Official 'Item Standard Play' Thread (65k views. Not bad for a side project, huh? :P + Poll in OP)

[gallax]

the fact remains that some people are just plain better at getting items. whether this is just plain luck or not, its true. my roommate gets items all the time. im always the one who get caught in a smash thena bomb drops in front of me and i die. my roommate always tends to get the smashball near him and then he get is. or a super scope will fall next to him. but when im playing my other roommate the tide seems to change. i always get the good items. truthfully i hate items.

 

[Jack Kieser]

...ok, this is getting old, and it's cutting into my Paper Mario time. The Dragoon is CP right now, at this moment, because of all of the previous reasons I gave you earlier, not because the opponent might get it. 'The opponent might get it' is why a PLAYER would choose NOT to activate the Dragoon, which is actually quite an intelligent thing for a player to think if he isn't 100% confident in his skills.

'One player might be more skilled at getting items' is TOTALLY relevant in high-level play because that fact will determine how you play the game. If I'm not getting to items fast enough, I'm going to CP to either fix that problem or inhibit the opponent from getting any more items, which may or may not backfire. THIS IS A RISK INHERENT IN ITEM PLAY. If you aren't 100% certain in your skills, or at least certain in the majority of those skills, then DON'T PUT YOUR MONEY ON THE LINE. Either way, now we're arguing the difference between playing style and balance. Again, the Dragoon is not banned flat-out for all of the above reasons and because I hear no stories of it tearing up tournaments. For the last time, Yuna, you can fix this like right now (or at least very soon). Stop ignoring ME and tell me why you aren't out in item tournaments tearing things up with the Dragoon, other than you don't like item play. You can do it, if you're so certain in your skills/the Dragoon's brokenness. Honestly, I just think you're afraid of your opponent getting the Dragoon and owning you with it.

Oh, and when you're dealing with a format that isn't just not accepted, but widely criticized and bad-mouthed, politics is important. I don't know how politics works in wherever-the-hell-you-aresville, but sometimes people pander a bit to get things done. It sucks, but that's life.

 

[Empy]

That discussion has already been covered in the original ISP thread that Panda linked to in the OP. I'd put it here, but this thread was made just to discuss the items themselves, not the benefits/rigors of item play in general. I know the other thread is long and frought with flames/peril, but I'd like to keep this thread as clean as I can.

I read through that and nowhere does it say why I should turn items on. There isn't a single bit of motivation about how items might enrich your gameplay experience. Don't you think you should at least have a reason to why we should start using this item standard?

[...]'One player might be more skilled at getting items' is TOTALLY relevant in high-level play because that fact will determine how you play the game. If I'm not getting to items fast enough, I'm going to CP to either fix that problem or inhibit the opponent from getting any more items, which may or may not backfire. THIS IS A RISK INHERENT IN ITEM PLAY. If you aren't 100% certain in your skills, or at least certain in the majority of those skills, then DON'T PUT YOUR MONEY ON THE LINE. [...]

It's common sense that for the sake of argument you assume that both players are equal skilled. Also, isn't this risk there with Smashballs ? So couldn't you put those on counterpick? I mean, the other player might be more skilled so if you counterpick it wrong it might turn out the wrong way. And the same goes for stages, if you pick a stage but your opponent knows it better, it's better not to counterpick. See where I'm going? You're basically saying, "in high-level play, if you think you lose you better not play at all". You repeat this by saying if you aren't 100% certain in (it's confident in and certain of) your skills, you shouldn't put your money on the line.

Well all Melee money tourneys here were won by Amsah (njhonijn) so I guess that means no1 else should have competed right? In fact, if you knew M2K was going to play you couldn't be 100% sure you'd win so you shouldn't play either. In fact this isn't just true for M2K, but for any person you play.

 

[Jack Kieser]

First of all, Empy this item standard isn't for you. This isn't here to get people to play with items; this is here for people that already do play with items, but need a coherent standard to play with instead of all-Brawl (which doesn't work well). If you don't like items in the first place, chances are:

A ) no standard is going to make you like them.
2 ) the reasons one would play with items don't interest you.

Now, because you're interested, I'll go ahead and list some of the reasons that I play with items (even though I don't necessarily like them). First of all, they create more dynamic matches, which is a problem in Brawl. I happen to agree with the concept of Stage Control, so I don't see a problem with the game awarding players with items because items spawn at preset intervals that can be predicted (somewhat), because the player with the most space controlled logically has access to more spawn points (so don't let that happen), and because both players have the same chances for anything to happen and, ultimately, nothing the game throws at either player can't be countered. Secondly, items change the dynamics of the game. The tier lists would be quite different if items were on, and I don't see that as bad, either. There are also techs that can only be performed with items, they make comboing easier (which is also seen as a problem)... basically, I choose to ignore the 'ZOMG RANDOMMZ' aspect because it's not really that big a deal to me; I can handle random spawns, and that skill is just another facet inherent to item play.

Oh, and I'd like to say something about the whole '100% confident' thing. That reason, right there, is why I never have and never will have a money match. I don't gamble with my cash, so without that 100% confidence in my skills (which I'll never have), I refuse to enter in a money match. Same concept. I would never in a million years turn the Dragoon/Smash Ball on in competitive play because I'm not 100% confident that the person who will receive the benefit of the item will be me. Other items, I can deal with. Someone gets a Ray Gun? I know how to deal with that. Someone gets a HRB? I know how to deal with that. More importantly, I'm confident 100% in my skill to be able to deal with those items. So me, personally, I'm fine with them being on because I can deal. Not so with the Dragoon (I'm not a very crafty person) or the Smash Ball (I'm usually impatient and end up only weakening it, not breaking it).

