both have a 100% success rate is...wrong.

IC infinites, when practiced and practiced and practiced, can have a high practical success rate for 0-death'ing. Possibly around 90-95% I would guess, at best.

Grab release infinites, regardless of practice or skill, have a practical success rate that borders on 100%

Anyways, the argument for keeping it legal is that it only affects Ness/Lucas, and by banning it we're artificially rebalancing the game. Now, if EVERYONE could be regrabbed by anyone for an infinite, we'd ban it, since it breaks the entire game.

I'm sorry, you're opposed to artificial rebalancing?

You're opposed to...what? You ban stages, items, planking/stalling, OTHER infinites, and you draw the line of "artificial rebalancing" HERE? At the banning of a gameplay oversight that renders an otherwise unique and balanced character unplayable?

Or maybe I should say unmainable, because that's closer to the truth. Ness mains are all but doomed to lose every set they play, assuming they are playing someone who is serious about winning.

Let me repeat that: True Ness mains should never EVER win a tournament SET, much less an entire tournament, unless this infinite is banned.

Ness isn't even my main and I am outraged at this, why does no one else have a problem with this?

 

[Chuee]

lol only two MU's would be affected by banning the infinite. Squirtle isn't one.
Also how the **** should Ness never win a set?

 

[Zero_Gamer]

I agree with Winnar.

Enforcing a limit on chaingrabs is very possible, especially compared to impossible to enforce limitations such as air camping, as you can clearly define what a re-grab is and does.

As a TO, one of my rules is that King Dedede is allowed one standing re-grab per grab on Mario, Luigi, Samus, Bowser, DK, Wolf (offstage), and Dedede (offstage). I don't see anything wrong with extending the ruleset to cover these infinites on Ness/Lucas, although number of re-grabs allowed in this case (since pummeling yields little damage) may be debatable, but difficulty in debating that is practically a non-issue.

I wouldn't enforce limitations to infinites on Wario or ZSS's infinite on ROB as those are much more difficult to actually land and shouldn't be compared to infinites on Ness/Lucas as they are hugely easier to land.

 

[Levitas]

Winnar, let me explain a couple things. NOT justify. Explain.

First: defining a ruleset necessarily rebalances a game. Artificial is a term that cannot be defined in this context, and as such I am disregarding it.

For any set of rules, there is an optimal way to play it. More complex games require different insights. Tic tac toe requires logic and nothing more. Super smash bros games tend to require two things: knowledge of the game (encompassing skill, reaction time, control, and good play) as well as knowledge of the metagame (what characters other people are using and therefore what character you should use to win).

BOTTOM LINE OF THIS POINT: no matter how you slice it, a game will have favored characters. This community tends to set boundries on what is fair, and could be doing worse. I will not defend the flaws of this particular ruleset BUT every game gives advantages to some and disadvantages to other styles of play.

SECOND POINT: this one's a history lesson.

At the time when the rules regarding grab release infinites were discussed, misinformation was spread on this point. To the point that there is still ambiguity over who's right.

I'm referring to EIDI. This referred to a technique that would put ness/lucas far enough away to escape the next grab. I've done extensive frame research on this, and concluded that if it does exist, it isn't by any real form of skill, but rather a timed break within the pummel animation of the grabber. As in, impossible to control with skill. Oh, did I forget to mention that I've been unable to produce even that result? I've never done a grab break that puts me far enough away even by chance in my testing. As far as I'm concerned, whether by skill or not, EIDI or anything that does what it would do does not exist.

Everyone at the time had accepted EIDI as a skill based mechanic, therefore everyone had this notion that ness/lucas can get away and that it wasn't an infinite after all.

BOTTOM LINE OF THIS POINT: Misinformation on behalf of our own has actively shaped the ruleset to its current state. I don't believe that people who decided it wasn't ban-worthy did it just to screw us over, especially with this considered.

Your underlined bolded italicized statement is true. So the best course of action would be to attempt to bring this to the attention of people who care and can make a difference, rather than just make bitter angry posts to people who know. Or rally people to lobby with you. make a thread here for that. BUT DON'T rely on emotional posting to win your points. Rely on inconsistencies within the rules themselves, and the reasons for those rules to win.

I'm trying to keep this as brief as possible w/o cutting anything important.

 

[Delta-cod]

This is wrong. Saying that you should treat IC infinites and grab release infinites the same because theoretically they both have a 100% success rate is...wrong.

