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

[John12346]

Well, if I haven't said it yet, aside from my four proposed changes:

Motion Sensor Bomb: Neutral to Counterpick(maybe)
Star Rod: Neutral to Counterpick
Smart Bomb: Banned to Counterpick
Hothead: Counterpick to Banned

I don't see any problems with using the format laid out by the 5/28 update.

45 out of 49. Super agreeable!

 

[Grim Tuesday]

I agree with all of these except for the hot-head.

 

[W.C.N]

Wait you took out the hot head but added the smart bomb?

 

[John12346]

Yeah, the Smart Bomb, once people learn that they can SDI out of it and take maybe 10 damage tops, is really nothing more than a space controlling object. There's nothing really banworthy about it aside from that fact that it LOOKS like ban material >___>

The reason I suggest Hothead as a banned item is only because of its extremely destructive potential in a match. It can net kills at 0 if you make it too big or if it is reflected too many times, and while those occurrences may be situational at best, I feel it might be too risky to leave it as legal tender, is all.

 

[Grim Tuesday]

Ice Climbers can KO at 0% as well, Hothead is fine.

 

[salaboB]

The reason I suggest Hothead as a banned item is only because of its extremely destructive potential in a match. It can net kills at 0 if you make it too big or if it is reflected too many times, and while those occurrences may be situational at best, I feel it might be too risky to leave it as legal tender, is all.

Someone has to choose to reflect it, don't they? If they want to play the lottery it seems like a good counterpick item.

 

[W.C.N]

Someone has to choose to reflect it, don't they? If they want to play the lottery it seems like a good counterpick item.

This

 

[John12346]

Well, it's just a concern of mine, over an argument. I guess I'd be fine if it were left legal, I'd just be a little worried about it, is all.

 

[Bobwithlobsters]

The point john#s made earlier that the power of the hot head is so much that it could cause a centralization on reflectors just because it is so much more powerful than most things. I think this is the best argument against the hot head, that it Could centralize the metagame adversely.

 

[W.C.N]

But since its a counter pick its more optional maybe the person who lost the last one doesn't want to pick someone with a reflector so they don't put it on there

 

[The Ben]

The point john#s made earlier that the power of the hot head is so much that it could cause a centralization on reflectors just because it is so much more powerful than most things. I think this is the best argument against the hot head, that it Could centralize the metagame adversely.

This is a terrible reason. The metagame has to be influenced by something, and adversely is subjective. Why should someone's personal taste dictate what ought to be allowed?

 

[W.C.N]

This is a terrible reason. The metagame has to be influenced by something, and adversely is subjective. Why should someone's personal taste dictate what ought to be allowed?

That's how any ruleset is made, if enough people agree something is too strong they see who else agrees and it may become more common.

While I see what John#'s was saying I think it adds another level to the CP system and makes the order that you make decisions more important,

 

[Jack Kieser]

Well, this is a nice surprise to come back to! ^_^ A nice end to the scholastic year, indeed.

So, a few notes:

1 ) Keep in mind that we try VERY, VERY hard not to proactively ban in this thread (ver. 1.0 release notwithstanding); the evidence for something has to be MASSIVE in order to ban proactively, as far as the project goals were originally concerned, and it's served the project fairly well so far. This is part of why, although John#'s brings up a very valid concern with the Hothead, Grim's point about the IC's is important to note. Just because something is a OHKO, that doesn't mean it automatically must be banned, only that we should keep an eye out for any problems in the future. Yes, the Hothead is very close to the ban line, but it was placed there long before John#'s raised his concerns. For now, I can't say I approve of banning it; until we see actual players complaining / showing evidence of reflector over-centralization, I honestly think it should stay legal. Don't worry about it too much, though; it is a CP item (which means players still have to choose to use it), it can be banned or CP'ed off, and at the first hint of serious issues, we can easily ban it.

2 ) Given John's analysis of the MSB spawn and detonation mechanics, I don't think I can, in good conscience, allow the MSB to stay neutral, as much as it pains me to say. I fought pretty hard with other people for a long time about this one, but (unless memory is failing me) there are no explosive-type items that can detonate on spawn in the neutral category, and it would be hypocritical to single the MSB out for special treatment, considering its other mechanics, etc. I'm probably going to move it over to CP soon, but first I want to update the write-up with John's new info and, possibly, a replay or something. We'll see. Now that class is out, I should have more time.

3 ) The more I think about it, the more I'm coming to the conclusion that we were overly harsh in banning the SB without giving it time as a CP item. I'm leaning towards legalizing it, but want to hear some other thoughts first. Does anyone have any opinions toward the Smart Bomb? Any experience, videos, or otherwise to post? This is just my curiosity speaking, here.