As for entering tournaments, I don't see the entrance fee as a bet; I see it as cash I have to pay to play, kind of like paying a ticket fee for the fair. I couldn't care less about getting my 5$ back because I didn't enter to get money, I entered to play with other skilled people, win or lose (probably lose, to be honest).

 

[Yuna]

Oh, and I'd like to say something about the whole '100% confident' thing. That reason, right there, is why I never have and never will have a money match. I don't gamble with my cash, so without that 100% confidence in my skills (which I'll never have), I refuse to enter in a money match. Same concept. I would never in a million years turn the Dragoon/Smash Ball on in competitive play because I'm not 100% confident that the person who will receive the benefit of the item will be me. Other items, I can deal with. Someone gets a Ray Gun? I know how to deal with that. Someone gets a HRB? I know how to deal with that. More importantly, I'm confident 100% in my skill to be able to deal with those items. So me, personally, I'm fine with them being on because I can deal. Not so with the Dragoon (I'm not a very crafty person) or the Smash Ball (I'm usually impatient and end up only weakening it, not breaking it).

Too bad since they're up for counterpicking.

In Teams, you'll might have to face one of them since I'm assuming one can only ban one item. So whichever you don't ban, the opposition can counterpick.

You can neverb be 100% confident in the person to benefit from the item to be you. Your opponent could just, you know, take the item from you and use it against you, thus benefiting from it while it ends up possibly killing you. This is true for all items.

Which is where you logic fails. Oh, the Dragoon is special. There's the risk of the opponent getting it before I do. Yeah, big deal, that's the inherent risk with all items.

 

[Jack Kieser]

Yuna, try reading the entire post, please. Me, personally, I'll never be confident in my skills to deal with the Dragoon, for instance, because of my own level of skill. That's not to say that someone else won't be confident, though. Besides, that's why it's CP, NOT why it's allowed. So this point you keep on bringing up isn't even RELATED to the item's inherent balance; that is covered in the other points.

How about this: I'll reduce the hyperbole to 95%. Happy now? Sh*t does happen, but I'm fairly certain that I can out class my opponent and get to the item first (if stage control doesn't beat me to the punch). So, I'm not worried. But that 5%, for an item like the Dragoon, I'm not personally willing to take even a 1% chance; some people will, I won't. Technically, since I won't take that chance, I'd probably just ban the Dragoon at the start of the set. Oh, wait, you did know you could do that, right? Each player can choose to ban an item outright at the beginning of the set. Just another thing we put in place to give the players control, instead of taking all control from them. So, not too bad, since in my matches they won't even be up for CP; they'll be banned at the start of the set.

 

[Yuna]

I didn't say the point of you eventually having to face either a Smash Ball or a Dragoon had anything to do with the point at hand. When did I do that? I was replying to that part of your post and juggling another topic at the same time.

Some of us are able to discuss more than one bullet point per post.

Blah, blah, control, blah, blah, people want it, blah, blah. But refute the fact that it's broken and overpowered. That's what relevant. A lot of people like Hyrule Temple for reasons beyond my comprehension. Should we unban it?

 

[Jack Kieser]

I can't refute that it's broken for the same reason that you can't prove it: we don't have high-level tournament data showing its use during the rigors of competitive play. AGAIN, Yuna, you ignore me. Go outside of your house and prove your point, if it means so much to you.

 

[Yuna]

I can't refute that it's broken for the same reason that you can't prove it: we don't have high-level tournament data showing its use during the rigors of competitive play. AGAIN, Yuna, you ignore me. Go outside of your house and prove your point, if it means so much to you.

I'm sorry, you've held how many items tournaments now? And you got zero data from them, or what?

And what do I need to prove, anyway? It's a 1 frame unblockable move with a huge hitbox which OHKOs you on any legal stage. Once one piece spawns, they will inhibit other items from spawning (with a few random exceptions) until such time the Dragoon is completed or all three pieces somehow manage to fall off stage at the same time. All you have to do to prove this is, at most, 5 matches in a row to prove the pattern.

You've had how many tournaments where Dragoons are allowed? Did no one counterpick them, or what? How can you possibly have next to no tournament data on the Dragoon?

Also, the bias is clear here. We can ban certain things without extensive tournament data on it simply by looking at it clinically... however, if people like the item and whine about it, then we'll keep it in as a counterpick. Yes, very solid basis for "scientific" experimentation.

 

[bobson]

Also, the bias is clear here. We can ban certain things without extensive tournament data on it simply by looking at it clinically... however, if people like the item and whine about it, then we'll keep it in as a counterpick. Yes, very solid basis for "scientific" experimentation.

What's wrong with working like that? If people don't like the rules of the tournament, they won't enter. Without the community, the tournament is worthless; it stands to reason, then, that pleasing the community should be among the primary goals in determining the rules. This rule applies doubly-so to tournaments where the target audience is already small.

