Official BBR Recommended Rule Set 3.1

[Spelt]

I think i'll just use this quote to reply to any of your posts for now on because you're just posting the same thing over and over anyways.

we're not removing anything, we're simply changing the setting the game allows. Whether or not D3 can throw items is in our control, therefore we have every right to take it. This isn't a valid argument.

What is a valid argument is showing why D3 having access to his items is a healthy addition to the meta game and that it isn't over-centralizing or degrading. This is what the BBR considers when discussing these types of matters.

 

[Tesh]

You will use any justification to remove the things you don't like.

So far all you have said is that being fair just isn't worth the cost.

 

[Spelt]

You like sticking words in people's mouths when you don't like what they say. I guess we're even.

 

[Raziek]

What is a valid argument is showing why D3 having access to his items is a healthy addition to the meta game and that it isn't over-centralizing or degrading. This is what the BBR considers when discussing these types of matters.

Just quoting this again for good measure.

GET TO IT, TESH.

 

[Tesh]

Capsules beat tornado and may help balance out the matchup.

If he throws a smart bomb is could help him handle ICs better.

DDD was obviously meant to be a top tier character with MK. If you nerf him it sets a precedent to nerf others. Which you refuse to do.

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

It still produces food. If you want to remove as much randomness as possible, then ban all stages except battlefield, castle seige, FD, brinstar. And Ban Luigi, Peach, DDD, GnW etc. But don't nerf them with arbitrary rules.

RC is also non-random, and so is Luigi's.
MK and DK have seriously random moves (Dtilt trips 30% of the time).

Ok, let's say we had items on, Sonic vs. Falcon...Sonic gets the SmashBall, kills twice, he gets a pokeball, throws it at you, gets a Moltres... and wins.

Now... let's imagine YOU were the falcon -_-

Point is, I'd be pissed

Totally not what we're talking about

It is your fault for being killed by a bomb-omb in sudden death mode.

PvS is an essential factor for Brawl.

Total strawman

 

[-Vocal-]

RC is also non-random, and so is Luigi's.
MK and DK have seriously random moves (Dtilt trips 30% of the time).



Totally not what we're talking about



Total strawman

Actually the platforms in Luigi's appear at locations in random order

unless someone proved that they're always in the same pattern

 

[da K.I.D.]

There is no good reason DDD shouldn't be allowed what he was designed to have.

Its pretty clear that sonic was DESIGNED to go super sonic in brawl.
SMASHBALLS PLEASE!

You can control it by banning Peach.

Did you really just say that you want to turn items on to allow peach to pull items AND THAN ban her for it?

You will use any justification to remove the things you don't like.

So far all you have said is that being fair just isn't worth the cost.

Your version of fair is whacked out completely.

Capsules beat tornado and may help balance out the matchup.

If he throws a smart bomb is could help him handle ICs better.

DDD was obviously meant to be a top tier character with MK. If you nerf him it sets a precedent to nerf others. Which you refuse to do.

wow dude, just shut up. seriously.

youre being a douche and youre trolling people for no real reason, the stuff youre saying makes no sence and your points are completely inane.

Just be quiet and re read everything raz and spelt just told you. and if you still dont understand (im pretty sure you do understand and are just trying to get a rise out of people) just hold your own tourneys with these bogus rules that YOU think are fair and go from there.

 

[Spelt]

http://www.smashboards.com/showpost.php?p=11368754&postcount=9546


He is being serious, which is the sad part.
unless he's trying to troll sonic gd too for some reason.

 

[da K.I.D.]

and people wonder why I play falco now...

 

[-Vocal-]

This all just seems like an elaborate troll.

 

[Raziek]

At this point, that's what I'm leaning towards.

 

[ADHD]

Total strawman

Why? It's random and intrusive, and kills at lower percents like Green Greens' bombs.

 

[Raziek]

If you die to a block on Green Greens below 80% or so, you were either BELOW the stage, or you have AWFUL DI.

A randomized event that is localized SPECIFICALLY to a VERY NARROW portion of the stage, is not even remotely comparable to a bob-omb that will kill you at 30 or 40%, Spawns randomly and OFTEN (GG is 1/8th of the blocks) and has no safe vestige save the ledge. (Lol planking)

Like BPC said: Total strawman.

