Official BBR Recommended Rule Set 3.1

[Budget Player Cadet_]

That is making it harder for people who have the incentive to time out to time out. It's still making a viable option harder.

I'm up for anything at this point, but it sucks that the timer and timeouts are such a big issue in brawl

But... But... but... They aren't! Really!

Also, @Jebus, just increase the timer to 10 minutes. Why do we need another rule?

 

[UberMario]

Exactly, Sonic, among others, is a character who can legitimately go for a timeout.

I noticed that when I started to make him my [third] secondary, he can get away with a lot of defensive and offensive tactics, but it takes forever to land a kill with him without racking up a good amount of damage himself.

The closest thing I can think of to a solution against players timing out the clock via planking is to force the planker to stop if the other person doesn't move on the stage, but that would probably be too hard to regulate in a big tourney.

 

[ShadowLink84]

this coming from a sonic main

Bring up the person I main is only an attempt at avoiding the argument.
My point stands.

 

[Braxton2011]

I'd personally like the 10 minutes per match thing. But in all honesty, I feel that would SERIOUSLY cut into the tournament time. With 10 minute matches, people who are seriously time impaired

Spoiler

Lain

will probably mess up the tournament with their hour of counter-picking thoughts.

Maybe 9 minutes? I like to think there should only be 1 minute allowed for stating a counter-pick.

Basically
9 minutes per match in a 2-3 set = 27 minutes
1 minute per counter-picking stage = 3 minutes
Total set length is 30 minutes.

45 minutes 3-5 set = 45 minutes
1 minute per counter-picking stage = 5 minutes
Total Set length is 50 minutes.

The data was me thinking out loud how long a set would be with 9 minute matches.

 

[ShadowLink84]

WHY!?
WHY!?
WHY!?
WHY!?


That is my question no on here has at all answered.
What is your reason that you feel the rule concerning time limit must change?
How is it supported?

To be blunt, this community is being EXTREMELY stupid. If you have NO VALID reason to make changes to rules do NOT change them.
It doesn't matter if you dislike timeouts, they are a valid strategy. If you acknowledge it is valid, DO NOT NERF IT.

 

[Elyssa Xey Hexen]

Ignoring all else, I would like to know as well the effects of increasing the timer by 25%. For one, I could see it increasing the effectiveness of those who are best suited for getting kills. By going to time, you can merely win by percentage which can clearly give those who have a hard time killing a boost by merely abusing their damage racking abilities. Increasing the timer by two more minutes makes it harder to go to timeout, which means it would give the player with better killing set-ups more time to find a moment to get a kill in.

 

[Braxton2011]

You don't care for the well-being of this game's players, do you?

By increasing the time limit, MK will become less dominant in this factor of the game, because lets face it, most characters will not have the option to actually fight, or run away when they know they can't win.

By basing the match on more than just stock percentage, then many characters that get away with percent leads by using projectiles just for that 3% damage lead, we can eliminate some of the things that are preventing character diversity.

Off topic: By giving ledge grab limits, plankers (not characters, the players) will be forced to fight and not waste the time of their opponent; again, bringing out more character diversity and saving time in tournaments.

By placing these rules, we can expect to see more players actually contributing to the game, more character diversity and a more enjoyable time overall for everyone. Hell, we might find something new if we limit these "valid strategies" that fill our tournament roasters our community today.

I think we should take the Japanese's lead on this kind of stuff, they know whats up.

And in regards to your "the community is being extremely stupid" comment, the community is based off the BBR's decisions and guidelines. So you are basically calling you and your fellow backroomers stupid.

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

You don't care for the well-being of this game's players, do you?

NO! A THOUSAND TIMES NO!

Look, if a bunch of scrubs come to me and say, "Hurr durr I hate PS2 ban it I ****ing hate that stage ban it because we're scrubz and can't stand the stage even though it's not broken and has no abusive tactics we just don't want to learn to adapt", is that a legitimate reason to ban the stage? If you think so, you are part of the problem! IT DOESN'T MATTER WHAT SCRUBS THINK. SCRUBS WILL WANT TO BAN EVERYTHING THEY DISLIKE, AND EVERYTHING THAT MAKES THEM LOSE.

God DAMMIT this community is terrible. I wish that we could like, swap communities with the Smash 64 guys. They aren't utter scrubs.

Off topic: By giving ledge grab limits, plankers (not characters, the players) will be forced to fight and not waste the time of their opponent; again, bringing out more character diversity and saving time in tournaments.

Off topic: By giving spam limits, spammers (not characters, the players) will be forced to fight and not waste the time of their opponent by sitting on the side of the level and spamming ice blocks and lazers; again, bringing out more character diversity and saving time in tournaments.