 

[Yuna]

What's wrong with working like that? If people don't like the rules of the tournament, they won't enter. Without the community, the tournament is worthless; it stands to reason, then, that pleasing the community should be among the primary goals in determining the rules. This rule applies doubly-so to tournaments where the target audience is already small.

Because Jack claims to be objective and a man of science who relies on data from experiments.

Either he has to not ban anything until substantial tournament data has been provided to prove certain items broken and successively ban them as more and more items are proven broken, or he has to ban everything which is broken on paper pending proof that it isn't.

He can't just pick and choose and then go "I'm objective and a man of science! I need real evidence before banning the Dragoon!" when he's obviously (he's admitted to it) banned other items without first gathering tons of data on them.

 

[Jack Kieser]

Yuna, you obviously are only selectively reading my posts, because everything you've been saying lately has been covered before. I'd appreciate it if you would stop cluttering the thread if you have nothing else new to say.

I don't have more Dragoon data, btw, because AS I'VE SAID BEFORE the only tournament I've held 1v1 yet had the Dragoon banned. You don't need to prove how it works, you need to prove that it tears up tournaments. On paper, the IC chain grabs sound broken as hell, but they don't tear up tournaments. So, prove to me that the Dragoon is tearing up item tournaments and we'll talk more. Otherwise, you aren't saying anything new or constructive anymore, so just stop. If you keep this up, it will be considered spamming the thread.

 

[Yuna]

Yuna, you obviously are only selectively reading my posts, because everything you've been saying lately has been covered before. I'd appreciate it if you would stop cluttering the thread if you have nothing else new to say.

Oh yes, let's, as usual, accuse our opponents of doing what we ourselves are doing. I'm repeating myself because you keep ignoring certain parts of my posts.

I don't have more Dragoon data, btw, because AS I'VE SAID BEFORE the only tournament I've held 1v1 yet had the Dragoon banned. You don't need to prove how it works, you need to prove that it tears up tournaments.

And my question is:
Are you the only one holding ISP tournaments (a question asked a while back, BTW)? Aren't there other people around to do it to help you? Also, was the Golden Hammer, Lightning, Timer, Containers, Bob-Omb, Deku Nut and other items allowed at that tournament?

How did you come to the conclusion they had to be banned? Were they allowed at that tournament and then you got enough data to ban them? Or was it just a preference because you came to the conclusion they were broken even without data?

(BTW, I've asked you all of this before and you categorically refused to answer.)

On paper, the IC chain grabs sound broken as hell, but they don't tear up tournaments.

No they don't. They have little range, bad traction (slide back a lot from shielded attacks) and only work if Nana is close to Popo and desynched.

Solution? Separate the two. They don't sound broken on paper at all. That's just what less educated people claim despite evidence otherwise.

So, prove to me that the Dragoon is tearing up item tournaments and we'll talk more.

Pull out the data you used for banning the Golden Hammer, Deku Nut, Lightning, Timer, Bob-Omb, containers, Heart Container, Maximum Tomato, etc. (this is the, what, 3rd time I ask you to address this).

Otherwise, you aren't saying anything new or constructive anymore, so just stop. If you keep this up, it will be considered spamming the thread.

If your own fault for categorically refusing to address relevant parts of my post, be it due to selective blindness, dyslexia, laziness or "If I pretend he didn't say it, then I won't have to try to refute it".

 

[Jack Kieser]

Tell you what, Yuna. I won't hold your hand. You want my data? Every bit of data I have is posted online for you to read. Go find it, it's all nicely and neatly organized for you in the second post of the other thread. Which is, by the way, what I've said from the beginning. Just like how the Dragoon is hard to set up, the IC grabs are hard to set up, too. But, if you can ignore set-up to focus on result, then I can, too. IC grabs result in a stock on ANY CHARACTER. All you need to do is land the grab. Sure there is setup, but I'm ignoring that because the result is more important, right Yuna?

Oh, and I'm sure other people are holding tournaments, but I've never received any data from them. I haven't seen the results posted, or if I have they haven't had the rigor necessary for me to pull relevant data from them. So, as far as this project is concerned, until someone else PM's me with some data or posts results in our threads, yeah, I'm the only one gathering data. Nice job on expecting one guy to do the equivalent of what the SBR has like 30 people to do. For one dude, I think that, for all the problems we still have, this has come a long way.

Now, you have some reading/tournament playing to do. Go do it.

 

[Yuna]

Tell you what, Yuna. I won't hold your hand. You want my data? Every bit of data I have is posted online for you to read. Go find it, it's all nicely and neatly organized for you in the second post of the other thread. Which is, by the way, what I've said from the beginning.

I see, so the reason the project is so stagnated is because in these many months, you've held only one single tournament.

Just like how the Dragoon is hard to set up, the IC grabs are hard to set up, too. But, if you can ignore set-up to focus on result, then I can, too. IC grabs result in a stock on ANY CHARACTER. All you need to do is land the grab. Sure there is setup, but I'm ignoring that because the result is more important, right Yuna?

Yes, but the IC's have a powerful weapon that's hard to set up. So play as ICs them. Fight for that grab and then go into an infinite.

The Dragoon works for everyone. It becomes a toss-up of who gets the Dragoon because chances are it will be completed if even once piece spawns. Whoever gets it wins 'cause it's a OHKO at 0%. Barring the opponent already being past the 120%s, nailing it will dramatically turn the tide of the game.