IC infinites, when practiced and practiced and practiced, can have a high practical success rate for 0-death'ing. Possibly around 90-95% I would guess, at best.

Grab release infinites, regardless of practice or skill, have a practical success rate that borders on 100%

No, it can be done 100%. One grab should equal one stock. It is possible, so it should be considered that it is always so when discussing the matter.

Ness can air release during the grab release, guess we shouldn't consider it an infinite. The Grabber can mess up, guess it's not an infinite. Nope, it can be done without messing up, so it's done.

I'm sorry, you're opposed to artificial rebalancing?

You're opposed to...what? You ban stages, items, planking/stalling, OTHER infinites, and you draw the line of "artificial rebalancing" HERE? At the banning of a gameplay oversight that renders an otherwise unique and balanced character unplayable?

This is creating a competitive environment. What we're talking about it changing the entire metagame for ONE character.

Or maybe I should say unmainable, because that's closer to the truth. Ness mains are all but doomed to lose every set they play, assuming they are playing someone who is serious about winning.

Let me repeat that: True Ness mains should never EVER win a tournament SET, much less an entire tournament, unless this infinite is banned.

Very true. He's completely unviable due to this. Luckily, most people have a code of honor and will usually just GR > whatever strong option they have out of it. You really cannot get grabbed as Ness.

Ness isn't even my main and I am outraged at this, why does no one else have a problem with this?

I'm sure we're all angry about it. I just think most of us understand it won't be changed. I wish it were, though.

 

[Winnar]

No, it can be done 100%. One grab should equal one stock. It is possible, so it should be considered that it is always so when discussing the matter.

Perhaps you aren't familiar with the concept of practical yield versus theoretical yield?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yield_(chemistry)

Ness can air release during the grab release, guess we shouldn't consider it an infinite. The Grabber can mess up, guess it's not an infinite. Nope, it can be done without messing up, so it's done.

I don't know what most of this is saying, but addressing the air release...

It happens far less frequently in tournament matches than in friendlies.

Plus against Squirtle I don't think it ever happens

This is creating a competitive environment. What we're talking about it changing the entire metagame for ONE character.

Very true. He's completely unviable due to this. Luckily, most people have a code of honor and will usually just GR > whatever strong option they have out of it. You really cannot get grabbed as Ness.

Not good enough.

I'm sure we're all angry about it. I just think most of us understand it won't be changed. I wish it were, though.

And why not?

Winnar, let me explain a couple things. NOT justify. Explain.

First: defining a ruleset necessarily rebalances a game. Artificial is a term that cannot be defined in this context, and as such I am disregarding it.

For any set of rules, there is an optimal way to play it. More complex games require different insights. Tic tac toe requires logic and nothing more. Super smash bros games tend to require two things: knowledge of the game (encompassing skill, reaction time, control, and good play) as well as knowledge of the metagame (what characters other people are using and therefore what character you should use to win).

BOTTOM LINE OF THIS POINT: no matter how you slice it, a game will have favored characters. This community tends to set boundries on what is fair, and could be doing worse. I will not defend the flaws of this particular ruleset BUT every game gives advantages to some and disadvantages to other styles of play.

SECOND POINT: this one's a history lesson.

At the time when the rules regarding grab release infinites were discussed, misinformation was spread on this point. To the point that there is still ambiguity over who's right.

I'm referring to EIDI. This referred to a technique that would put ness/lucas far enough away to escape the next grab. I've done extensive frame research on this, and concluded that if it does exist, it isn't by any real form of skill, but rather a timed break within the pummel animation of the grabber. As in, impossible to control with skill. Oh, did I forget to mention that I've been unable to produce even that result? I've never done a grab break that puts me far enough away even by chance in my testing. As far as I'm concerned, whether by skill or not, EIDI or anything that does what it would do does not exist.

Everyone at the time had accepted EIDI as a skill based mechanic, therefore everyone had this notion that ness/lucas can get away and that it wasn't an infinite after all.

BOTTOM LINE OF THIS POINT: Misinformation on behalf of our own has actively shaped the ruleset to its current state. I don't believe that people who decided it wasn't ban-worthy did it just to screw us over, especially with this considered.

