Official BBR Recommended Rule List 3.0

[MetalMusicMan]

Still, was anyone REALLY concerned with Bowser and/or Ganon winning from a suicide move?

The fact that the character is "bad anyway so it doesn't really affect anything" is not relevant. That is not means for justifying an arbitrary buff.

I wish Link could recover better. Should we give him a rule that says you aren't allowed to gimp him because he "deserves it"?

 

[Crow!]

YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES!!!!!



Lol. No.

On a more serious note, MMM, the favored sensational term to use to illustrate that conccept is "Punch Time." Idea is that if your opponent is Ganon, you implement a rule where the Ganon player can shout "Punch Time!!" once per game, and when he does, the opponent must stand still on the stage and let Ganon do a Warlock Punch.

This silly example makes it clear to most people that just because a balance-oriented rule may improve the balance of the game, it doesn't make it a good rule.

 

[ADHD]

Do you know what metagame means? Do you know what advancing means? Just because something random exists does not mean that "the metagame isn't advancing".

Port priority is probably more game interfering than tripping, so please justify why this specific act of encouraging randomness is "advancing" when it LITERALLY has absolutely nothing to do with skill.

If something is random, that does not always make it bad. If that were so, we would ban G&W's side-b, peach's turnip pull (several different turnips, bombs, beam sword, mr. saturn), DeDeDe's side-b (3 different minions), etc. etc. etc.

Yes, because it's possible to do the above.. We have no control over something like GnW's side b, but we can control the result of a match determined by something like Ganon's side b.

 

[B!squick]

MK vs Ganon:

Scenario 1
- SUDDEN DEATH GO!
- Lots of spacing ensues
- MK hits Ganon with Dash Attack/Utilt/Uthrow; Ganon goes over the top boundary for a Star KO
- A bob-omb lands on MK and kills him off the side before Ganon dies

MK should have mentioned his shield button/control stick/eyes were broken before the match started.

Scenario 2
- SUDDEN DEATH GO!
- Both players grab the ledge
- *30 minutes later*
- "Wtf guys are you still doing this?"

This isn't stalling, right?

Alternate Scenario 2
- SUDDEN DEATH GO!
- Both players grab the ledge
- MK glides under the stage and ****s Ganon's **** or at the very least forces him onto a bob-omb filled stage

You can't glide under EVERY stage and Ganon's ledge game is quite good at any rate.

 

[vVv Rapture]

The fact that the character is "bad anyway so it doesn't really affect anything" is not relevant. That is not means for justifying an arbitrary buff.

I wish Link could recover better. Should we give him a rule that says you aren't allowed to gimp him because he "deserves it"?

That's completely different.

Ganon's recovery option is COMPLETELY taken away when someone moves in front of it and forces him to suicide.

Link can still make the stage even if the opponent moves in front of him to attack or be a punching bag. Link shouldn't be recovering, because it's Link and he can be gimped easily, but there is still a chance Link can make the stage regardless.

However, Ganon cannot when someone moves in front of him when he uses that move. The opponent is forcing a suicide. Someone gimping Link is not forcing a suicide. No rule should really force a suicide, in my opinion.

 

[TP]

Sometimes there's randomness involved, sometimes there isn't. And it's not actually clear in this case whether it is random at all, btw: Amazing Ampharos has done some study and doesn't think the Ganoncide result is truly random, though it is chaotic enough (depending on the exact height of the grab) that players aren't usually going to know ahead of time in Ganon's case what the result will be.

"Completely unable to tell what is going to happen until it happens" is definitely "truly random." There is no doubt that the outcome of a Ganoncide is random, if you have the better controller port. (With the higher port, we just always lose.)

While it is certainly unfortunate for Ganon, I'm content with the current ruling. It's better than giving Bowser an advantage for no ****ing reason, at any rate.

 

[.AC.]

Port priority is probably more game interfering than tripping, so please justify why this specific act of encouraging randomness is "advancing" when it LITERALLY has absolutely nothing to do with skill.



Yes, because it's possible to do the above.. We have no control over something like GnW's side b, but we can control the result of a match determined by something like Ganon's side b.

you are not using enough theory, if you want i can sell you some.

 

[BBQTV]

i'll buy, how much?

 

[MetalMusicMan]

Yes, because it's possible to do the above.. We have no control over something like GnW's side b, but we can control the result of a match determined by something like Ganon's side b.

No, we can't control it. We have no way to control it anymore than we do to say "you aren't allowed to side-b as G&W because a 9 might come out and that's random and not fair!"

Your argument here is akin to children playing "cops and robbers" and one of them "shooting" the other, but the other saying "nuh uh, you didn't hit me!!!"