 

[John12346]

Alright, I guess I'm on board with all of that.

And the Star Rod, what of that? As we determined, it does provide a troubling amount of knockback when thrown, at a destructive level similar to that of a thrown Home Run Bat. It seems like it should be classified as a Counterpick item in that regard, but I could see if it remained as a Neutral.

I'm also a little interested in what other people think of the Smart Bomb. How about it?

 

[W.C.N]

The random factor of both no blows and early explosions makes me like it as a counterpick. I feel if were stuck with tripping being a big factor anything heavenly evened out by luck good

 

[Jack Kieser]

Alright, I guess I'm on board with all of that.

And the Star Rod, what of that? As we determined, it does provide a troubling amount of knockback when thrown, at a destructive level similar to that of a thrown Home Run Bat. It seems like it should be classified as a Counterpick item in that regard, but I could see if it remained as a Neutral.

I'm also a little interested in what other people think of the Smart Bomb. How about it?

Damnit, I was hoping you were going to let that one slide...

Truth is, I just don't feel confident about making a call on the Star Rod right now. We know that the KB is good, we know that the angle is good (if not unique in the realm of items)... but I just can't say with certainty if I think it's unbalanced at this time. Which is odd, considering how it usually works with judging items. Most of the time, the discussion ends up with the thread saying "Well, we're not sure if it's balanced or not, so we'll take this course of action."

This time, it's come to "Well, we don't know if it's unbalanced or not." Which leaves me at a bit of a loss. I feel like the prudent course of action is to leave it as-is for three reasons:

* To see if the power, angle, or both prove to be an issue
* To see what strategic uses people find for the angle / star projectiles, if any
* To see if people are able to counter the strange angle / above average KB of the Star Rod itself as a thrown item

...but it's entirely possible that it's also prudent to just switch it. Like I said, my vote is for not being hasty or rash, as it's not like we've seen a deluge of complaints or anything, but it's definitely an interesting situation. My vote is for letting it play out, and seeing what happens.

 

[The Ben]

That's how any ruleset is made, if enough people agree something is too strong they see who else agrees and it may become more common

No, absolutely not. I've worked with organizing tournaments in a variety of games, all of which have been successful, none of which have been anywhere close to being that democratic. The community proactively changing rules hurts itself because investors and people looking in see it as disorganized. A group of (at least seemingly) business minded people need to be at the top who represent the game as a sort of ambassador to the general public to draw attention. Those same ambassadors need to look at the game retroactively to see what worked and what didn't, and the community needs to not openly show dissent for a plethora of reasons.

The first being the dunning-kruger effect, people who are inept at decision making are often the loudest about making decisions. Those people who don't know what they're talking about (R.O.Botnik for example) actively influencing the community is bad. This effect grows exponentially over time, because as the community grows you get more ineptness.

The second is one I don't know the technical name for but studies have shown to be true, people really don't know what they want. Until people have at least experienced what things are like why should they get a say in if it should be the standard? They might think they hate it, they might even think the majority will hate it, but they might not. The same is true the other way too, they might think something is good for the state of the game, the majority might even think something is bad for the game, but that doesn't mean that taking it away would make the game any better to the average person playing it. The average person doesn't know how to express what actually makes them enjoy whatever a given topic is.

The third is that the human ability to comprehend what affects their behavior is extremely poor. Having majored in business with some psychology classes this happens to be one of those topics I studied extensively in college since it applied to both sides of my study. On the surface this wouldn't be too big of an issue except that it feeds into the fourth reason why I'm against giving a community the power to make its major decisions.

The fourth, and most important reason, is that if you know what you're doing it's easy to manipulate people with speech. Jack Kieser strikes me as a rather intelligent person and his last post is a really good example of how even intelligent people fall for this. There is really no difference between asking how balanced something is and asking how unbalanced something is. Those are the same question asked with different words. Now, when we're discussing if we should ban things from a game, we're constantly couching our conversation with persuasive wording (not necessarily good persuasive arguments). Simply asking if something is worthy of a ban implies that there could possibly be something about it making it banworthy when in reality there probably isn't, and asking what someone thinks of it fails for reasons number 2 and 3. You literally can't ask a large community what is best for itself because they don't know, and by asking them you're suggesting that they do and possibly causing them to doubt their initial stance without logical reason to.

 

[Jack Kieser]

Oh, Ben... you can't tell a professional philosopher that word choice is unimportant. I mean, other than that quibble, good post, but semantics is, like, 1/4 of my job, at least.

What I was trying to say was that there is a small, but distinct difference between assuming an item is broken, but being unsure (the Hothead debate could be an example of this, but a more drastic example is Smash Balls in 2v2), and assuming an item is balanced, but being unsure (the current Star Rod debate). Both instances pivot around a common point (the CP list), but approach it from different sides (the Banned and Neutral sides, respectively).