Your underlined bolded italicized statement is true. So the best course of action would be to attempt to bring this to the attention of people who care and can make a difference, rather than just make bitter angry posts to people who know. Or rally people to lobby with you. make a thread here for that. BUT DON'T rely on emotional posting to win your points. Rely on inconsistencies within the rules themselves, and the reasons for those rules to win.

I'm trying to keep this as brief as possible w/o cutting anything important.

Thank you for taking the time to fully address my concerns :D I had always wondered about EIDI.

I'm mainly going to be responding to the bolded portion.

I have a couple of reasons for asking here versus making a new thread about it. I wanted to test the waters. I wasn't sure what kind of response I would get, as I don't really frequent character specific boards. Also, I know that a lot of boards are uppity about making new threads, especially making threads about old issues. The other thing is that I don't play brawl competitively anymore, it's just been something that I've been thinking about lately.

I don't plan on going on a crusade for a character I don't main in a game I don't play. That said, it would be nice if someone did. Ness deserves more. He used to be one of my favorite characters, until I looked at playing him in tournament. I bet I'm not the only person who dropped Ness as a serious character because of this stupid grab release nonsense. Actually, I know at least 2 people (including reflex's brother who is beast at brawl) who did just that, not including myself.

This just seems like such a no-brainer to me that I thought I'd bring it up and see what happens.

 

[Saki-]

Wow such an intelligent post!

xD Levitas well stated!

 

[Yink]

Honestly, Ness does have some crappy grab release shenanigans, but I think you can get around those "to a point". That said, I'm not however, stating that because you do that, it changes how Ness is.

I totally agree with the fact that I play in tournament, and usually do very well in singles and doubles as Ness, but I do always have at least one person (usually a Wario) out of like, 50-60 people, who grab release me into fsmash. That's infuriating.

I guess all I do in that situation is pick up my secondary (Snake) and just have a go with all his fun toys.

All in all, I agree with you Winnar and with Levi.

 

[Winnar]

Honestly, Ness does have some crappy grab release shenanigans, but I think you can get around those "to a point". That said, I'm not however, stating that because you do that, it changes how Ness is.

I totally agree with the fact that I play in tournament, and usually do very well in singles and doubles as Ness, but I do always have at least one person (usually a Wario) out of like, 50-60 people, who grab release me into fsmash. That's infuriating.

I guess all I do in that situation is pick up my secondary (Snake) and just have a go with all his fun toys.

All in all, I agree with you Winnar and with Levi.

To be honest I don't even have a problem with grab release to fsmash

Or charizard grab release to dtilt which kills at like 90% or something goofy

I'm saying that grab release to infinite regrab is a blatant inconsistency that can so easily be fixed. All it takes is a TO who says "No infinite regrabs. If you regrab more than once then you will be DQ'd"

Instantly it turns squirtle vs ness into a normal match just like any other.

If such a rule is not set in place then the match is warped into an exercise in futility. Few things do that.

Hell, fox vs pikachu is less bleak than squirtle vs ness. And that's saying something.

 

[Levitas]

well in any event, if anyone has interest in taking up this issue, pm me and I'll give you the go ahead to make the thread.

I don't have the time or energy to take this up myself, but I'll do my best to give solid advice to anyone who does want to.

 

[Yink]

Spoiler

^LAZItus

Winnar I know what you're saying...it seems so easy for them to just say, "No, I'm not allowing that." The fact that they don't is a bit baffling. I suppose some people could just claim it as a strat, but then again if a Marth were to just standing infinite me, I'd maybe try a little, then come to the realization that if they resort to that, what is the point of the match even happening?

I like how you brought this subject up, we really do need to think about this kind of thing more often, rather than just say, "Oh well I guess those are the 'rules' ".

 

[Cosmopolitan]

The problem is that Ness’ disadvantages when it comes to grab releases are a direct result of his hardcoded physics (e.g. fall speed, buoyancy, etc.) as well as that of the grabber. The physics is also responsible for many of the unique advantages, quirks, etc. of particular characters. In order to legitimately abate infinite/near-infinite grab releases on Ness, you’d have to adjust said physics, effectively changing the attributes of one or more characters. Not only would you alter the characteristic feel of the characters (for instance, Ness might be much less floaty), but you’d also change the metagame for a number of matchups; Ness players would no longer have to focus primarily on grab avoidance. Balanced Brawl and B+ provide good examples. In fact, I would say that the most obstructive consequence of I.G.R.'s on Ness is not that a grab guarantees a stock, but rather that the threat of it forces a shift from an otherwise high potential for offensive play to a high necessity for defensive play.