Ganon side-b's and chokes someone. Both players die. The game says Ganon loses. The Ganon player says "NUH UH, I CHOKED YOU SO I WIN!!!!" ...how is that in any way sensible?

That's completely different.

Ganon's recovery option is COMPLETELY taken away when someone moves in front of it and forces him to suicide.

Link can still make the stage even if the opponent moves in front of him to attack or be a punching bag. Link shouldn't be recovering, because it's Link and he can be gimped easily, but there is still a chance Link can make the stage regardless.

However, Ganon cannot when someone moves in front of him when he uses that move. The opponent is forcing a suicide. Someone gimping Link is not forcing a suicide. No rule should really force a suicide, in my opinion.

Ness dies when someone jumps in front of his recovery. And you know what? He doesn't even get a kill for it like Ganon.

That really sucks for Ness... but that still has no relevance to anything, though.

It doesn't matter if Ganon has no options or 10,000 options. Either way, giving him an arbitrary buff is completely unjustified.

While it is certainly unfortunate for Ganon, I'm content with the current ruling. It's better than giving Bowser an advantage for no ****ing reason, at any rate.

This. It sucks for Ganon, but that's the way it is. That's the way the game is. There is nothing else to it.

 

[Crow!]

@ vuVuvela Rapture:

"Forcing a suicide" and "gimping" are nearly identical. Compare, for instance, to footstooling a double jumping Yoshi offstage.

Was it an attack or not?
Hard to say, and in fact irrelevant. Point is, something you did stopped Yoshi from returning to the stage.

 

[KoRoBeNiKi]

^^^ By getting rid of an "arbitrary" buff, you are getting rid of one of ganondorf's main recovery moves, or in other word's nerfing him at the same time.

 

[B!squick]

The fact that the character is "bad anyway so it doesn't really affect anything" is not relevant. That is not means for justifying an arbitrary buff.

I wish Link could recover better. Should we give him a rule that says you aren't allowed to gimp him because he "deserves it"?

Sure it justifies it. Makes the game balanced that way, however slightly. And not being able to gimp Link is kind of a silly example. Making sure your opponent dies is, like, the game aspect of the game. But then again, even if you couldn't gimp Link, he'd still be bad. No offense Link mains.

 

[.AC.]

i'll buy, how much?

theory is actually free today.

btw saying the game should decide the outcome whenever possible and then ignoring sudden death after a time out sounds contradictory.

 

[ADHD]

Well that was lame.

 

[MetalMusicMan]

^^^ By getting rid of an "arbitrary" buff, you are getting rid of one of ganondorf's main recovery moves, or in other word's nerfing him at the same time.

We are not nurfing him. That is how he is.

When you buy the game, that is how he is. There is no nurfing going on, that's just how the character is.

Sure it justifies it. Makes the game balanced that way, however slightly. And not being able to gimp Link is kind of a silly example. Making sure your opponent dies is, like, the game aspect of the game. But then again, even if you couldn't gimp Link, he'd still be bad. No offense Link mains.

No, it does not justify it. It is literally the SAME THING.

If I jump in front of Ness's up-b and let his electric ball hit me, then I FORCE HIM to suicide. It's the same thing as jumping in front of Ganon's side-b. Ganon is actually better off though, since he will also kill his opponent.

 

[Crow!]

btw saying the game should decide the outcome whenever possible and then ignoring sudden death after a time out sounds contradictory.

Addressed a few pages back.
Link:
http://www.smashboards.com/showthread.php?p=10893672#post10893672
(and subsequent posts, of course)


Anyway, I'm out of the forums for the night - off to play some Brawl!

 

[.AC.]

isnt that the same case for the suicide rule?

 

[ADHD]

**** this "that's how he originally is" and "we aren't removing buffs or nerfing" bs.

YOU ARE IMPLYING THAT YOUR RULES ARE THE "RIGHT" WAY TO PLAY BRAWL, THAT'S TOTALLY SUBJECTIVE.

The character is as good as he is in THAT ruleset. YOU, don't dictate how good the character is meant to be, so stop it, you aren't Brawl's version of God.

 

[Vex Kasrani]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_8pyFk1gJg0

 

[Sharky]

I would like someone to give me some type of reasoning as to why Port Town Aero Dive is allowed but

Spear Pillar
Summit
Corneria
and Hanenbow

are not allowed.

corneria = lol ness/lucas instawin

 

[ADHD]

QUOTING MASSIVE POSTS FTW

genius.

 

[MetalMusicMan]

**** this "that's how he originally is" and "we aren't removing buffs or nerfing" bs.

YOU ARE IMPLYING THAT YOUR RULES ARE THE "RIGHT" WAY TO PLAY BRAWL, THAT'S TOTALLY SUBJECTIVE.