 

[ADHD]

If you die to a block on Green Greens below 80% or so, you were either BELOW the stage, or you have AWFUL DI.

A randomized event that is localized SPECIFICALLY to a VERY NARROW portion of the stage, is not even remotely comparable to a bob-omb that will kill you at 30 or 40%, Spawns randomly and OFTEN (GG is 1/8th of the blocks) and has no safe vestige save the ledge. (Lol planking)

Like BPC said: Total strawman.

A "VERY NAROW?" You mean, two enormous pillars of blocks containing bombs with a randomized reset?

Why is Green Greens good again?

Strawman or not, it's still comparable.

 

[Tesh]

If you guys want to control random events so hard. Why do you constantly insist upon adding more stages with random events.

@ KID you didn't read my post. I'm talking about peach pulling bombs, swords, saturns with or without items on.

As for Super Sonic, powerful items spawning randomly all over the stage =/= a calculated risk initiated by one player.

Bananas spawning everywhere =/= tripping or using a down tilt to trip someone.

Look at competitive pokemon or any competitive mmorpg and tell me critical hits make the game uncompetitive.

If you truly believed we should remove as much randomness as possible, you would want a stagelist to reduce random effects.

@ Raziek ,ADHD has you here. What do we GAIN for enabling yet another random stage to an already random stagelist. Is it not within our control to leave Green Greens off the stagelist?



I have a question for you.

Do you have a philosophy that dictates exactly how you feel the game should be played?
Or do you change that philosophy for each part of the ruleset?

 

[Raziek]

If you guys want to control random events so hard. Why do you constantly insist upon adding more stages with random events.

We are not ADDING stages with random events, we are choosing not to REMOVE them, because the randomness is not significant enough to detract from the over-all competitive value of the stage.

Secondly, we don't "want to control random events so hard", we want to "Control random events without detracting too much from the rest of the game."

Banning Peach (Or her down B) is too much, banning an entire stage because of minor random events, is, in my opinion, too much.

Flicking a switch, which removes the introduction of items into a game where we have decided MOST items are anti-competitive, is NOT too much, especially when you consider that Dedede STILL retains the risk/reward factor of the move.

As for Super Sonic, powerful items spawning randomly all over the stage =/= a calculated risk initiated by one player.

...which involves extremely powerful items spawning randomly.

Bananas spawning everywhere =/= tripping or using a down tilt to trip someone.

Look at competitive pokemon or any competitive mmorpg and tell me critical hits make the game uncompetitive.

If you truly believed we should remove as much randomness as possible, you would want a stagelist to reduce random effects.

These are NOT EVEN COMPARABLE. What if one time in eight, Guile's Flash Kick randomly did triple damage? Would that be fair?

What if every once in a while, you got THREE hadoukens instead of one?

Randomness IS anti-competitive when it cannot be controlled in reasonable moderation.

This means Peach's Down B, and Luigi's, Dedede's, and GW's side B's ARE INDEED anti-competitive to a degree, but NOT to the point of warranting banning a central part of these character's movesets, or banning the character entirely.

To suggest otherwise is LAUGHABLE, and if you suggest banning any of these characters or their moves again, I'm no longer going to take you remotely seriously.

@ Raziek ,ADHD has you here. What do we GAIN for enabling yet another random stage to an already random stagelist. Is it not within our control to leave Green Greens off the stagelist?

No, he does NOT have me here. Green Greens is a COMPLETELY UNIQUE stage with unique qualities, and banning it for a MINOR random element (if you have any clue how to play on the stage) is over-kill and results in more lost than gained.

I have a question for you.

Do you have a philosophy that dictates exactly how you feel the game should be played?
Or do you change that philosophy for each part of the ruleset?

I feel the game is to be PLAYED however people please.

However, when it comes to rulesets, I feel the ultimate goal is to ban as little as possible, while still retaining a reasonably balanced, competitive metagame. This entails banning SOME random aspects, when the pros of doing so outweigh the cons.

Now, I'll ask you again, what do we GAIN by allowing Dedede to randomly introduce powerful items into a situation where we have decided items are largely anti-competitive, and when we can EASILY AND DISCRETELY REMOVE SAID RANDOM ASPECT, WITH LITTLE OR NO PENALTY, since Dedede STILL has his Gordos.