The effect on the metagame would also apply to an outright ban of I.G.R.'s. However, in this case you would be changing Ness’ metagame without actually altering his physics. To this extent, the game would be "artificially rebalanced" but in the favor of only Ness (as Delta-cod suggested). Thus, in the interest of fairness (as unintuitive as it may sound) the infinite grab releases remain largely legal. On the other hand, stages, items, planking, etc. affect most or all characters (to a sufficient extent - observe, for instance, DDD on any walled stage), and banning these elements is unbiased because it removes them from each character’s metagame.

As for the impact on competition, I would say that I.G.R.'s have effects on both ends of the scale. Although they make people less likely to main Ness (unless, of course, they're the masochistic type), it's quite probable that they ultimately make Ness mains better (as far as cautious, meticulous playstyles are concerned). One analogue would be Metaknight, who is arguably responsible for both a skew in character selection and an increase in the average skill level of non-MK mains. However, in both cases, because it's difficult to translate the effects to numbers, we can't say for sure whether or not the net impacts on competition have been positive. Imo, for MK it has been positive, but for I.G.R.'s it's debatable. At any rate, both cases deal with the effects of character attributes on the metagame, but the difference between the two boils down to range once again; MK affects all characters, whereas infinite grab releases affect a select few.

Yes, the I.G.R.'s are frustrating, but they're essentially the (hefty) price that’s paid for some of Ness’ favorable gameplay properties. That’s just the nature of a complex game engine, however unfortunate for Ness (and any other character to whom it applies). Hopefully the next incarnation of SSB will avoid these types of matchup-breaking mechanics. Until then, it's completely up to PT, Marth, etc. players whether or not they should exercise some honor and abstain from their game-given infinite/near-infinite grab releases.

 

[Winnar]

The problem is that Ness’ disadvantages when it comes to grab releases are a direct result of his hardcoded physics (e.g. fall speed, buoyancy, etc.) as well as that of the grabber. The physics is also responsible for many of the unique advantages, quirks, etc. of particular characters. In order to legitimately abate infinite/near-infinite grab releases on Ness, you’d have to adjust said physics, effectively changing the attributes of one or more characters. Not only would you alter the characteristic feel of the characters (for instance, Ness might be much less floaty), but you’d also change the metagame for a number of matchups; Ness players would no longer have to focus primarily on grab avoidance. Balanced Brawl and B+ provide good examples. In fact, I would say that the most obstructive consequence of I.G.R.'s on Ness is not that a grab guarantees a stock, but rather that the threat of it forces a shift from an otherwise high potential for offensive play to a high necessity for defensive play.

The effect on the metagame would also apply to an outright ban of I.G.R.'s. However, in this case you would be changing Ness’ metagame without actually altering his physics. To this extent, the game would be "artificially rebalanced" but in the favor of only Ness (as Delta-cod suggested). Thus, in the interest of fairness (as unintuitive as it may sound) the infinite grab releases remain largely legal. On the other hand, stages, items, planking, etc. affect most or all characters (to a sufficient extent - observe, for instance, DDD on any walled stage), and banning these elements is unbiased because it removes them from each character’s metagame.

As for the impact on competition, I would say that I.G.R.'s have effects on both ends of the scale. Although they make people less likely to main Ness (unless, of course, they're the masochistic type), it's quite probable that they ultimately make Ness mains better (as far as cautious, meticulous playstyles are concerned). One analogue would be Metaknight, who is arguably responsible for both a skew in character selection and an increase in the average skill level of non-MK mains. However, in both cases, because it's difficult to translate the effects to numbers, we can't say for sure whether or not the net impacts on competition have been positive. Imo, for MK it has been positive, but for I.G.R.'s it's debatable. At any rate, both cases deal with the effects of character attributes on the metagame, but the difference between the two boils down to range once again; MK affects all characters, whereas infinite grab releases affect a select few.

Yes, the I.G.R.'s are frustrating, but they're essentially the (hefty) price that’s paid for some of Ness’ favorable gameplay properties. That’s just the nature of a complex game engine, however unfortunate for Ness (and any other character to whom it applies). Hopefully the next incarnation of SSB will avoid these types of matchup-breaking mechanics. Until then, it's completely up to PT, Marth, etc. players whether or not they should exercise some honor and abstain from their game-given infinite/near-infinite grab releases.