This is ****ing stupid, I'm sorry. You're getting rid of a tactic just because you don't like it. YOU CAN'T DO THAT TO THE GAME!

I think we should take the Japanese's lead on this kind of stuff, they know whats up.

Japan... Ugh. I'm shocked at how horrifically scrubby they are, honestly.

And in regards to your "the community is being extremely stupid" comment, the community is based off the BBR's decisions and guidelines. So you are basically calling you and your fellow backroomers stupid.

You realize that almost no tournaments use the BBR ruleset, right? That a huge part of the community basically said, "This is ****ing stupid" when they saw that the BBR was against the ganoncide rule, a rule which gives a completely arbitrary and senseless buff to Ganon in one of his weakest points? That when the BBR says, "this stage is actually really legit" and gives very solid reasoning, they are ignored and laughed at, and people claim "haha bbr is AWFUL"? That when the BBR points to the baseline of competitive game theory, they get laughed at and people go on playing the game how they want to, as opposed to the way it should be played?

Swordgard has it right.
"The current BBR is better than it has ever been. What needs to change is the community."

 

[Braxton2011]

I do not believe I was talking to you, sir. None of that pertains to you, I was asking that to the person who provoked the questions I wanted his answers, not yours. By your single post, you will give him information he may or may not have known, proving no point being made.

I also never said, anything negative to the BBR, I simply stated that people generally follow BBR.

Japanese do know whats up (Brood says hi), also what defines "scrubby"? Opinions. Your argument is extremely invalid here.

I did not say get rid of the tactic at all in any of my statements, I only said 'REDUCE' or 'LIMIT'. I have nothing against any of these things, only to limit so they are not abused excessively. Because I, too, use some of these tactics to an extent.

Why you so mad? Why did you have to take out all of your frustration with everyone on me because of my statements?

 

[DMG]

Actually, the Smash 64 stages tend to be pretty conservative. First game of a set, a lot of rulesets have Hyrule as being the only choice (Dreamland being an alternative if both players agree). That would probably sound very scrubby to you, despite the community opting to play that way and enjoying it.

The BBR in recent times has gone more towards the direction of the pure competitive mindset, while neglecting the community input a bit. Yes we are better now in that we don't automatically say "PS2 DEAR LORD I DON'T LIKE IT IT HAS UNEVEN TERRAIN AND CHANGES!", but we are AWFUL for adding some stages when the clear majority of the community is like "Wtf is this, unacceptable. Get outta here".

Some stages we have included are borderline acceptable. Most of the community doesn't want them, and instead of saying "Ok we'll decide to go with this half", we kinda turned a finger to them and said "NOPE if it looks questionable, let's add it on". THAT's why people are mad/don't go along with the BBR ruleset really.

We're sacrificing being on the good side of the community for being "maybe" right.

 

[Braxton2011]

I personally like the idea of adding more stages. Port Aero Drive is a good stage. You just have to play on it for a couple of days to understand how it works.

 

[Tesh]

If the ruleset was about making the majority of the community happy, Metaknight would be banned wouldn't he? If we can just ban things because we don't like it then why isn't MK banned? Even some of the anti-ban people don't like him, they just don't think he is broken.

Olimar and Yoshi are pretty gay too without being broken imo.

Hell, if you include the casual part of the community, thousands of people were happier playing the game with all items on high.

 

[DMG]

Good lord. Ok here we go:

The ruleset is not about making the community happy. Some people are crazy and want items on High, matches being all random characters and 4 player FFA's. Who cares. What I was trying to say is that when it comes to some things, I think we should listen more to the community. When I say that, I mean respected members of the community, not Johhny AppleSauce and Jane Doe.

When it comes down to stages that arguably can go either way, and a large part of the respected part of the community STRONGLY feels a certain way, I think we should definitely take that into consideration. Some of our choices, I think we kinda stuck our tongue out and said "Too bad". That's what I mean by

 

[Braxton2011]

People in this thread are not remembering the balance factor that most competitive gaming was based on.

If we only aimed for the casual market, we would put items on high at tournaments.

If we only aimed for the hardcore market, we would all follow BBR's ruleset.

There needs to be balance in what rules are made and what they do most of the rules are set to the mindset of "Win by doing what is necessary to win". People are SERIOUSLY taking this to the mind, the heart, and the genitalia.

And why is it always either the BBR's fault or the community's fault. It everyone's fault that we let it become this way.

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

I do not believe I was talking to you, sir. None of that pertains to you, I was asking that to the person who provoked the questions I wanted his answers, not yours. By your single post, you will give him information he may or may not have known, proving no point being made.