 

[Tesh]

Its just as much in our control to NOT play green greens as it is to NOT play with items on.

Capsules are a COMPLETELY UNIQUE item with COMPLETELY UNIQUE qualities and banning them for a minor random element (if you have any clue how to shield when DDD throw something) is overkill and results in more lost than gained.

There is a penalty for removing something. Something is now gone. And you justify it in a way you refuse to apply to other random things that could EASILY be removed. The only thing unique about green greens IS the randomly spawning blocks/apples. The rest is just a basic stage layout without that.
If bombs fell randomly on "narrow" areas of battlefield, it would be just as unique.

 

[Raziek]

Green Greens: Hate it that much? Strike it for the set.

Dedede throwing capsules? Strike it for---- Oh wait.

Now, I'll ask you again, what do we GAIN by allowing Dedede to randomly introduce powerful items into a situation where we have decided items are largely anti-competitive, and when we can EASILY AND DISCRETELY REMOVE SAID RANDOM ASPECT, WITH LITTLE OR NO PENALTY, since Dedede STILL has his Gordos.

Also, Green Greens IS just a basic stage layout without its events. However, DOES THIS STAGE LAYOUT EXIST ON ANY OTHER STAGE? NO, so it has competitive merit.

 

[Tesh]

Alot of stages would have competitive merit WITHOUT the things that ruin them. Look at all of the banned stages and sure they would the layouts of those stages would have competitive value without the walkoffs, ceilings, walls and brokenly random hazards.

If the layout itself has so much competitive value, just make the same exact stage with the custom stage tool. Super competitive stage layout without the random events. We can recreate alot of interesting layouts without the random hazards.

Also, telling people to strike a stage because its broken is a horrible policy. What if I want to ban a perfectly fine stage that I don't like for that set. Like Final destination (which I do ban alot). Why should I have to waste it on Green Greens, Flat Zone, Spear Pillar or Hyrule Temple. Thats not what striking is for.

 

[Raziek]

Alot of stages would have competitive merit WITHOUT the things that ruin them. Look at all of the banned stages and sure they would the layouts of those stages would have competitive value without the walkoffs, ceilings, walls and brokenly random hazards.

If the layout itself has so much competitive value, just make the same exact stage with the custom stage tool. Super competitive stage layout without the random events. We can recreate alot of interesting layouts without the random hazards.

I am in fact, in the process of doing this for some of the competitive stages. It is a good idea that I hope more people explore.

Also, telling people to strike a stage because its broken is a horrible policy. What if I want to ban a perfectly fine stage that I don't like for that set. Like Final destination (which I do ban alot). Why should I have to waste it on Green Greens, Flat Zone, Spear Pillar or Hyrule Temple. Thats not what striking is for.

This is true, however this notion applies different to banned stages than it does to legal ones.

It is ok to apply it to Green Greens, because plenty of characters do well on this stage, and DESPITE THE RANDOMNESS, the stage has been SHOWN to provide consistent results when played on by two players who know the stage and how to use it.

It is NOT ok to apply it to a stage like Temple, because while providing consistent results, it comes down to "Is your character faster than your opponent's? If yes, and you gain the lead, congratulations on winning the game.

Green Greens is not plagued by such degenerate tactics, and the localized nature of the hazards means expecting players to adapt to it is in fact, quite reasonable.

 

[Shaya]

hey guys whats going on in--

*walks out*

Don't got **** argue with the items set to none thing, MOTHER OF GOD.
If items can be removed through easy to use settings, then they shall.
The end.

 

[Raziek]

Thank you Shaya.

<3

 

[Tesh]

Its not about it creating a degenerate unbeatable tactic. Its about it being random.

DDD throwing capsules doesn't create an unbeatable tactic either, yet you want it gone.

If its random, don't you want to get rid of it if you can? If you want that stage layout, why aren't you just arguing for the layout. Why must the blocks come with it?

 

[Spelt]

Christ you're still arguing about this?
You have no idea what you're talking about.
An 80 year old woman with Alzheimers could argue a case better than you can.
Stop.
Stop stop stop stop stop.