Wow, so much rage...

We are not implying that "our rules" are the correct way to play Brawl. We are implying that the way the game actually plays is the best way to play it.

 

[T-block]

Sorry JayDeth, I misunderstood your question in my last response.

 

[Ganonsburg]

Wow, so much rage...

We are not implying that "our rules" are the correct way to play Brawl. We are implying that the way the game actually plays is the best way to play it.

So I heard IDC, Sudden Death, and all stages are legal now...

 

[Jack Kieser]

Hey, guys, are we done raging and flaming each other? Any more logical fallacies being thrown around because people are too scared of having to learn how to play on PTAD?

*dodges flames, arrows, assorted implements of death and chaos*

...guess not. I'll come back when people are willing to debate like adults.

 

[ADHD]

Wow, so much rage...

We are not implying that "our rules" are the correct way to play Brawl. We are implying that the way the game actually plays is the best way to play it.

Which you can't give a good reason to as why something dictated by port priority and sheer randomness is "best."

But ya know, after the stagelist and no LGL skill is frowned upon in the BBR.

 

[The Truth!]

To anyone who saw me insult the community as a whole, that is my stance, not the BBRs.

Would be much more believable except that

1)Several members of the BBR directly agreed with your insult
2)Many others have continued to insult the community and its players

Just a sample from a few pages ago.

A lot of delicious tears.

maybe I can find that conversation between 3 or 4 bbr members discussing how entertained they were by everyones anger while eating popcorn or something. Ill probably just go back and search for every purple name and create a "best of bbr" quotes.

Keep it up. People were already preparing to ignore you before the insults and useless statements like 'test for us pls then maybe we'll reconsider'. All of this is quickly causing you to lose credibility and soon people are either going to entirely ignore the bbr or just replace it.

Its sad that the bbr is searching for some "correct" standard for competitive play that does not exist at the expense of this community.

swordgard I thought you might know the game but apparantly not. I'll classify you with MMM, or the other 5 randoms from the BBR now.

nugguh ur dumb as hell dont try to think you're a smart *** SG > you in knownledge ;P

hmm swordgard wasnt even aware that Lucario had transcendent priority.


Edit:

Wow, so much rage...

We are not implying that "our rules" are the correct way to play Brawl. We are implying that the way the game actually plays is the best way to play it.

Sorry, but that is the same exact thing. Just because its the way the way the game plays does not make it less subjective and the bbr has made no competent argument for why we should want to do this without referring to another communities preferences.

 

[Vex Kasrani]

Summit please.

 

[.AC.]

a best of bbr post compilation would be amazing, btw summit is totally legit.

 

[ADHD]

Would be much more believable except that

1)Several members of the BBR directly agreed with your insult
2)Many others have continued to insult the community and its players

Just a sample from a few pages ago.

maybe I can find that conversation between 3 or 4 bbr members discussing how entertained they were by everyones anger while eating popcorn or something. Ill probably just go back and search for every purple name and create a "best of bbr" quotes.

Keep it up. People were already preparing to ignore you before the insults and useless statements like 'test for us pls then maybe we'll reconsider'. All of this is quickly causing you to lose credibility and soon people are either going to entirely ignore the bbr or just replace it.

Its sad that the bbr is searching for some "correct" standard for competitive play that does not exist at the expense of this community.

hmm swordgard wasnt even aware that Lucario had transcendent priority.

The truth is too goodz. I think the bbr should be flat-out eliminated, we're advanced enough to be independent as a community now.

 

[WindMajor]

Wow, so much rage...

We are not implying that "our rules" are the correct way to play Brawl. We are implying that the way the game actually plays is the best way to play it.

So I heard IDC, Sudden Death, and all stages are legal now...

But of course, there are always different circumstances. The way the game actually plays isn't ALWAYS the best way to play it. There are circumstances in which something is simply not suitable for competitive play, and ruleset makers have to take some sort of action, whether it be a change or a ban, to fix it. However, things like bans should be kept to a minimum, by only banning things that are necessary, discrete, and enforcable.

For example, for competitive play, Sudden Death is clearly NOT the best way to play the game. There's no arguing against it. If there's a time out, there's a huge chance that the game won't ever end. If the game won't end, the tournament won't progress, and if the tournament doesn't progress, then that's a failure of a tournament you got there. Because of this, Sudden Death is unsuitable for competitive play, and under circumstances like that, it is necessary for rule makers to make a change. Thankfully, banning Sudden Death is completely discrete and enforceable, so it's possible to ban it.

I hope I don't get ninja'd. Edit: Crap I got uber ninja'd.