I decided to take the post off his hand. It doesn't matter who you were talking to, this is in fact a public forum, and if you want to talk to just him, feel free.

I also never said, anything negative to the BBR, I simply stated that people generally follow BBR.

...Which I showed to be completely wrong.

Japanese do know whats up (Brood says hi), also what defines "scrubby"? Opinions. Your argument is extremely invalid here.

AOISGJ#OJ@$#G)*H(@$H@*G$ ARGH I AM SO SICK OF EXPLAINING THIS

Knowing how to make the game competitive does not equate to knowing how to play the game. At all. You could be the best smash player in the history of the universe and still not get why you would have to ban temple hyrule, or why banning every character except ganon is a bad idea.

And scrubby is defined by not playing the game to win. This does not entail being bad at the game. Anti recently played an obscenely scrubby match (and lost), but he's one of the best players on the planet (and lost to one of the best players on the planet) (the match I'm referring to was his set vs. Ally at APEX, where he want FD game 1 (best starter for snake in the matchup) and SV game 2 (one of the best stages for snake in the game). He could've gone to brinstar, but he wanted to "prove that he could beat Ally without using gay stages". He did not play to win in a serious tournament setting and lost the set). You can win tournaments and still be a total scrub.

I did not say get rid of the tactic at all in any of my statements, I only said 'REDUCE' or 'LIMIT'. I have nothing against any of these things, only to limit so they are not abused excessively. Because I, too, use some of these tactics to an extent.

Why? If the competitive game has a "best option", why should this option not be abused until someone finds a better option? Obviously, MK's planking and IDC is not beatable. There is no better option. But now when you turn to the NEW "best options" (yes, as in, the options that became the best options since you banned the old best options) that aren't completely and demonstratably unbeatable, and you try to limit or nerf them, you are limiting the progression of the metagame. You are refusing to learn how to beat these tactics, and saying "I can't beat these tactics ban limit plz". This goes against the development of the metagame and is therefore anticompetitive. I can't figure out how to beat Falco's SHDL, he should only be able to do it twice in a row before hitting me with a non-projectile attack. Or, I can get better, stop sucking, and figure out how to fight against falcos (advance my knowledge of the game, or indeed the overall metagame if I'm the first to figure it out), the competitive option. Lrn2sirlin.

Why you so mad? Why did you have to take out all of your frustration with everyone on me because of my statements?

Because you are a part of the problem. And if you think that's all my frustration, you ain't seen the half of it yet.

If the ruleset was about making the majority of the community happy, Metaknight would be banned wouldn't he? If we can just ban things because we don't like it then why isn't MK banned? Even some of the anti-ban people don't like him, they just don't think he is broken.

Olimar and Yoshi are pretty gay too without being broken imo.

Hell, if you include the casual part of the community, thousands of people were happier playing the game with all items on high.

This.

 

[Braxton2011]

You are completely misinterpreting my comments. If this is how the debates take place here, then I shall keep my mouth shut and prove my words with my actions.

Lol at me being the part of the problem for saying my opinions on the matter.
I think this image will suffice for my actions.

 

[DMG]

Yes, because I was definitely talking about the casual part of the community. Yes, most people when talking about rules or stages are thinking about their 9 year old Brother who likes Licorice and 75M because "I like Donkey Kong".

Cmon now.

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

Actually, the Smash 64 stages tend to be pretty conservative. First game of a set, a lot of rulesets have Hyrule as being the only choice (Dreamland being an alternative if both players agree). That would probably sound very scrubby to you, despite the community opting to play that way and enjoying it.

Where did I hear that they went random selection round one, if one player is ness then Saffron City can be banned and random done again?

The BBR in recent times has gone more towards the direction of the pure competitive mindset, while neglecting the community input a bit. Yes we are better now in that we don't automatically say "PS2 DEAR LORD I DON'T LIKE IT IT HAS UNEVEN TERRAIN AND CHANGES!", but we are AWFUL for adding some stages when the clear majority of the community is like "Wtf is this, unacceptable. Get outta here".

If an ignorant (super) majority decides that democracy is stupid and that they want a military dictatorship, would it be right to do that?

Some stages we have included are borderline acceptable. Most of the community doesn't want them, and instead of saying "Ok we'll decide to go with this half", we kinda turned a finger to them and said "NOPE if it looks questionable, let's add it on". THAT's why people are mad/don't go along with the BBR ruleset really.

But they're wrong! And they aren't accepting our challenge! We tell them "show us what's wrong with the stage" and they don't do it! They spout false information (I still get people telling me that we have to ban YI because of DDD infinites), and when shown to be wrong opt to ignore us.

We're sacrificing being on the good side of the community for being "maybe" right.

