Official BBR Recommended Rule Set 3.1

[SaveMeJebus]

You're now saying that grabbing the ledge is broken.












(Thank you, I haven't had a good reason to use that in a while.)

Basically what I'm trying to say is that's not an issue.

No. What I am trying to say is that while it may not be broken, it is still strong enough to were it give the player who remains on the ledge a huge advantage (as long as he has the lead).

 

[-Vocal-]

No. What I am trying to say is that while it may not be broken, it is still strong enough to were it give the player who remains on the ledge a huge advantage (as long as he has the lead).

Thanks for reading the pamphlet on Brawl 101. It's a feature, not a problem.

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

Is this advantage enough to take action?

(Just so you know, if it is, then the solution can be extracted from Circle Camping and Fin Camping-we don't ban the tactic because we can't do it fairly and effectively; we ban the stages that enable it)

 

[-Vocal-]

Is this advantage enough to take action?

(Just so you know, if it is, then the solution can be extracted from Circle Camping and Fin Camping-we don't ban the tactic because we can't do it fairly and effectively; we ban the stages that enable it)

Lol I think this may be the giddiest you've ever made me BPC

BAN ALL STAGES WITH LEDGES! BATTLES SHALL ONLY BE FOUGHT ON HANENBOW, BROKEN FLOORED SKYWORLD, AND THE PLATFORM OF PTAD!

 

[SaveMeJebus]

Is this advantage enough to take action?

(Just so you know, if it is, then the solution can be extracted from Circle Camping and Fin Camping-we don't ban the tactic because we can't do it fairly and effectively; we ban the stages that enable it)

You don't have to ban it. all you have to do is limit it so that it isn't used to safely avoid any contact with the opponent.

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

Lol I think this may be the giddiest you've ever made me BPC

BAN ALL STAGES WITH LEDGES! BATTLES SHALL ONLY BE FOUGHT ON HANENBOW, BROKEN FLOORED SKYWORLD, AND THE PLATFORM OF PTAD!

You think I'm kidding?

If it turns out that the ledge on most stages poses an overpowering defensive position, like the fin on corneria or the circle on temple, then what? Well, you can't really stop people from using the ledge... The correct procedure would be to ban any stage with permanent ledges. That leaves, from the currently "potentially legal" stages:
-Castle Siege (debatable; ledge is only gone for approximately 1/3rd of the stage's total time
-Delfino Plaza (debatable; see CS)
-Norfair
-Port Town
-Brinstar
-Rainbow Cruise
-Pirate Ship (water makes it easier to come at the planker from below, again, debatable)
-Onett
-Frigate? (very fringe; the ledge is only unavailable during the flip, which is not much time to hit your opponent and not very often)


...of course this is ridiculous. The ledge is not a broken defensive position for anyone except MK. While it may swing a few matchups (Falco and Oli especially eat **** on this count), there's exactly one character who breaks the ledge. Of the rest? None of them have remotely been proven.

You don't have to ban it. all you have to do is limit it so that it isn't used to safely avoid any contact with the opponent.

How? LGLs? Yes, I'm only allowed to grab the ledge so and so many times. I can still stall you out by aircamping and then planking for as long as the LGLs provide. Again, LGLs are only justified if planking is flat-out broken. Therefore, only for MK at this point.

 

[BSP]

How would Snake beat this? Diddy? Marth? Wario? DDD? Olimar? Game and Watch? If the majority of A and B tier has no answer, it's a pretty difficult to beat. That said, I've never actually seen it done in an actual match, though the same can be said for rising Pound.

Snake's got nades, remote missile, and C4 depending on the stage.
Diddy can actually travel under FD. He does have peanuts too.
Marth can travel under FD too, although it's difficult
Wario can too, and Sonic's giving him the chance to get a fully charged waft.
D3 can't make it under FD, but he should be able to make SV. Same with Game and Watch.

FD's the only stage where HA under the stage may cause a problem, but even then it's character dependent.

Vocal seems to get it though....HA under the stage is not on the same level as Pplanking. Depending on the stage, it's even less powerful than normal planking since Sonic is limiting himself as well. If planking is legal, HA under the stage needs to be too.

Snake has well-cooked grenades that may or may not work with very good timing; Diddy has bananas; Marth can't beat it, Wario has tires, Olimar has either purple pikmin or nothing, he probably gets wrecked by it pretty hard, DDD has waddles or gordo (can he do this without dying?), G&W can probably hit with bacon...

Again, it depends on the stage. FD is the worst since the middle of the bottom of the stage is so far from the edges. Against certain characters though, it's still easily stoppable there too.

 

[SaveMeJebus]

At BPC, with my rule set, you can grab the ledges as many times as you want as long as the match does not got to time. If the match does go to time, the winner of that point(not the match) will be the player with the least amount of ledge grabs.