Nice first post lol

Whether or not it makes Ness mains better or worse is debatable, though not really relevant to the issue at hand.

Your post mainly focuses on the consequences of making this change, whereas I would like to focus on the consequences of NOT making this change.

Ness is bottom tier. Ness is worse than that, Ness is Roll Tier (MvC2) - completely unviable for tournament use. By banning IGR's you aren't significantly shifting the metagame, you're returning order to it.

By NOT banning IGRs you are condemning an entire character (or two or three) to be 100% useless in tournament play, effectively removing them from the character select screen.

Consider this: You enter a tournament wherein you play potentially 6 sets. You fight a MK, Snake, Falcon, Ness, Marth, and DDD player. In each match it essentially comes down to player versus player, besting one another in wits, spacing, and game knowledge. Each match EXCEPT for Ness. For Ness, you might play the first game of the set as Diddy, your main. Let's say you lose game 1. You CP squirtle or marth. You get 3 grabs and consequently 3 stock him (if he hadn't already forfeited the game). It's now 1-1 and you pick squirtle/marth again. You have effectively made the Ness main unable to main Ness.

If you do nothing, Ness is unplayable. If you ban infinite grab releases, you get one or more characters added to brawl's tournament character roster. This isn't about making Ness better, this is about making Ness playable.

The correct choice seems so clear to me.

 

[Chuee]

I'll say this again.
Banning infinites doesn't make Ness viable.
Only one character has a true infinite on Ness, DK.
Banning infinites doesn't affect the Squirtle MU unless you ban smallsteps. Even with that Squirtle can still dash grab CG Ness, and the MU is still bad.
It only affects Marth because people haven't realized that it isn't an infinite or a smallstep yet. Even without that Ness is still at a disadvantage.

Even if you ban infinites there's still plenty of other characters that cause trouble for Ness.

 

[Winnar]

I'll say this again.
Banning infinites doesn't make Ness viable.
Only one character has a true infinite on Ness, DK.
Banning infinites doesn't affect the Squirtle MU unless you ban smallsteps. Even with that Squirtle can still dash grab CG Ness, and the MU is still bad.
It only affects Marth because people haven't realized that it isn't an infinite or a smallstep yet. Even without that Ness is still at a disadvantage.

Even if you ban infinites there's still plenty of other characters that cause trouble for Ness.

Do you even read what I type?

I can't imagine I haven't made my point clear enough

The infinites on Ness make him unplayable. Remove them and he is still probably low/mid tier with matchup problems and disadvantages but that is not what I'm even addressing. With IGR's legal he is UN - PLAY - ABLE

This may be a hard concept to swallow but anyone can beat any Ness main in a set if IGR is not banned conditional on them knowing where the z button is located

 

[Chuee]

Ness is still playable.
Also you're posts are too long for me to read.

 

[Winnar]

Ness is still playable.
Also you're posts are too long for me to read.

Then why are you even posting here?

What are you doing in a serious discussion if you refuse to even look into what we are discussing?

Too long for you to read? Do you have some kind of condition that keeps you from focusing on more than three lines of text at a time?

And because you're not fond of words here's a ****ing picture

 

[Uffe]

Nice first post lol

Whether or not it makes Ness mains better or worse is debatable, though not really relevant to the issue at hand.

If this is Cosmopolitan's first post, then I'm amazed. But that's besides the point. It might be true that because Ness mains have grab release issues and such, that it makes them better players. Think of how Marth mains are. They have no issues with grab releases for the most part, but they learn to condition their opponents and they learn to space to avoid taking damage. Usually when a player mains a particular character, they usually take their mains playstyle(s) and apply them to their secondaries.

Your post mainly focuses on the consequences of making this change, whereas I would like to focus on the consequences of NOT making this change.

Ness is bottom tier. Ness is worse than that, Ness is Roll Tier (MvC2) - completely unviable for tournament use. By banning IGR's you aren't significantly shifting the metagame, you're returning order to it.

By NOT banning IGRs you are condemning an entire character (or two or three) to be 100% useless in tournament play, effectively removing them from the character select screen.

Ness isn't a horrible character and nowhere near what Roll is in Marvel vs Capcom 2. And Ness is completely viable. We've seen Ness mains get top 8 at tournaments and we've seen a few Ness mains get first place. Ness may not be the best character in the game, but he's not trash, either.