And not because of a character strength, no, but because of random item spawns. That's not to mention how dramatically the game favours the loser when it comes to Dragoon parts and knocking them out of people, much more so than with normal items.

Oh, and I'm sure other people are holding tournaments, but I've never received any data from them. I haven't seen the results posted, or if I have they haven't had the rigor necessary for me to pull relevant data from them. So, as far as this project is concerned, until someone else PM's me with some data or posts results in our threads, yeah, I'm the only one gathering data. Nice job on expecting one guy to do the equivalent of what the SBR has like 30 people to do. For one dude, I think that, for all the problems we still have, this has come a long way.

How about you just tell people to collect data and give it to you?! Say it in the OP.

Now, you have some reading/tournament playing to do. Go do it.

The Swedes, even the Casual players at conventions, turn items off in tournaments so I can't actually go attend any Items On tournaments.

Go host some more tournament for crying out loud. Several months and you've only had one single tournament (the online one doesn't count) to base your findings on. And the question remains (it was not answered in the thread).
Were all items on for that tournament?

Why did you ban so many items without testing them out in tournaments first, yet you persist the Dragoon needs extensive testing? I smell bias.

 

[Jack Kieser]

*sigh* Alright, one more time.

A ) I would love to hold more tournaments, because I find the act enjoyable... but life gets in the way very much. I have school, running a business, taking care of pets and a house, working out, and on top of that, I'm trying to fit in a tournament. Guess what will get left out when push comes to shove?

B ) I HAVE said in the OP in our original thread that people should hold tournaments and give me data. I even gave them examples (through my own prelim testing) of possible testing formats AND typed up and posted paperwork to make the job easier. I can't MAKE anyone use it or do it, though.

C ) Wow, Swedes don't hold item tournaments? I guess it sucks that you aren't a Tournament Directer, then... OWAI-

D ) Ok, I'm only gonna say this one more time. When we started out, we had no idea what was broken and what wasn't in a tournament setting because we had no tournaments. But, no one would agree to playing in an all-Brawl format; if we tried hosting an all-Brawl tournament, we'd get mabe 5 people to show up, all of the noobs who just didn't care about the format. So, we discussed things and used all that we had available at the time (paper theory fighter) to formulate a starting point KNOWING THAT THE RULES WOULD CHANGE WHEN WE HAD MORE DATA. We created the starting point, then to validate the data in some way, I did that basic CPU testing just to test mathematical outcomes. The math seemed to work pretty well, so we knew we were on to something, and I held 2 tournaments: the online one (all of the entrants who participated said that the lag wasn't bad, so I count it, even if you don't), and my 1v1 live tournament. Since then, I tried holding a 2v2, but life got in the way. I'm going to start holding bi-weeklies here in Dallas starting the 13th, and hopefully I can make one or more of them with ISP rules... we'll see if the competitive players here tolerate that and are open enough to help me out.

So, to re-iterate, in the beginning, we worked with what we had (theory) to formulate a starting point. Now that we have somewhere to begin with and have exhausted all of the theory-related arguments (nothing you've borough up in the last 2 days hasn't been brought up before), it's time to use hard data to finish making the ruleset. Theory, from the point of our first tournament onward, will not be good enough, because we're past that stage in the process. It's just like the SBR; when we first started playing Brawl, we banned stages because we didn't like them/on theory instead of waiting for tournament data to prove them broken because we needed somewhere to start, and then the SBR used the tournament data (among other things) they were getting to decide whether stages really were broken. They are doing what we're doing, just they have more data (and more people) to do it with.

 

[Yuna]

C ) Wow, Swedes don't hold item tournaments? I guess it sucks that you aren't a Tournament Directer, then... OWAI-

Why would I hold a tournament for a tournament format I do not enjoy?

D ) Ok, I'm only gonna say this one more time. When we started out, we had no idea what was broken and what wasn't in a tournament setting because we had no tournaments. But, no one would agree to playing in an all-Brawl format; if we tried hosting an all-Brawl tournament, we'd get mabe 5 people to show up, all of the noobs who just didn't care about the format. So, we discussed things and used all that we had available at the time (paper theory fighter) to formulate a starting point KNOWING THAT THE RULES WOULD CHANGE WHEN WE HAD MORE DATA. We created the starting point, then to validate the data in some way, I did that basic CPU testing just to test mathematical outcomes. The math seemed to work pretty well, so we knew we were on to something, and I held 2 tournaments: the online one (all of the entrants who participated said that the lag wasn't bad, so I count it, even if you don't), and my 1v1 live tournament. Since then, I tried holding a 2v2, but life got in the way. I'm going to start holding bi-weeklies here in Dallas starting the 13th, and hopefully I can make one or more of them with ISP rules... we'll see if the competitive players here tolerate that and are open enough to help me out.

This in no way translated into why the Dragoon cannot be banned while others things can. What have you found out during testing and discussions that makes it less bannable than the Deku Nit, the Timer and Lightning? Other than "Well, it takes longer to build".

So, to re-iterate, in the beginning, we worked with what we had (theory) to formulate a starting point. Now that we have somewhere to begin with and have exhausted all of the theory-related arguments (nothing you've borough up in the last 2 days hasn't been brought up before), it's time to use hard data to finish making the ruleset. Theory, from the point of our first tournament onward, will not be good enough, because we're past that stage in the process. It's just like the SBR; when we first started playing Brawl, we banned stages because we didn't like them/on theory instead of waiting for tournament data to prove them broken because we needed somewhere to start, and then the SBR used the tournament data (among other things) they were getting to decide whether stages really were broken. They are doing what we're doing, just they have more data (and more people) to do it with.