 

[Raziek]

DDD throwing capsules doesn't create an unbeatable tactic either, yet you want it gone.

Easily fixable, worth the loss.

Green Greens: Easily Fixable, NOT worth the loss.

Please, stop ****ing talking.

 

[Tesh]

Didn't we just agree that its easily fixable by duplicating the stage WITHOUT the random hazards?

Similar to "creating" a DDD that can't throw bombs, capsules, ray guns.

 

[Raziek]

You cannot duplicate Green Greens accurately unless you hack.

Furthermore, AGAIN, Because the randomness is centralized, you can and SHOULD incorporate it into your gameplay.

Is there a bomb in a stack? Hit your opponent into it, detonate it from afar, or use an invincible move to do so!

The bombs bring strategic value, DESPITE their inherently random nature.

inb4capsules

**** off, Gordos do the same thing without introducing items.

 

[Tesh]

Well now you are just being insulting because I don't agree with you.

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

To be fair, you're kind of acting like Jebus at this point.

 

[John12346]

It actually kinda sucks for Dedede to throw items since they travel almost the same trajectory as Waddles, making them very easy to shield.

And then the opponent gets the item.

 

[da K.I.D.]

and to the guy who used wow (terribly) as a means to defend the effects of doing random amounts of damage by comparing ddd throwing items to me getting a fireball crit...

First of all, your bad.
second. the crit system in WOW is as scripted as a random event can possibly be. You can hit one button to see the percent chance of you hitting a crit at any point in time. and you can also use abilities to alter that chance and not make it random at all. (i.e. cold blood). there have been times where I know that exactly one 3rd of my spells will crit. and use that information to count my attacks and plan my crits for the best possible time.

That concept is no where near comparable to the random chance of ddd throwing out an item because not only do you not know the chances that you have, but you dont even know what the effects will be afterwards...

 

[Tesh]

KID you are obviously a troll, I'm not going to respond to anything to say anymore.

 

[Spelt]

KID you are obviously a troll, I'm not going to respond to anything to say anymore.

Why? Because he posted facts and supporting evidence against your horribly formed argument?

 

[Tesh]

He posted irrelevant facts.

KID is trolling. Just because you can pull up a screen to look at the probability of random, doesn't make it competitive. Big deal, we don't need a freaking window to pop up and tell us there is a 1/8 chance of a green missile misfire.

How exactly do you NOT know the chances? There has to be a number listed somewhere for it. Thats like saying you don't know the chances of tripping when you dash.

@ Raziek, your basically saying DDD already got a random payoff so he can't have another. Thats not a good reason at all.

 

[Raziek]

No, I'm saying there's no need to further introduce random effects, when a virtually identical thing already exists.

He HAS Gordos, why does he need the ability to randomly introduce powerful items that we have already deemed anti-competitive?

Now, this is your last chance:

Now, I'll ask you again, what do we GAIN by allowing Dedede to randomly introduce powerful items into a situation where we have decided items are largely anti-competitive, and when we can EASILY AND DISCRETELY REMOVE SAID RANDOM ASPECT, WITH LITTLE OR NO PENALTY, since Dedede STILL has his Gordos?

 

[Tesh]

Virtually? Why does that matter. You already argue to add things that are VIRTUALLY the same as more reasonable alternatives (like custom stages).

I'm pretty sure I'm the target of a huge trolling conspiracy by BPC, Raziek the marth main, the guy with the cat avatar, and that falco with the poo colored text in his posts.

 

[Raziek]

Custom stages are NOT more reasonable alternatives than pre-packaged stages that come with the game.

They might be more balanced, but can you name ANY tournaments besides like, Overswarm's, that have EVER used custom stages?

Hardly a mainstream, practical option. (Though I wish it was.)

 

[Tesh]

How many tournaments have you seen with Green Greens legal? I think we can both agree here that being mainstream doesn't make it right.

 

[Raziek]

MLG, Midwest (I think), my tourneys... It's more than enough to be "standard", when it comes to liberal stages.

It's definitely no PTAD in that regard.

And yes, being mainstream does NOT make it right, but Green Greens is backed up with consistent results both in theory AND in practice.

It's a routine CP for a Fox main around here.