Consider this: You enter a tournament wherein you play potentially 6 sets. You fight a MK, Snake, Falcon, Ness, Marth, and DDD player. In each match it essentially comes down to player versus player, besting one another in wits, spacing, and game knowledge. Each match EXCEPT for Ness. For Ness, you might play the first game of the set as Diddy, your main. Let's say you lose game 1. You CP squirtle or marth. You get 3 grabs and consequently 3 stock him (if he hadn't already forfeited the game). It's now 1-1 and you pick squirtle/marth again. You have effectively made the Ness main unable to main Ness.

Some people will use Ness all the way and get through a tournament with Ness only. Just because you bring out Marth or you bring out some other character that is his bad match-up doesn't mean the Ness main will switch. I'd like to add that infinites don't necessarily mean one stock is taken each time.

If you do nothing, Ness is unplayable. If you ban infinite grab releases, you get one or more characters added to brawl's tournament character roster. This isn't about making Ness better, this is about making Ness playable.

The correct choice seems so clear to me.

Some tournaments ban infinites and I see what you're saying. But again, just because you go up against a bad match-up doesn't mean the person maining Ness will go to someone who'll last longer in a match.

 

[theONEjanitor]

its just bad matchups.
brawl is full of them.
smash in general is full of them.

its the same as sheik vs. pikachu in melee. grab=stock.
either dont get grabbed or pick a different character.
thats the nature of smash

will_ has won tournaments in alabama with ness
no johns

 

[Chuee]

I post here because I read most of what you say then stop reading.
The GR stuff DOES NOT make Ness useless. There is no way Ness is even anywhere close to being as useless as roll. Also saying Ness is unviable because 1 grab = stock is like saying DK is unviable because if he runs into a DK, Pika, or Wario grab = stock. It's no different than a normal bad MU.

 

[ViceGrip]

Bigfoot (dk main) used the infinite on me in tournament In October and i still beat him because Ness>>>>>Dk's spacing. Not a big deal but it should still be banned. No reason Dk gets special treatment vs D3 ( a matchup that he gets ***** in WITHOUT the chaingrab) and Ness shouldn't in regards to standing infinites.

 

[Levitas]

It's insulting to reply to a post without having the decency to read it first.

GR is a severely hinders ness to the point where even if he were A/S tier quality (he isn't), he would still have auto game losses if you used him simply because of the infinites. Whether that means it's ban-worthy is an entirely different issue.

At least if you explain yourself and respond to specific points that you read in the post you're responding to, they can argue against it with reason. Just responding with the punchline amounts to flamebaiting or trolling, depending on intent.

 

[ViceGrip]

who was that directed at?

 

[Levitas]

That's a broad announcement that should apply to everyone.

But it was at chuee this time.

 

[Bartolon]

Vice, The740 also try'ed it on me but you can EIDI out of it so he has to walk and your spotdodge is faster then his grab when you EIDI ;D So it isn't a infinite =/

 

[Cosmopolitan]

Whether or not it makes Ness mains better or worse is debatable, though not really relevant to the issue at hand.

Nor did I state that it was pertinent - I was simply addressing a prior point made by someone else.

Your post mainly focuses on the consequences of making this change, whereas I would like to focus on the consequences of NOT making this change.

I'm not really arguing the reasons why we should or shouldn't ban I.G.R.'s. I'm explaining why we haven't.

By banning IGR's you aren't significantly shifting the metagame, you're returning order to it.

Significantly? Perhaps not, but it's not so much a matter of magnitude as it is one of principle and consistency. As I explained earlier, Ness' ability to be infinitely grab released is a result of Brawl's game engine. In order to legitimately remove I.G.R.'s, you'd have to alter the physics of Ness' and/or other characters. Whatever the case, the metagames of one or more characters would shift concurrently with their respective gameplay properties. This parallelism would constitute a genuine (i.e. fair) rebalance.

With a ban on I.G.R.'s, however, you'd be accomplishing the same exact effect, but the physics of the associated characters would remain the same. In this case, the metagames of one or more characters would not shift concurrently with their respective gameplay properties. In fact, only Ness' metagame would change at all, and it would be a positive shift. In this sense, the game would be "artificially" rebalanced.

A good way to visualize the effects is to picture average match results. Suppose each character is assigned a point value according to how well they perform in tournaments. In the interest of simplicity, I'll use a select portion of the cast and a single interval to begin with.