In other words, theory is OK as long as people don't whine. If people whine, then theory's out the window and all of a sudden, we need hard data before we ban anything. Biased, subjective and arbitrary.

The SBR, as opposed to you, has never said "We have to see everything in a tournament setting, preferrably for several months, before we ban anything", though. You use that as a cushion to defend the Dragoon not yet being banned.

 

[Jack Kieser]

You hold a tournament for a format you don't enjoy because otherwise we're not going to listen to you. So, either hold a tournament or leave it be. The ball is in your court. Prove us wrong.

No, it translates to why ANYTIHING should be changed. If you wanted to make Smart Bombs legal, we'd need the same data at this point. If you wanted to make Unira banned, you'd need hard data at this point. If you want Dragoon banned, you need hard evidence AT THIS POINT.

And if you don't like the way things are run here, then either make your own project that is better than this one, or deal with it. This is how this project is run right now because I'm doing this, for the most part, by myself and this is the most time and effort efficient way to run things. If you don't like it, either help me out by giving me more data, or make your own project and run it the way you think. Keits on SRK doesn't like the way ISP is run (mainly, that we ban things), so he made his own project. Either lead, follow, or show how it should be done.

 

[RDK]

You hold a tournament for a format you don't enjoy because otherwise we're not going to listen to you. So, either hold a tournament or leave it be. The ball is in your court. Prove us wrong.

No, it translates to why ANYTIHING should be changed. If you wanted to make Smart Bombs legal, we'd need the same data at this point. If you wanted to make Unira banned, you'd need hard data at this point. If you want Dragoon banned, you need hard evidence AT THIS POINT.

But you're not making decisions based off of common sense. The Dragoon doesn't need to "tear up tournaments" just to be considered ban-worthy; all you have to do is look objectively at its effects in matches. Doing experiments with a flawed starting point is useless, especially when you only have one tournament to draw data from.

Reason should lead you to believe that the Dragoon is ban-worthy. Tournament evidence isn't needed where common sense should do just fine. It's a 0HKO item that is randomly awarded to a player just for being in the right spot during a match. Again--it's a high-reward situation with no risks involved at all.

 

[Jack Kieser]

And that logic doesn't take the fact that it must be built into account at all. Once two people hold different pieces of the Dragoon, there is plenty of risk involved in getting the item, because you are forced to approach, thus risking either losing a stock (potentially), or losing your part. Thus, you have to play a waiting/approaching game with your opponent or risk losing your piece. Try playing competitively with the Dragoon on, really try it, and see how your playstyle will change when you have a Dragoon piece, and how it changes again when both people have a piece, or when one guy has two pieces and another has one. Go ahead. Why don't you and Yuna do a 50$ money match on it. See how your playstyle will change when the Dragoon comes into play. See for yourself how the building game affects your play.

Just looking at the result of all three pieces, of COURSE you will say it's broken. But you can't do that; you HAVE to take into account the risk of putting the d*mn thing together. It's not just awarded to someone like a Heart or Tomato is; there IS a lot that has to go into putting it together.

 

[Yuna]

You hold a tournament for a format you don't enjoy because otherwise we're not going to listen to you.

I'm sorry, what? This is a requirement to take a part in this debate now? Hold my own tournament or stay out of the thread?

So, either hold a tournament or leave it be. The ball is in your court. Prove us wrong.

I've proven you wrong using your own logic. With your own logic, you need to unban all items and make a do-over tournament where all items are on before banning anything. You haven't. So you're a hypocrite.

No, it translates to why ANYTIHING should be changed. If you wanted to make Smart Bombs legal, we'd need the same data at this point. If you wanted to make Unira banned, you'd need hard data at this point. If you want Dragoon banned, you need hard evidence AT THIS POINT.

Only you've betrayed yourself.

You yourself said that the Dragoon was originally banned. But then people whined (no mention of any hard evidence) and suddenly its status changed. So apparently whining alone can change an item's status.

And if you don't like the way things are run here, then either make your own project that is better than this one, or deal with it.

Or, how about I try to be a part of the project and be helpful. But apparently I can't as you're putting up ludicrous requirements for even taking part in the discussion. I'm sorry, do you require every else in this thread to have hosted their own items tournament (or at the very least participated in one) before they can post here?

This is how this project is run right now because I'm doing this, for the most part, by myself and this is the most time and effort efficient way to run things.

And maybe that's why it's so stagnated and failing on several points. Because you're doing it on your own. You refuse to listen sometimes, you're subjective, hypocritical and make arbitrary decisions.

Did I mention the stagnation? If you really wanted this to take off, you'd try to get others to join in and become a part of the "inner circle" of the ISP, you'd try to get more people to hold Items On tournaments because, apparently, there are enough of Itemnites around for this project to even exist.

If you don't like it, either help me out by giving me more data, or make your own project and run it the way you think.

Apparently a 5-6 (or how many people did that tournament of yours have) man tournament consisting of mostly n00bs is enough to harvest "relevant data". So if I run something like that, will you listen?