 

[-Vocal-]

At BPC, with my rule set, you can grab the ledges as many times as you want as long as the match does not got to time. If the match does go to time, the winner of that point(not the match) will be the player with the least amount of ledge grabs.

No one else supports your rule set.

 

[SaveMeJebus]

No one else supports your rule set.

Well then let's just continue arguing and see where that gets us

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

At BPC, with my rule set, you can grab the ledges as many times as you want as long as the match does not got to time. If the match does go to time, the winner of that point(not the match) will be the player with the least amount of ledge grabs.

I suppose that solves the problem. However, it brings up new problems. Like forcing your opponent to the ledge and then timing your opponent out. Whoops. Also, let's take a char like Snake, where we know that his ledge game is horrible. Why should he lose a point if he decides, foolishly, to hit the ledge? Or, better yet, a char like Oli, where in matchups like vs. Falco, planking is very useful, but other than those few he's fairly poor at it-we're removing a non-broken tactic here; throwing the baby out with the bath water.

 

[SaveMeJebus]

I suppose that solves the problem. However, it brings up new problems. Like forcing your opponent to the ledge and then timing your opponent out. Whoops. Also, let's take a char like Snake, where we know that his ledge game is horrible. Why should he lose a point if he decides, foolishly, to hit the ledge? Or, better yet, a char like Oli, where in matchups like vs. Falco, planking is very useful, but other than those few he's fairly poor at it-we're removing a non-broken tactic here; throwing the baby out with the bath water.

It takes a hell of a lot more skill to force your opponent on the ledge then it does to simply run and grab the ledge. Which one do you think should be rewarded?

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

Well, which is internally rewarded by the game itself?

 

[SaveMeJebus]

Well, which is internally rewarded by the game itself?

None. But neither is the win by percentage

 

[Life]

@Jebus: Generally when one grabs the ledge on their own, it's because it's advantageous to them, and when they're forced onto the ledge by their opponent, it's because the opponent found it advantageous to do so.

@BPC: You missed a good opportunity to link your ruleset...

 

[SaveMeJebus]

@Jebus: Generally when one grabs the ledge on their own, it's because it's advantageous to them, and when they're forced onto the ledge by their opponent, it's because the opponent found it advantageous to do so.

@BPC: You missed a good opportunity to link your ruleset...

Which one takes more skill though?

 

[Life]

Which one takes more skill though?

It takes a hell of a lot more skill to force your opponent on the ledge then it does to simply run and grab the ledge. Which one do you think should be rewarded?

10rhetorical

edit: and that
|
|
v

 

[Spelt]

Which one takes more skill though?

that doesn't matter.
we don't define rulesets by "what takes more skill?"

 

[SaveMeJebus]

that doesn't matter.
we don't define rulesets by "what takes more skill?"

And that's why we need a better rule set.

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

None. But neither is the win by percentage

The point --------------->





























Your head


The point is that we don't reward or punish someone for doing something. We let the game do it. If the game rewards you for taking to the ledge, bravo. Why should we step in and punish you for that? Because we think it should be differently? That's a terrible reason!

And for the record, I don't support deciding the winner by %.

And that's why we need a better rule set.

Can we please stop taking Jebus seriously now? PLEASE? This is so scrubby it's not even funny.

 

[Luxor]

Jebus' every post gives me headaches, which is why I stopped frequenting this/other threads.

 

[Nidtendofreak]

*nods*

I'm going to say this as nicely as possible:

Stop trying Jebus. You're either rehashing old arguments already put to rest, or you're just being completely and utterly illogical.

 

[Ripple]

I'm curios as to what SMJ would say about this situations...

lets say UTD zac is playing against M2K.

UTD gets an early lead by 9ing m2K 2x in a row (somehow). UTD knows he can stall for the rest of the game because there is 5 min on the clock left. UTD grabs the ledge and proceeds to plank. now for some reason m2k can only take 1 stock by the time time runs out.

m2k should win because he used more "skill" even though he's a stock behind?

 

[-LzR-]

That is one tough cookie Ripple

 

[Spelt]

no, it isn't tough at all

 

[-Vocal-]

Jebus' every post gives me headaches, which is why I stopped frequenting this/other threads.

THANK GOD IT'S NOT JUST ME

And that Simpson's monkey's image has forever been muddled in my head by him

 

[C.J.]

And that's why we need a better rule set.

I get 1 stocked by a MK in 2 minutes and 34 seconds as Ganon. Obviously I played a hell of a lot better since I'm Ganon. Since I obviously am more skilled, does that mean I should win?