No, we're sacrificing the good side of the community for having the moral high ground and being right. Until people show that Luigi's Mansion is broken, the BBR is right. Until people show that DP is broken beyond doubt, the BBR is right.

Good lord. Ok here we go:

The ruleset is not about making the community happy. Some people are crazy and want items on High, matches being all random characters and 4 player FFA's. Who cares. What I was trying to say is that when it comes to some things, I think we should listen more to the community. When I say that, I mean respected members of the community, not Johhny AppleSauce and Jane Doe.

"Respected members of the community". Like M2K, who is ridiculously biased? Like Ally, who only ever trolls outside of snake discussion? Like Anti, who basically threw a set against Ally at APEX because he didn't want to only win because he has access to RC and Brinstar and starter stages that aren't FD, a ridiculously scrubby reason? Like TKD, who still blindly support the "air time limit" rule which has been shown over and over and over again to be beyond ******** in theory and only not ******** in practice because you can't effectively demonstrate that it is ******** in practice? Like ADHD, who doesn't understand why FD is not the most balanced stage in the world?

Who is a respected member of the community? If it's any of them, then your idea is stupid.

When it comes down to stages that arguably can go either way, and a large part of the respected part of the community STRONGLY feels a certain way, I think we should definitely take that into consideration. Some of our choices, I think we kinda stuck our tongue out and said "Too bad". That's what I mean by

I guess. Now where could it go either way? There's the planking rule (gameplay simply cannot function without at least MK-specific LGLs or a ban on metaknight), Luigi's Mansion, Pirate Ship, and... Um...

People in this thread are not remembering the balance factor that most competitive gaming was based on.

I found a ruleset where the game is competitive and fairly balanced without banning anything, and with only two rules-one to deal with super sudden death, and one to deal with stage selection (again, nothing is banned, not even temple, not even warioware, not even MK's IDC). Brawl is a competitively designed game at its core, they just had to sneak it past nintendo's "fun-o-scanner" somehow. Prove me wrong, or prove yourself right. Neither will work.

If we only aimed for the casual market, we would put items on high at tournaments.

I don't get what you're saying...

If we only aimed for the hardcore market, we would all follow BBR's ruleset.

So you're saying that the BBR ruleset is correct?

There needs to be balance in what rules are made and what they do most of the rules are set to the mindset of "Win by doing what is necessary to win". People are SERIOUSLY taking this to the mind, the heart, and the genitalia.

And why is it always either the BBR's fault or the community's fault. It everyone's fault that we let it become this way.

I have no idea what you are saying in this post at all.

 

[Tesh]

Why would you only listen to the community "when it comes to some things"? If you want them to like you, you should listen to everything. And if you want to follow your beliefs, why not do that with everything? Why back down to be on the community's "good side"?

I guess I can understand that you want a competition, but you also want there to be alot of players willing to be in that competition. If that is your point.

 

[SaveMeJebus]

The reasoning behind the BBR's stage list is very stupid. They are basically saying, this is the rule set you guys should use in your tournament. Go to a tournament and waist 10+ dollars and if you can find a flaw with our stage list and get it on tape, we will consider banning it. Instead they should say, we will test out these stages in non tournament settings or in WIFI ladders before actually allowing them to be used in tournaments.

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

The reasoning behind the BBR is very stupid. They are basically saying, this is the rule set you guys should use in your tournament. Go to a tournament and waist 10+ dollars and if you can find a flaw with our stage list and get it on tape, we will consider banning it. Instead they should say, we will test out these stages in non tournament settings or in WIFI ladders before actually allowing them to be used in tournaments.

You know what's funny? We (the BBR and those of us who advocate a liberal stagelist) did just that. We went to wifi, we went to casual games, and we tested these stages out. We found the typically broken tactics, and we found ways to beat them.

Also, you have it backwards. We never have to prove that a stage is legit. Or at least, we should never have to. It's in the game, therefore it requires strenuous (and constantly accurate; if we think that something makes a stage broken but it is found to be a beatable strategy and no longer overcentralizing, then it is no longer reason to ban the stage) proof to be removed from the game. But that's not to say you guys can't get this proof outside of a tournament setting.

The problem? You haven't. In fact, we've worked backwards. We did what you wouldn't (should've) and tested these stages in high-level "casual" play. And we found nothing wrong with them, or at least not enough to warrant a ban. Like the common belief that you can circle camp on Distant Planet-proven wrong. Or the belief that PTAD is random. PROVEN WRONG. Or the belief that you can CG almost the whole cast up YI(M)'s right side with DDD-PROVEN WRONG! The claim that walkoff camping on Onett is broken-I'm working on this one, but it will soon be proven wrong, I'm telling you.