Fine, I'll go and host an at least 8- to 16-man tournament with items on (including the Dragoon) on the 17-19th of October (one of the days). If I can provide data for why it should be banned, then will it be banned? After all, you have very little grounds to not ban it other than BS arguments and whinage from the n00bs.

Keits on SRK doesn't like the way ISP is run (mainly, that we ban things), so he made his own project. Either lead, follow, or show how it should be done.

You mean EVO? Yes, what brilliant show he made.

And why can't I just be a part of it and contribute? That's right, only your opinion matters. When called on your BS, you instead try to change the subject or (illogically) accuse the opposition of doing what you do when they're clearly not doing that.

 

[MarKO X]

Whoa.... the rules for Evo (mainly the item set) was influenced by Keits?

 

[RDK]

And that logic doesn't take the fact that it must be built into account at all. Once two people hold different pieces of the Dragoon, there is plenty of risk involved in getting the item, because you are forced to approach, thus risking either losing a stock (potentially), or losing your part. Thus, you have to play a waiting/approaching game with your opponent or risk losing your piece. Try playing competitively with the Dragoon on, really try it, and see how your playstyle will change when you have a Dragoon piece, and how it changes again when both people have a piece, or when one guy has two pieces and another has one. Go ahead. Why don't you and Yuna do a 50$ money match on it. See how your playstyle will change when the Dragoon comes into play. See for yourself how the building game affects your play.

Just looking at the result of all three pieces, of COURSE you will say it's broken. But you can't do that; you HAVE to take into account the risk of putting the d*mn thing together. It's not just awarded to someone like a Heart or Tomato is; there IS a lot that has to go into putting it together.

No other mechanic in the game allows for a virtually undodgeable attack once you collect an item three times. Again, it's basically being awarded a OHKO for fighting over an item. Little risk, big reward.

 

[Yuna]

And that logic doesn't take the fact that it must be built into account at all. Once two people hold different pieces of the Dragoon, there is plenty of risk involved in getting the item, because you are forced to approach, thus risking either losing a stock (potentially), or losing your part.

This is bull**** and you know it. It's the same BS all over again.

You: "Well, there's risk in..."
Me: "Well that risk exists for all friggin' items!"

Ouh, you have to actually collect the item before using it. Horribly risky! Yes! It's not like you can grab it with an aerial or a dashattack to hedge your bets! Nooo! Also, it's not like chasing the Smash Ball down doesn't involve the same risks as well!

No, no, these risks which exist for all items are special in this case because it's the magical Dragoon we're talking about! Never mind the fact that using this inane logic, no item should be banned because it's a risk that's inherent with all items!

Thus, you have to play a waiting/approaching game with your opponent or risk losing your piece.

See above.

Try playing competitively with the Dragoon on, really try it, and see how your playstyle will change when you have a Dragoon piece, and how it changes again when both people have a piece, or when one guy has two pieces and another has one. Go ahead. Why don't you and Yuna do a 50$ money match on it. See how your playstyle will change when the Dragoon comes into play. See for yourself how the building game affects your play.

Oh noes! Items on Brawl is a different game than Items Off Brawl. Well of course we know that!

This doesn't change the fact that there's no actual inherent risk in attaining the piece dwarfs the reward of finishing the Dragoon (and hitting with it). So what if you might somehow leave yourself open? Worst case scenario, you eat a hit, two or three. Unless your character sucks, it'll end there.

You get the Dragoon? OHKO at 0%. Risk <<<<<< Reward.

Just looking at the result of all three pieces, of COURSE you will say it's broken. But you can't do that; you HAVE to take into account the risk of putting the d*mn thing together. It's not just awarded to someone like a Heart or Tomato is; there IS a lot that has to go into putting it together.

What makes you think we haven't taken into account all of these things you're saying? What makes you think I haven't already addressed most of them either in another form or in the exakt same form since you keep repeating the same inane arguments over and over and over again while ignoring me a lot of the time when I crush your flimsy excuses for arguments?!

 

[manhunter098]

Jack, the entire purpose of ISP is to allow items but still have SKILL play as great a part in the outcome of matches as possible is it not?

The Dragoon is an item that clearly once it has been completed by a player is incredibly overpowering and has very little if ANY means to counter it.

Now if a player were to by pure chance end up having the Dragoon parts frequently spawn near them, allowing them to easily complete it then they just got control over an item that has no real counter.

Thus allowing the Dragoon in tournaments adds an item that takes away from the amount of skill necessary and adds to the amount of luck necessary.

By this virtue it should be banned.


Evidence is totally unnecessary in proving this.

 

[Jack Kieser]

Oh, poor Yuna! How you aren't being listened to! We're not listening because you've been arguing in circles with us for the last 2 pages. You've said everything that you can, and haven't said anything even reletively new. So, theory has ceased to be enough. What's the next logical step? Hard proof. So, get some hard proof. It isn't that big of a stretch, is it?

And you haven't 'proven' anything, because if you had, I wouldn't be able to refute or even counter you. And I have, because in your own proof, you don't even take everything into consideration (for instance, your insistance on ignoring how the Dragoon is completed). You logically argued and theoretically show certain things, but beyond the shadow of a doubt? Not even close. That's why I want to see your proof. Because I haven't been convinced (and obviously no one other than RDK has either, because I see no other people posting), I want to see something that will convince me.