 

[judge!]

just because 20 or so people said this. doesnt mean anyone to has to do it lol. noones being forced into it =P

 

[Eddie G]

just because 20 or so people said this. doesnt mean anyone to has to do it lol. noones being forced into it =P

Thank you.

Only a God Kai would have common sense like this and not whine. Much love.

I've been facepalming repeatedly while reading through this thread. No one is forced to abide by the BBR's stagelist or ruleset, both of which are only recommendations. It's so easy to understand, silly Brawl community.

 

[Tmacc]

just because 20 or so people said this. doesnt mean anyone to has to do it lol. noones being forced into it =P

Quoted for truth. The title of the thread says it all.

A group of knowledgable players compiled a list of what they feel to be the proper rules/stages. It's not the Constitution of Smashboards in that first post. It's a recommendation based on data, observations, and the subsequent opinions.

 

[EdreesesPieces]

edress when was the last brawl tournament you entered?


edit: just curious, not flaming.

The last one I entered I believe was Tourneyplay #5 back in May. I only show up every couple of months, but I'm still there once in awhile (= I think I have have a free saturday to come to one later this month!

 

[Coney]

well sure, but it seems kinda silly to have an organization of people behind the scenes working on this stuff for a more competitive metagame, then saying the product of their labor doesn't have to be taken seriously

i dunno, kinda like contracting someone to make a wedding cake and when they make it out of seafood they say "well, you don't have to eat it."

unless the chef is cheep cheep the cooking chicken, this would be unacceptable

 

[vVv Rapture]

@ vuVuvela Rapture:

"Forcing a suicide" and "gimping" are nearly identical. Compare, for instance, to footstooling a double jumping Yoshi offstage.

Was it an attack or not?
Hard to say, and in fact irrelevant. Point is, something you did stopped Yoshi from returning to the stage.

Lol, I didn't think that's what another thing vVv could stand for. I like that. xD

Forcing a suicide and gimping aren't identical. Forcing a suicide would essentially make a situation's only result a suicide and whatever the rules implement for succeeding that event. When someone forces a suicide, they make that instance result only in a suicide without any chance of anything else. Not only that, but forcing the suicide also means that the opponent is giving the opponent only one option after executing the movie, one of which does not include victory though the point of the attack is, indeed, to win or avoid losing.

Gimping doesn't necessarily force a suicide, as someone can recover from an attempted gimp and every gimp attempt does not lead to an automatic suicide.

Also, gimping is not manipulating the opponent's attack to end the game/lose stocks. Gimping is the act of the player using a move (or footstooling) to stop recovery, but forcing the suicide, in this case, only means the opponent has to literally move in front of the opponent to force it. This isn't an attack. This is manipulation knowing that, because of the rules, favors their option.

Either way, gimping is fine because it is risk/reward. If a player tries to gimp, they are putting themselves at risk of not recovery, either. Forcing the suicide is different, since both characters have no option to recovery from the forced suicide regardless of what they do. Not only there, but there is barely any risk at forcing the suicide.

If someone is forcing the suicide, they are probably in a situation in which they need to do this to win. That makes the reward a lot higher than the risk. The rule is essentially giving people a reward for moving in front of Ganondorf for no other reason than the fact that they are losing (or, hypothetically, to get rid of Ganon's last stock if he/she has more than enough to spare, which is another case entirely, I suppose).

 

[B!squick]

Quoted for truth. The title of the thread says it all.

A group of knowledgable players compiled a list of what they feel to be the proper rules/stages. It's not the Constitution of Smashboards in that first post. It's a recommendation based on data, observations, and the subsequent opinions.

But then... why have a BBR to do this in the first place if everyone is just going to do what they want anyway?

 

[Eddie G]

well sure, but it seems kinda silly to have an organization of people behind the scenes working on this stuff for a more competitive metagame, then saying the product of their labor doesn't have to be taken seriously

i dunno, kinda like contracting someone to make a wedding cake and when they make it out of seafood they say "well, you don't have to eat it."

unless the chef is cheep cheep the cooking chicken, this would be unacceptable

I agree, but until the community can show that it is capable of some intelligent discussion and not asswipe posts like I've read all over this thread, I don't see what the harm is with having a group of people at least attempt to create a guideline for others to experiment with.

Or would you rather it be mandatory to follow the rules they put out? It's pretty obvious that people wouldn't like that idea any more than what we have now, so what's the sense in complaining about how pointless it is to have a BBR when they don't even realistically have any power over our decision-making whatsoever? xD

That's the reason we have a BBR; not to establish a mandatory set of rules to follow, but to create a general guideline for others to work off of and/or make their own changes from. Their recommendation is just a tool to work with, nothing more.

 

[Vex Kasrani]

Summit da bes, make it legal please.