And then you bring up bull**** like this? Get out of here. Also, here's a basic issue with your claim. It's not "go to a tournament and waste 10 bucks", it's "go to a tournament, find the error, and automatically win the tournament because we were wrong". If there's a tactic that breaks the stage, why aren't you using it? It's like noticing that a tournament hasn't banned MK's planking, and then saying that you'd go there and waste 10 bucks. No, you'd go there and win the tournament pot easily because you'd abuse the planking, you scrubby idiot!

 

[Spelt]

Yes, because I was definitely talking about the casual part of the community. Yes, most people when talking about rules or stages are thinking about their 9 year old Brother who likes Licorice and 75M because "I like Donkey Kong".

Cmon now.

I like licorice. ;_;
red vines > twizzlers

 

[SaveMeJebus]

You know what's funny? We (the BBR and those of us who advocate a liberal stagelist) did just that. We went to wifi, we went to casual games, and we tested these stages out. We found the typically broken tactics, and we found ways to beat them.

Also, you have it backwards. We never have to prove that a stage is legit. Or at least, we should never have to. It's in the game, therefore it requires strenuous (and constantly accurate; if we think that something makes a stage broken but it is found to be a beatable strategy and no longer overcentralizing, then it is no longer reason to ban the stage) proof to be removed from the game. But that's not to say you guys can't get this proof outside of a tournament setting.

The problem? You haven't. In fact, we've worked backwards. We did what you wouldn't (should've) and tested these stages in high-level "casual" play. And we found nothing wrong with them, or at least not enough to warrant a ban. Like the common belief that you can circle camp on Distant Planet-proven wrong. Or the belief that PTAD is random. PROVEN WRONG. Or the belief that you can CG almost the whole cast up YI(M)'s right side with DDD-PROVEN WRONG! The claim that walkoff camping on Onett is broken-I'm working on this one, but it will soon be proven wrong, I'm telling you.

And then you bring up bull**** like this? Get out of here. Also, here's a basic issue with your claim. It's not "go to a tournament and waste 10 bucks", it's "go to a tournament, find the error, and automatically win the tournament because we were wrong". If there's a tactic that breaks the stage, why aren't you using it? It's like noticing that a tournament hasn't banned MK's planking, and then saying that you'd go there and waste 10 bucks. No, you'd go there and win the tournament pot easily because you'd abuse the planking, you scrubby idiot!

your the idiot that thinks that if you find one broken thing on a stage, you are automatically going to win the set. It takes at lest two out of three wins to win a set last time I checked.

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

your the idiot that thinks that if you find one broken thing on a stage, you are automatically going to win the set. It takes at lest two out of three wins to win a set last time I checked.

You could nitpick the one (non-critical) part of my post which is wrong, or you could reply to the main point. If what you just said is correct, then your whole statement about "wasting $10" is completely faulty as well. Seriously, either get a clue what you are talking about, learn a little logic, or stop trying to debate here. All you're doing is making yourself look like an idiot.

To be perfectly clear, here's the issue:

Go to a tournament and waist 10+ dollars and if you can find a flaw with our stage list and get it on tape, we will consider banning it.

your the idiot that thinks that if you find one broken thing on a stage, you are automatically going to win the set. It takes at lest two out of three wins to win a set last time I checked.

What you are saying is that your original premise is wrong? And all the rest of my points, the whole bit about "we DID test these stages you moron", and the part about it being up to the players to prove a stage broken, not us to prove a stage legal... Yeah, they still stand.

You're really, really bad at this, you know.

 

[Tesh]

It only takes 1 broken thing on a stage to win a set :Metaknight.

 

[SaveMeJebus]

You could nitpick the one (non-critical) part of my post which is wrong, or you could reply to the main point. If what you just said is correct, then your whole statement about "wasting $10" is completely faulty as well. Seriously, either get a clue what you are talking about, learn a little logic, or stop trying to debate here. All you're doing is making yourself look like an idiot.

To be perfectly clear, here's the issue:





What you are saying is that your original premise is wrong? And all the rest of my points, the whole bit about "we DID test these stages you moron", and the part about it being up to the players to prove a stage broken, not us to prove a stage legal... Yeah, they still stand.

You're really, really bad at this, you know.

I still stand By what I said earlier. Not everyone is going to be that person that found that one broken thing that won them the tournament. There is always going to be that group of people that got skrewed over by that one person that found that broken group of stages or tactics. These will be these people that waisted their 10+ dollars.

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

I still stand By what I said earlier. Not everyone is going to be that person that found that one broken thing that one them the tournament. There is always going to be that group of people that got skrewed over by that one person that found that broken group of stages or tactics. These will be these people that waisted their 10+ dollars.