I choose my words carefully... *devilish hand-wringing*

_______________________________________________

Hey, don't mind this edit. I'm testing out some formatting stuff for a future thread update.

 

[The Ben]

I'm not saying wording isn't important (in fact, I'm saying wording is rather important). Just that when you ask "Is this balanced?" and "Is this unbalanced?", those mean the same thing relative to "What should the balance be like?" which is really what the larger question is. It doesn't matter what assumption you begin with, you're still trying to reach the same point; the method at which to get to that point is still the same too, so switching up the wording only serves to make your audience think otherwise.

 

[Jack Kieser]

So, guess what, guys! I have a present for you: the first data update in a long, long time. It took a while to get this data, because I have no idea how to extract item data from .pac files... which means I had to get all of these numbers manually. Honestly, it's what I deserve; I should have had this done literally years ago. Here are some tables with the raw data I've compiled; I'm planning on putting all of it inline with the item impressions, but that will take time since the post is so large.

Anyway, here it is!

-------------------------------------------------------------

Item Damage Data

Item Name | Item Type | Damage (%) | Soft Throw Kill (%) | Smash Throw Kill (%) | Single Shot (%) | Single Shot Kill (%) | Max Charge Dmg (%) | Max Charge Kill (%) |

Screw Attack 1 | Buff | 1 | 447 | N/A | N/A | N/A | N/A | N/A |
Super-spicy Curry | Buff | N/A | N/A | N/A | 1 | N/A | N/A | N/A |
Bob-omb | Explosive | 35 | 36 | 27 | N/A | N/A | N/A | N/A |
Gooey Bomb | Explosive | 22 | 82 | N/A | N/A | N/A | N/A | N/A |
Deku Nut | Explosive | 24 | 91 | 91 | N/A | N/A | N/A | N/A |
Motion Sensor Bomb | Explosive | 12 | 154 | 120 | 25 | 67 | N/A | N/A |
Smart Bomb | Explosive | 10 | N/A | N/A | 1 | 204 | N/A | N/A |
Cracker Launcher | Gun | 14 | 186 | 134 | 14 | 162 | N/A | N/A |
Fire Flower | Gun | 7 | 560 | N/A | 4 | N/A | N/A | N/A |
Ray Gun | Gun | 12 | 184 | 140 | 4 | 563 | N/A | N/A |
Super Scope | Gun | 15 | 338 | 270 | 1 | 72 | 28 | N/A |
Barrel | Container | 17 | 105 | 94 | N/A | N/A | N/A | N/A |
Crate | Container | 20 | 106 | 95 | N/A | N/A | N/A | N/A |
Capsule | Container | 15 | 140 | 111 | N/A | N/A | N/A | N/A |
Rolling Crate | Container | 18 | 76 | 70 | N/A | N/A | N/A | N/A |
Party Ball | Container | 15 | 207 | 180 | N/A | N/A | N/A | N/A |
Pokèball 2 | Projectile | 13 | 174 | 137 | N/A | N/A | N/A | N/A |
Banana Peel | Projectile | 5 | N/A | N/A | N/A | N/A | N/A | N/A |
Bumper | Projectile | 6 | 76 | 51 | N/A | N/A | N/A | N/A |
Mr. Saturn | Projectile | 5 | 842 | 736 | N/A | N/A | N/A | N/A |
Freezie | Projectile | 16 | 171 | 149 | N/A | N/A | N/A | N/A |
Green Shell 3 | Projectile | 23 | 82 | 67 | N/A | N/A | N/A | N/A |
Hothead | Projectile | 11 | 118 | 96 | 6 | N/A | 20 | 62 |
Pitfall | Projectile | 17 | N/A | N/A | 10 | N/A | N/A | N/A |
Smoke Ball | Projectile | 8 | N/A | N/A | N/A | N/A | N/A | N/A |
Spring | Projectile | 11 | 156 | 122 | N/A | N/A | N/A | N/A |
Unira | Projectile | 10 | 124 | 93 | 10 | 116 | N/A | N/A |
Warpstar | Vehicle | 23 | 48 | N/A | N/A | N/A | N/A | N/A |
Dragoon | Vehicle | 40 | 0 | N/A | N/A | N/A | N/A | N/A |

1 Since the Screw Attack often hits multiple times, it can interrupt itself and end up killing at much higher percentages; the kill percentage listed is if the attack hits once at the optimal angle.

2 Percentages listed apply to the Pokèball itself, and not to the Pokèmon themselves.

3 Percentages listed apply only if the shell hits the opponent before touching the ground; damage values for a sliding shell will come in a later update.