 

[dainbramage]

I get 1 stocked by a MK in 2 minutes and 34 seconds as Ganon. Obviously I played a hell of a lot better since I'm Ganon. Since I obviously am more skilled, does that mean I should win?

No, because that MK pulled off a lot of BDACUSes

 

[Browny]

You know...after counting that makes about ten characters that could theoretically beat this, esp. with Rickerdy's insights. (@BPC: wouldn't Sonic be so far under the stage that most of those items wouldn't reach him? That's the reason I questioned them.) As such, this is on an entirely different level than PPlanking. To try to group them together is poor, poor logic. Don't really think I'd be in favor of banning it either, due to the fact that there is a core of characters that can beat it. Not to mention it's not as abusable as either IDC or PPlanking - the other two you can start and stop at will, but HA Stall needs specific setup and takes longer to quit.

ugh

the point im getting at is that one is banned and not the other, how close they are isnt important, only the fact that HA is weaker.

Consider it like this, the left represents viable tactics, right banned

****ICGs**********Perfect HA stall******Perfect Planking**IDC**Freeze glitches

I dont think anyone would disagree on that order, and you would assume that a line is drawn where all tactics which are powerful enough are banned. By current BBR logic, that line is drawn to the left of HA stall and everything on the right of it should be banned. Yet clearly that isnt the case.

The only alternative is that HA stall is more broken and more centralising of the metagame with a bigger potential to win tournaments than perfect planking which is of course ridiculous, as proven by the BBR themselves it is not possible. The current BBR perspective though is that nerfing planking is a surgical nerf and should not be placed into the game yet thats highly hyporcritical because the exact same thing is placed on Sonic. It begs the question, why are they so quick to chuck a surgical ban on sonic yet extremely hesitant to do so on MK?

 

[sunshade]

I would disagree browny. There is not a spectrum of banned or legal tactics its a yes/no situation.

We ban freezing glitches and techniques should they meet all of the the following criteria.

1. Is the player deliberately preforming the tactic?
2. Is the tactic at hand avoiding any and all conflict?
3. Is the tactic making the game unplayable?

Nothing else done by players during combat is banned in anyways (by the bbr). Homing attack stall meets criteria 1, arguably 2, but not 3. Metaknight's planking meets 1, arguably 3, but not 2.

Neither are banned.

infinites are a different business because if you preform an infinite infinitely they meet 1,2 and 3 but if they end once a kill is obtainable they only meet 1 and 2. This gray area is what caused us to need to create the 300% cut off on infinites but nothing else in the entire game has needed a gray area.

As for your statement about the BBR being quick to nerf sonic but not metaknight you are wrong. The BBR does not surgically limit sonic or metaknight, reread the 3.1 ruleset and you will notice it at no point says sonic's HA camping is banned.

 

[Spelt]

how is a perfect planker not deliberately perfect planking?
that makes no sense.
Are they accidentally ledge dropping > uair x2 multiple times in a row?

 

[ShadowLink84]

Sunshade I have told Browny this repeatedly, over and over and over and over. Apparently he is too **** stubborn to read properly.

 

[sunshade]

how is a perfect planker not deliberately perfect planking?
that makes no sense.
Are they accidentally ledge dropping > uair x2 multiple times in a row?

opps you are right I mixed up 2 and 1. >.>

editing now.

@Shadowlink: I thought he just had you on ignore and posted based on what other people said.

 

[ShadowLink84]

opps you are right I mixed up 2 and 1. >.>

editing now.

@Shadowlink: I thought he just had you on ignore and posted based on what other people said.

Nope he's been told by several other people as well. It does not register in his eyes i guess.

 

[Browny]

thats pro coming from the person who refuses to ever answer the hard questions

@sunshade

Spoiler

Tell me, what other tactics in this game are under the discretion of a TO to disqualify a player on which is not explicity stated? It seems like this ruleset is a really pathetic attempt to redirect disagreements onto something horribly outdated and wrong. A TO could cite this ruleset as an argument but at no stage has the BBR made it clear what they want on this matter, thats unfair to the player who may be using a perfectly fair, legitimate, beatable tactic but is banned by pure ignorance and subjectivity which the BBR promotes with the current stalling rule.

/hate

What I would like to know (I dont expect you to be able to answer on behalf of the BBR obviously) is why Sonics HA under the stage does not have a rule about it. Its clear there is a lot of ambiguity here, there is no reason why the BBR cant ammend the rules and simply state that HA under the stage is banned, or allowed. Nothing beneficial is gained by not stating their viewpoint on the matter. You cant tell the TO's to do what you want but the least you can do is give them advice on what is best for competition. Isnt that the reason the entire ruleset exists in the first place lol?

of course, if that ammendment happens to be that it is banned, well then this is going to continue for a lot longer than you would like

Yes, HA is not explicity banned. But any TO can DQ a player for using this tactic simply by thinking it is stalling. In that same tournament another player can plank for 8 minutes in every single match and get through the tournament without a care in the world. All he has to do is say 'im in an advantageous position, you cant ban the ledge' etc. It MUST be clear cut. Stalling is banned. So list every single possible stalling option. Theres only TWO in the entire game which are already explicitly banned (IDC and CG'ing past 300) so why is it so hard to add the supposed 3rd option there?