You know what? You're STILL ignoring the whole rest of my post. The way we have tested these stages is pretty intensive. You might as well be saying this about a stage like Delfino or Frigate. We could find some obscenely broken stage tactic on ANY stage. Which stages are you even talking about?

And even if not everyone will find it, how many matches do you think will pass before people realize "Holy **** this is broken" and start abusing it? How many matches before someone finds the counter for it?

 

[ShadowLink84]

Cracks knuckles.
HULK SMASH DUMB ARGUMENT WITH HIS LOGICAL BRAWN!
LETS GO!

Ignoring all else, I would like to know as well the effects of increasing the timer by 25%. For one, I could see it increasing the effectiveness of those who are best suited for getting kills. By going to time, you can merely win by percentage which can clearly give those who have a hard time killing a boost by merely abusing their damage racking abilities. Increasing the timer by two more minutes makes it harder to go to timeout, which means it would give the player with better killing set-ups more time to find a moment to get a kill in.

Okay, why do this for them again?

You don't care for the well-being of this game's players, do you?

I don't.
I honestly, do NOT care for the scrubs who whine about PS2, who whine about Rainbow Cruise or Frigate.
I do NOT CARE AT ALL.

The scrub mentality is NEVER a good reason to change rules.

By increasing the time limit, MK will become less dominant in this factor of the game, because lets face it, most characters will not have the option to actually fight, or run away when they know they can't win.[/uote]
I...I honstly took 15 minutes wondering how the hell to respond to this ludicrous statement.

You wish to increase the timer in an attempt to make it so that MK is nerfed and thus isn't as good a character and will thus be less able to dominate the game?
Hey, tell Akuma to stop the following

Red fireball
Air fireball
No combos leading into a dizzy.
No kicking allowed.

Same concept. you are nerfing a character.
If you are going to go to such great lengths to nerf a single character (and thus hurt every single character who has NO guaranteed setups.).
You might as well flat out ban him.
Let alone that this also is a blatant attempt at removing timeouts which are a VALID METHOD OF WINNING.

You do NOT remove VALID METHODS OF WINNING.
It is the equivalent of saying
YOU ARE BANNED FOMR LEDGEHOGGING THE OPPONENT!

By basing the match on more than just stock percentage, then many characters that get away with percent leads by using projectiles just for that 3% damage lead, we can eliminate some of the things that are preventing character diversity.

We do not enact rules to promote character diversity. By that logic, I demand we enact the punch time rule for Ganondorf and Captain Falcon.

THE ONLY time character diversity is an issue is during cases of overcentralizing.
An extreme example of overcentralizing is Akuma in SSF2T

A lesser example is Old Sagat in SSF2T (he is soft banned in Japan and has been banned in some tournaments thus making him very controversial).

You are basically on a slippery slope. If we do this for character diversity, why not enct this rule? It is the same logic so it is fine.

oh but wait, now it comes into conflict with this rule.
Character diversity is never a good reason.

Off topic: By giving ledge grab limits, plankers (not characters, the players) will be forced to fight and not waste the time of their opponent; again, bringing out more character diversity and saving time in tournaments.

I'll put this in leyman's terms.

M2K STOP DAIR CAMPING ME ITS NOT FUN!.

Oh and by the way it does NOT promote character diversity at all. Did you know the main reason some characters lose is not due to planking but the inability to approach the opponent entirely?
For example, fighting Ice climbers is very dangerous, you get grabbed, you die. This buffs them.
This buffs Snake.
This makes it so that characters who hit hard and ahve guaranteed kill setups do even better and characters who have issues approaching are now FORCED to approach because now, it gives their opponent much more time to have a chance at Koing. It weakens their strategy while buffing others.
Which is not only completely unecessary, but also wrong competitively.
Rules do not change just because you dislike something or want to increase character diversity, in fact, the only thing this does is KILL more of the cast because the great majority of them are not offensively based and would thus be forced to jump into the ****, OR give the opponent more oppurtunities to KO them.

Let alone you NEVER, EVER, EVER should be trying to dictate how someone plays unless the method they are palying is overcentralizing the game. In which case, you remove the element which allows it.
Circle camping is not banned.
It overcentralizes so we bans tages that allow it. We do NOT tell the opponent circle camping is banned.

We do NOT tell the opponent to stop being in the air too long (air time rule)
We do NOT tell the opponent to get off the ledge (ledge grab rules).
This is because they remove liegitimate strategies that do NOT overcentralize.
If the issue is MK, and obviously you said this is about MK.
Then ban MK.
If you are going to go o far as to NERF him, then it means the character necessitates a ban

As it stands though, the majority of matches do NOT end ina time out.
Thus, any global changes enacted because of 1 character will only do harm not good.