The single tournament I could hold so far had 35 entrants. 4 top players from Houston entered, as well as a few G-crew members. So, if you can do something along those lines and prove that the Dragoon skewed the results of the tournament, then I'll have no choice to listen, and I'd expect you to link to this post to keep me in line. So... get to it.

I've already done all I can, other than holding people at gunpoint, to get people to help out here. Not many have. I've even asked the SBR if they had any data or input to give, or any advice, or any bones at all to throw me. Nothing. So, I'm on the ropes here. I'll keep going because I have that responsibility, but I've done all I can to get people to help.

And, btw, I'm not saying you can't be in the discussion... but again, your discussion has stagnated. We're going in circles now. So, either do something different to make it not go in circles, or let it drop, cause otherwise you're wasting your time and mine.

Oh, and go to SRK. I'm not talking about EVO; Keits didn't run that. He made an all-Brawl ruleset thread since EVO because he didn't like that I was banning things.

 

[Yuna]

Oh, poor Yuna! How you aren't being listened to! We're not listening because you've been arguing in circles with us for the last 2 pages. You've said everything that you can, and haven't said anything even reletively new. So, theory has ceased to be enough. What's the next logical step? Hard proof. So, get some hard proof. It isn't that big of a stretch, is it?

Too bad you're still arguing theory. Instead of dismissing RDK with "I want hard proof, not theory", you argue him theoretically... with faulty BS. Which gives me Carte Blanche to expose your BS.

And you haven't 'proven' anything, because if you had, I wouldn't be able to refute or even counter you.

Your only real counter is "I want hard evidence!"

And I have, because in your own proof, you don't even take everything into consideration (for instance, your insistance on ignoring how the Dragoon is completed).

Selective reading taking its toll again? I have not ignored how it's completed. In fact, I've addressed that already.

You logically argued and theoretically show certain things, but beyond the shadow of a doubt? Not even close. That's why I want to see your proof. Because I haven't been convinced (and obviously no one other than RDK has either, because I see no other people posting), I want to see something that will convince me.

Maybe people aren't posting because they just don't care. This thread was pretty dead 'til I revived it. You demand concrete proof, well then I say, unban many of the items. No, "That's how it used to be done, we're doing it differently now!" is a bad argument. We have to give each item an equal chance of representation and experimentation.

Unban everything and try them all out before banning anything, because theory means nothing, right?

The single tournament I could hold so far had 35 entrants. 4 top players from Houston entered, as well as a few G-crew members. So, if you can do something along those lines and prove that the Dragoon skewed the results of the tournament, then I'll have no choice to listen, and I'd expect you to link to this post to keep me in line. So... get to it.

Why must it just be that it skews the results? If it's just way too good and breaks the game, that should be enough.

And how much will it have to skew the game? Must one lose a match to someone clearly inferior in skill? Or an entire? Or have a set/match between two highly skilled players come down almost solely to who Dragoons the other the most?

I've already done all I can, other than holding people at gunpoint, to get people to help out here. Not many have. I've even asked the SBR if they had any data or input to give, or any advice, or any bones at all to throw me. Nothing. So, I'm on the ropes here. I'll keep going because I have that responsibility, but I've done all I can to get people to help.

It's not the SBR's job to do your own job. Get people who like playing with items on to host item tournaments. Host some of your own.

Whatever.

And, btw, I'm not saying you can't be in the discussion... but again, your discussion has stagnated.

Funny, you said "[you] were not going to listen to [me]" unless I went out and hosted my own items on tournament.

Oh, and go to SRK. I'm not talking about EVO; Keits didn't run that. He made an all-Brawl ruleset thread since EVO because he didn't like that I was banning things.

Why should I go to SRK? It's a stupid forum filled with idiots. At least here we have some intelligent people.

So what's Keits doing if he dislikes banning items? Are all items on? Why should I care about a project like that?!

 

[Jack Kieser]

*facepalm* Yuna, I was correcting you, not telling you to care about Keits' stuff. You said 'Oh, you mean EVO?' No, I didn't mean EVO, and if you went to SRK, you'd have known that, so I said go to SRK and see what I'm talking about before you open your mouth. Jesus.

Just because you say something is faulty doesn't mean it is. It has to be proven faulty... which is why I'm asking you for hard data. To prove, once and for all, which line of thinking is correct. You know what, that's it; final straw right here. Yuna, you can post here all you want. Go for it. You get no responses from me any more until you either say something that hasn't been said in this thread or any other ISP thread before or you post data from a tournament, in which case you should post it in the other thread because that is our data repository. I'm not going to waste any more time fighting in circles with you.

 

[Yuna]

Fine, I'll host a tournament with items on and post the findings. And then maybe you'll listen up.

 

[Jack Kieser]

Yes, then I will. I promise. And I want you to hold me to that, too. And anyone else that reads this. In fact, I'll print this post out and keep a copy of it on my bulletin board just for you, Yuna.

 

[RDK]

Kieser, what you're doing is basing everything off of one tournament. Any scientist knows that that is in no way conclusive, and shouldn't even be considered conclusive. That's why multiple tests should always be held.

Asking for "hard proof" to disprove the results from one tournament with questionable rules is ridiculous and an argument from ignorance. How can you trust results when your initial test is flawed? Using the Dragoon in competition even as a test goes against common sense, and everything we know about items.