There is no reason AT ALL why the BBR cant add half a sentence to the rule and clear this mess up. Stop giving TO's this ruleset which is missing important information and leaves far too much room for interpretation.

 

[sunshade]

What TO's do and what the BBR say are not the same thing. The BBR does not tell anyone to do anything, they only recommend. They put up a baseline ruleset and say "this is all you need to run a tournament from a ruleset perspective" and then they let you run with it how you please adding or removing what you want.

TO's DQ people for things which they should not be DQ'd but thats not the fault of the BBR. Nor does that mean that it is right or acceptable of the TO's to do that. Sonic HA camping is not stalling and should not be dealt with as if it was. The BBR does not say anything about it because it is legal by the ruleset. The only things which go into the gray area are IDC and infinites and because of that they are given special rules.

IDC meets all 3 of the criteria for stalling but only over prolonged use. The BBR cleared up confusion with IDC by acknowledging that it is broken in all cases used for stalling or not. The technique however is a glitch and not a feature of the character and reasonably speaking cannot be done by mistake which then served as justification for a surgical ban of the technique as opposed to a character ban.

They then said that infinites are an integral part of many characters and are simply long combos and are not bannable but due to their potential to stall will be capped at 300% (300% because that is the percent in which the game puts you for sudden death).

HA stall has no mention because it is LEGAL as according to BBR rules. Tournament officials are the ones who put a ban on it much like they created LGLs.

 

[DMG]

Half a sentence? What would that be, that Perfect Planking/Regular Planking is banned? That's fine, but now define what that constitutes. For perfect planking, a main problem you will find in enforcing it is differentiating when someone is doing it perfect or not. For regular planking, you could outline what planking is/can be, but that's gotta be pretty in depth if you wanna cover everything well.

 

[Browny]

im not talking about planking, im talking about this get out of jail free card of not mentioning anything about HA.

If HA is legal, state that it does not fall under the term stalling. Considering the only other 2 options to stall in this game have rules specifically for them, the third option should also have one.

do what you want with planking, but get HA right first.

ugh sunshade what im getting at is WHY does the BBR recommend... nothing about HA under the stage? Nothing they said leads us one way or the either. The absence of anything regarding HA leads us to believe it is legal but then they chuck in some safety net by saying that stalling is banned. As Ive said before, since the only 2 stalling cases in the game have separate rules for them, what could this 'stalling' possibly mean? Any TO could rightfully argue that HA is stalling even though the BBR tells us it is legal on account of not saying it is banned explicitly.

 

[sunshade]

IDC and infinites have rules because they if used for brief periods are not stalling but if used for long periods are. Those two are gray area and that is the reason they have rules specifically targeted at them. Everything else is either legal or banned (just about everything being legal).

HA stall is legal by the definition (its also beatable) and is not banned by the BBR. Planking is also not banned by the BBR and they even go so far as to say that LGLs are bad.

They recommend nothing specifically because of this.

 

[-Vocal-]

im not talking about planking, im talking about this get out of jail free card of not mentioning anything about HA.

If HA is legal, state that it does not fall under the term stalling. Considering the only other 2 options to stall in this game have rules specifically for them, the third option should also have one.

do what you want with planking, but get HA right first.

ugh sunshade what im getting at is WHY does the BBR recommend... nothing about HA under the stage? Nothing they said leads us one way or the either. The absence of anything regarding HA leads us to believe it is legal but then they chuck in some safety net by saying that stalling is banned. As Ive said before, since the only 2 stalling cases in the game have separate rules for them, what could this 'stalling' possibly mean? Any TO could rightfully argue that HA is stalling even though the BBR tells us it is legal on account of not saying it is banned explicitly.

I think the reason it is left to TO discretion is because what may be stalling in one match may not be in another. For example, Ganon will never be able to stop HA stall, so in that matchup it would be stalling. Pit, on the other hand, could (easily?) drop down and shoot a couple arrows - thus, it's not stalling in that matchup.

PPlanking, on the other hand, will always be unbeatable by everyone. It would make far more sense to ban PPlanking before banning HA stall. Too bad MK taunts at the laws of logic and a concrete, practical way to ban PPlanking hasn't arisen yet.