By placing these rules, we can expect to see more players actually contributing to the game, more character diversity and a more enjoyable time overall for everyone. Hell, we might find something new if we limit these "valid strategies" that fill our tournament roasters our community today.

proof?
LGL's were instituted without SBR recommendation and surprise surprise, MK can STILL time you out.
MK STILL dominates.
This is called being wrong.
Let alone that limiting valid strategies is the equivalent of dictating how someone should play their character even if that strategy is the optimal one for that charatter.

As I said, the only time such a thing is done is if it overcentralizes.
Wario timing out people is NOT overcentralizing the game.

I think we should take the Japanese's lead on this kind of stuff, they know whats up.

Drop the scrub mentality

And in regards to your "the community is being extremely stupid" comment, the community is based off the BBR's decisions and guidelines. So you are basically calling you and your fellow backroomers stupid.

Um.

checks SBR ruleset.


3 Stock
8 minute timer
Items are set to "off" and "none"

# The BBR is opposed to the institution of a Ledge Grab Limit of any number (for any character) for use in determining the winner of a match by time out.

Oh and by the way,t he majority of the community is being extremely stupid by trying to limit valid strategies.
Feel free to make your dislike of timeouts known, but, and keept his in mind, Many other games have rules that give wins due to timeouts!

I do not believe I was talking to you, sir.

Public forum means the public can rip you apart.
you want your argument privately addressed, Drop a PM, but do not act disrespectful due to YOU placing your argument before the public.

None of that pertains to you, I was asking that to the person who provoked the questions I wanted his answers, not yours. By your single post, you will give him information he may or may not have known, proving no point being made.

Um.

"Don't make a response because I want my opponent to fail at refuting one point or another that was I can continue as if my argument is perfectly valid"

no johns.
Let alone if you wanted to evaluate the amount of knowledge I contain within my brain, get a quiz.
I suck at pop culture btw.

Japanese do know whats up (Brood says hi), also what defines "scrubby"? Opinions. Your argument is extremely invalid here.

Brood says hi?
Word?
Tell him hi for me. I never did get to chat with him seeing as how i left Apex early (lost my keys).

Let alone your entire statement boils down to "the japanese players know whats up since they are using rules I would like to see used."

Just because someone agrees with you that 2+2=3 doesn't validate your argument.
it only means someone agrees with you.
Yeah, I know, great revelation there.

I did not say get rid of the tactic at all in any of my statements, I only said 'REDUCE' or 'LIMIT'. I have nothing against any of these things, only to limit so they are not abused excessively. Because I, too, use some of these tactics to an extent.

Prove that they are abused excessively
PROVE that they must be limited.
The only thing that I have remotely heard concerning these tactics was "So MK cant be as dominating" which is nerfing a character which means you might as well ban him.

you do NOT limit valid tactics UNLESS they OVERCENTRALIZE.
Timeouts don't overcentralize the game.

Why you so mad?

Why you so scrubby?

Why did you have to take out all of your frustration with everyone on me because of my statements?

Ignorance is not something that generally results in a pat on the back.
Nor a cookie.

People in this thread are not remembering the balance factor that most competitive gaming was based on.

We do not aim to balance the game.
Tell Potemkin to stop ****** Anji Moto

If we only aimed for the casual market, we would put items on high at tournaments.

We do not care for them.
Lets stay int he competitive realm yah?

If we only aimed for the hardcore market, we would all follow BBR's ruleset.

No no no.
We would follow the EC ruleset.

There needs to be balance in what rules are made and what they do most of the rules are set to the mindset of "Win by doing what is necessary to win". People are SERIOUSLY taking this to the mind, the heart, and the genitalia.

This is the mantra of competitive sport.
Tell football players to stop using good tactics cause it isn't balanced.
To give weak teams a chance.

And why is it always either the BBR's fault or the community's fault. It everyone's fault that we let it become this way.

No no, i generally think its the communities fault actually.
Too quick to get angry at a proposed ruleset, and too ignorant to recognize bad rules.

 

[Steeler]

actually i like the fact that these stages are being given a fair shake, although some of them are obviously not going to stay if people abuse them like they should

i DON'T like the fact that this is coming to pass 2 1/2 years after the game originally came out, because this should have been the first thing we did...and now you've basically got a bunch of people up in arms because they feel these stages (justly or not) are 'obviously' not tourney material

'better late than never'

 

[ShadowLink84]

actually i like the fact that these stages are being given a fair shake, although some of them are obviously not going to stay if people abuse them like they should

i DON'T like the fact that this is coming to pass 2 1/2 years after the game originally came out, because this should have been the first thing we did...and now you've basically got a bunch of people up in arms because they feel these stages (justly or not) are 'obviously' not tourney material

'better late than never'

This is sad but true.
People love their knee jerk reactions Steeler.
It cannot be helped.