Currently, the (simplified) list would look like the following:

1000 - MK
900 - Snake
800 - Diddy
700 - Marth
600 - Kirby
500 - Pit
400 - Ness
300 - PT
200 - Lucas
100 - Jiggs

If you were to remove I.G.R.'s by altering the game engine (suppose the physics of Ness, PT, and Marth were modified), you might end up with the following:

(remember, this list is for demonstration - it is not speculation as to what would actually result)

950 - MK (-50)
850 - Snake (-50)
800 - Ness (+400)
750 - Diddy (-50)
600 - Marth (-100)
550 - Kirby (-50)
450 - Pit (-50)
300 - Lucas (+100)
200 - PT (-100)
50 - Jiggs (-50)

The list would shift across the board because changes to the game engine apply to all matchups/metagames. Note that the net change is 0.

If instead you were to ban I.G.R.'s, the list would be entirely different:

1000 - MK
900 - Snake
800 - Diddy
700 - Marth (minimal)
700 - Ness (+300)
500 - Kirby
400 - Pit
300 - PT (minimal)
200 - Lucas (+100)
100 - Jiggs

The net change is +400. Ness and Lucas have benefitted significantly whereas Marth and PT have been set back marginally - since you've externally modified specific matchups, the overall metagame for PT and Marth have hardly changed. The rest of the cast has been unaffected for the same reason. In this case, Ness and Lucas have been given "artificial" advantages that ignore the precedence of the game engine by circumventing it entirely, and it's for this reason that I.G.R.'s haven't yet been banned nationwide.

The principle is simple:

Players of a game must accept the nuances of the engine. If there is an element that warrants change, it must be altered in such a way that the majority of characters are affected more or less equally (e.g. banning planking, infinite dimensional cape, etc.), and/or through methods that are character-impartial (e.g. editing their physics). Elements of the game engine (e.g. grabbing and falling physics) must be taken in their entirety, or they must be entirely discarded. Thus, character-specific disregard of game mechanics cannot be considered legitimate in the context of fair gaming.

As for accessible gaming, that's a completely different story.

 

[ViceGrip]

That's good to know Bart, I had suspicion that it wasn't a true infinite but I hadn't done enough testing and every time I would escape Bigfoot doing it to me, i thought that perhaps it was just him messing up.

 

[Levitas]

for the iterative DK cargo turnaround to face back> break> regrab DK shouldn't have to move much if at all

 

[swordgard]

I have been told Ness' Dtilt has a sweetspot for tripping, however when I go in training mode vs snake I seem to randomly get these, from afar or up close. Is there a sweetspot or not, and has this been throughly verified?

 

[AvariceX]

I don't know if I'd say thoroughly tested, but it has come up as a discussion on more than 1 occasion and each time we found that it does indeed seem to have a sweetspot. Try to hit so that the middle of Ness' shoe overlaps the edge of the opponent's hurtbox... I believe that's roughly the spacing anyway. Just do it once, let them stand back up, do it again; it should trip them every time. The problem is that the sweetspot seems to be so small that 1 or 2 extra dtilts even with the very low pushback of dtilt will push them far enough that they won't be in the sweetspot after that.

Then again, you're probably looking for an answer from someone other than myself

 

[swordgard]

I don't know if I'd say thoroughly tested, but it has come up as a discussion on more than 1 occasion and each time we found that it does indeed seem to have a sweetspot. Try to hit so that the middle of Ness' shoe overlaps the edge of the opponent's hurtbox... I believe that's roughly the spacing anyway. Just do it once, let them stand back up, do it again; it should trip them every time. The problem is that the sweetspot seems to be so small that 1 or 2 extra dtilts even with the very low pushback of dtilt will push them far enough that they won't be in the sweetspot after that.

Then again, you're probably looking for an answer from someone other than myself

True, but for some reason I can also trip him from very close, maybe its just that the hitbox is hitting the other leg I guess.

 

[CarVac]

Yeah. It has 2 sweetspots.
The whole thing can trip randomly, but there is a near sweetspot (the char overlapping with Ness's body) and a far sweetspot (described by AvariceX).

I consider myself good at tripping people; If you know what the spacing looks like, you can just throw out a single dtilt at the right time and surprise your opponent because of the suddenness of the trip.

Fsmash isn't guaranteed, but it surprises people.