Even if you completely disregard this, just do one thing for me: explain why you ban things like the Golden Hammer but not the Dragoon. They're both overpowered, but one just happens to be split up into three parts.

 

[Jack Kieser]

Because people asked for more data on the Dragoon when it was first banned. But if we kept it banned, no one would play with it in tournaments, and we would be guaranteeing that we'd never get any new data. So, in an attempt to make it so that people willing to test it would be able to, we moved Dragoon to CP and added the 'ban clause'. That way, people would be free enough to get more data for us to use, but we wouldn't be forcing the Dragoon into every match. If people wanted more data on the GH, we'd have done the same thing. You forget, we NEVER expected anything on this list to ever be set in stone, but even if it was going to be, we told everyone that this wouldn't happen for at least a year,if not longer.

We only have a small set of data, so we made judgments based on what we could because otherwise we'd be waiting so long that we'd never get anything done. We don't operate like the SBR in that we'll wait 6 months before updating things. We needed a starting point, and so we made it.

Not to mention, it's not like any of this is a mandate. Any TO could turn the GH on and the Dragoon off if he wanted to. It's totally their call; if they don't agree, they don't have to follow it to a T, just like the SBR's official list.

 

[manhunter098]

But why do you even need tournament data for the Dragoon? We know the mechanics of it to the frame do we not? Simply from that we can already derive ALL the data we need without the need to do any matches to test it at all. Its like wondering what the circumference of a circle is when we already know the radius, well thats not an incredible analogy, but I think it serves the point.

The Dragoon purely due to its mechanics even with the randomly located spawning of the parts still has a notable probability of turning the tide of a match based PURELY on chance and that is NOT something that is wanted for competitive play. Its nothing like say a Home Run Bat where even if you do happen to get it by chance (it spawns close to you), being able to use it effectively is based not only on YOUR skill in using it, but your opponents ability to avoid it with their own skill as well.

 

[Zamuel]

I sort of think that the two of you are stalemating each other in arguments. Jack, as much as I believe in the project and feel things need to be tested, I can see where heavy arguements can come in from the Dragoon. It's hard to test since no one wants to turn them on and/or the people who play with them aren't that skilled. I will say that they seem a little more valid in Keits's ruleset than yours since he runs two stock which prevents the loser loyalty from kicking in like with three or more stock.

I experimented with a modified version of the ISP rules Saturday: http://forums.shoryuken.com/showthread.php?t=163397

I moved a few items around within the normal/counterpicked/banned lists. Of interesting mention:

-Very few people did item counterpicks. The only ones added in during the 2nd and 3rd rounds were the Bumper and Smash Ball. Bumper actually had no effect on the match though there was an "almost" where the person who placed the Bumper nearly had the placement work against them.

-Smash Ball might have been a bad idea. I feel that they need to be tested in a tournament setting but in the two matches they were used, they very heavily swayed the match and the person who chose to CP was the one who got the Smash Ball. Intriguingly enough, the characters were ROB and Mr. Game & Watch.

-Unira & Spring didn't cause heavy problems. I was outzoned by a Unira but that was due to my trying to deactivate it so I could take it and use it as opposed to simply ignoring it and floating over (Jigglypuff @ Battlefield).

 

[Jack Kieser]

I saw your post in the SRK ISP thread; I think I responded to it there, but I might not have, in which case, I'm sorry. I'll go ahead and add your data to the main thread's tournament data list when I get home from class.

And thank you very much for posting your data; it's very much appreciated and needed.

 

[MarKO X]

Spring doesn't cause problems because people don't seem to realize that it can't be blocked yet. Spam tossing it and see how effective it can be.

 

[Jack Kieser]

It won't be a problem then because then people will just spot dodge it, if they know what they're doing. That or SHAD/aerial it.

 

[Zamuel]

I saw your post in the SRK ISP thread; I think I responded to it there, but I might not have, in which case, I'm sorry. I'll go ahead and add your data to the main thread's tournament data list when I get home from class.

And thank you very much for posting your data; it's very much appreciated and needed.

You did. I meant to post it here and there simultaneously but been busy with work and school. I will probably will attempt another tournament with ISP but we've been alternating between items on and items off so it'll probably be a month and a half at least (not counting any friendlies/mini-tournaments). Also been experimenting with (items off) Stamina but that's another topic...

 

[Yuna]

It won't be a problem then because then people will just spot dodge it, if they know what they're doing. That or SHAD/aerial it.

I perform an aerial, it spawns into my hand, auto-cancel into a throw. Hey, unblockable hit!

Or if I have it in my hand, what are you gonna do when I glide toss it across the stage at you? You spotdodge it, I recover fast enough and kick your *** for spotdodging it with a move with a lingering hitbox.

 

[Jack Kieser]

While the spawning into your hand thing would suck, that comes with the territory of item play; plus, you'd have to autocancel it, which means either you're REALLY lucky (which may happen), or you caught it with enough time to make a decision to AC into a throw, in which case the opponent would have time to react, too. Now, the second example? That's called mindgaming. You haven't done anything out of the ordinary; you baited a spotdodge, which you then punished. Peach could do that with a turnip, or I could do that with Link's bombs. Big a$$ deal. In fact, I'd applaud you for good use of items in that case because you knew that the Spring couldn't be shielded and used that to your tactical advantage. I'd also applaud your opponent for knowing that he had to spot dodge, although I'd have thought a SHAD would have been a better choice.