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

I ****ing love ShadowLink84.

 

[ShadowLink84]

I ****ing love ShadowLink84.

I am inspired!

 

[SaveMeJebus]

You know what? You're STILL ignoring the whole rest of my post. The way we have tested these stages is pretty intensive. You might as well be saying this about a stage like Delfino or Frigate. We could find some obscenely broken stage tactic on ANY stage. Which stages are you even talking about?

And even if not everyone will find it, how many matches do you think will pass before people realize "Holy **** this is broken" and start abusing it? How many matches before someone finds the counter for it?

I have a bunch of videos on my friends Wii where stupid random things have happened to me. Random lava spouts hitting me while I try to recover on Norfair. Apple bombs(which are also random) blowing up in my face and costing me the match on Green greens. Me some how stage spiking my friend on the blocks on rainbow cruise. Are you guys sure you tested these stupid stages?

 

[Spelt]

i'm getting kind of bored of seeing the punch time rule comparison.

 

[Raziek]

So what's up guys, 90% of you probably don't care, but Nova Scotia has decided to ban MK. Immediately, we no longer have to deal with 90% of these ******** problems and the arguments surrounding them.

Also, Jebus, just because you're ******** and can't play a stage correctly doesn't mean it's bad.

 

[Shaya]

Raziek da bess.

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

So what's up guys, 90% of you probably don't care, but Nova Scotia has decided to ban MK. Immediately, we no longer have to deal with 90% of these ******** problems and the arguments surrounding them.

The ****? Why would you do that?

I have a bunch of videos on my friends Wii where stupid random things have happened to me.

Upload 'em.

Random lava spouts hitting me while I try to recover on Norfair.

Non-random lava spouts hitting you after an opponent forced you into a very bad position. No really, their timing is not random.

Apple bombs(which are also random) blowing up in my face and costing me the match on Green greens.

In other words, you took a serious risk (grabbing the apple) and paid for it. Don't ****ing grab the apples if you're so worried about it.

Me some how stage spiking my friend on the blocks on rainbow cruise.

COMPLETELY non-random and controlled. It's like complaining about being saved by the platform on Smashville being in the way of your spike.

Are you guys sure you tested these stupid stages?

YES. YES WE ARE. YOUR REASONING IS ALL INCREDIBLY FAULTY, NONE OF THE THINGS YOU MENTION ARE BANWORTHY, AND ALL YOU HAVE PROVEN IS THAT YOU ARE BAD AT DEALING WITH STAGES AND THAT YOU NEED TO EXPAND YOUR KNOWLEDGE OF SMASH.

God DAMMIT you are annoying.

EDIT:

Also, Jebus, just because you're ******** and can't play a stage correctly doesn't mean it's bad.

This.

The sad part is, this is 90% of the smash community. And instead of learning how to play on the stage, they ban the stage. If we acted the same way with characters, Snake, MK, and DDD would be gone, ICs would probably disappear, and Marth would be the next one on the chopping block. ****ing community man.

Imagine a flat stage.

Now add a platform.

"you can't espect us to lrn2deal!! we haz to dance around the plat and it gives depf and stragety! noooo"

Fox only, no items, Final Destination?
Playing on only hazardless stages is soooo 2008.

 

[SaveMeJebus]

So what's up guys, 90% of you probably don't care, but Nova Scotia has decided to ban MK. Immediately, we no longer have to deal with 90% of these ******** problems and the arguments surrounding them.

Also, Jebus, just because you're ******** and can't play a stage correctly doesn't mean it's bad.

raziek, just because you are ******** and don't know what the definition of random is does not mean that random **** doesn't happen on these stupid stages.

At BPC, I did not grab the apple it just randomly blew up when I was on the platform

 

[Browny]

Lol braxton... you just committed the worst of all internet arguing techniques
http://cdn-www.cracked.com/articleimages/ob//internet_graphic1.jpg

time to leave the computer for a while

 

[T-block]

I have a bunch of videos on my friends Wii where stupid random things have happened to me. Random lava spouts hitting me while I try to recover on Norfair. Apple bombs(which are also random) blowing up in my face and costing me the match on Green greens. Me some how stage spiking my friend on the blocks on rainbow cruise. Are you guys sure you tested these stupid stages?

I could give you replays of Yoshi's Island's support ghost eating Lucas' recovery and killing him. People falling through the stage in Delfino. People falling through the stage in PS1, and Castle Siege. You wanna ban these too?