Bludgeon Name | Standard Dmg (%) | Tilt Dmg (%) | Smash Dmg (%, Uncharged) | Smash Dmg (%, Charged) | Standard Kill (%) | Tilt Kill (%) | Smash Kill (%, Uncharged) | Smash Kill (%, Charged) | Thrown Dmg (%) | Light Throw Kill (%) | Smash Throw Kill (%) | Dash Throw Kill (%) | Dash Dmg (%) | Dash Kill (%) |

Beam Sword | 5 | 7 | 9 | 15 | 420 | 284 | 164 | 104 | 15 | 154 | 120 | 127 | 7 | 378 |
Golden Hammer | 30 | N/A | N/A | N/A | 55 | N/A | N/A | N/A | N/A | N/A | N/A | N/A | N/A | N/A |
Hammer 1 | 23 | N/A | N/A | N/A | 54 | N/A | N/A | N/A | 31 | 28 | 20 | 22 | N/A | N/A |
Fan | 2 | 6 | 10 | 12 | N/A | N/A | N/A | N/A | 4 | 247 | 200 | 209 | 8 | N/A |
Home Run Bat | 7 | 12 | N/A | 30 | N/A | 149 | N/A | 0 | 19 | 81 | 65 | 68 | 16 | 84 |
Lip's Stick | 4 | 7 | 12 | 16 | 242 | 155 | 98 | 65 | 7 | 356 | 296 | 309 | 6 | 323 |
Star Rod 2 | 10 | N/A | N/A | N/A | 190 | N/A | N/A | N/A | 16 | N/A | N/A | N/A | 15 | 140 |

1 Thrown damage values apply to the Hammer head, in the event it falls off.

2 All Tilt and Smash values are character-dependent, because the attack animation and number of star projectiles released change depending on character.


Notes:

* All values are using Mario against a dummy Mario standing at center FD with no DI of any kind.

* "Throw" and "Light Throw" values are comparable; both are performed by either tapping A or tilting the analog stick and pressing Z (depending on item type).


-------------------------------------------------------------

I'm still missing exact knockback angle data, which can only be obtained by extracting from .pac files. If anyone wants to help out with that, PM me. It'd be a big help!

 

[Dre89]

Jack Keiser you're a professional philosopher? Are you a tutor/lecturer/research assistant? If you are that's awesome. Respect to ma philosophy homies.

 

[Jack Kieser]

Lol, well, right now I'm a teller. I'm aiming to have a job lecturing at the college level as soon as possible... But we'll see how that goes. I have a few papers I want to submit to conferences this year, though, so here's hoping I get to do some presentations.

 

[lordvaati]

hopefully I don't get in trouble for this, But I'm bumping this, since I feel this should become a sticky again with the site revision and all.

 

[Jack Kieser]

lordvaati, you are a gentleman and a scholar. Of course, I will agree with you, but I can understand the mod's hesitation to resticky the thread... for now.

Not to turn this into a M v B v SSB4 thread, but the closer we get to the release of SSB4, the more people need to read this thread. I'm sure very few people will like this, but it needs to be said: SSB4 will have physics changes, will have mechanics changes, and will have balance changes; items are guaranteed to be different in SSB4, which means that it's our obligation and duty as FGC players to take seriously EVERY aspect of the new game when it comes out, including items.

I guarantee you that the Tekken team will not let item balance go to the wayside like in previous games. The community needs to prepare itself for the release of a new game, and not, you know, screw it up like we did last time. The only way that will happen is through education, so... get educatin', people.

EDIT: Also, I REALLY need to update the OP. I'll put in there the most recent BBR ruleset and such whenever I get a chance.

 

[W.C.N]

Once you have more data would you making a video explaining to the masses how to cp items and what part of the process it falls under?

 

[Jack Kieser]

Do you mean more data on the items themselves, or more data on smart counterpicks? Because I probably have the data right now to make just an instructional video on ISP set procedure (well, ISP data. I have next to no information / skill for making videos). As for metagame info...

 

[lordvaati]

yeah, with Smash 4 i say we should do with items what Smogon does with Pokes-ban the no briner broken stuff(Arceus/M2/Ky & Gro, Bomb-Ombs/PokeBalls/Containers) then do testing from there.

 

[W.C.N]

I really just said more data to mean in the future, but I think a video would be needed to explain to the masses how to function in an items tournament. Otherwise you might end up with some matches played incorrectly

 

[DiscoCokkroach]

Hey Jack:

Good news for people who want to help test, but have no idea where to start! I finally got on my computer and made a template in Wordpad to help give people direction when they are testing. The template has slots for your input and places to put data pertaining to the test setup AND results! Unfortunately, it's not post compatible (meaning you can't copy/paste the results into a post for SWF), but I'll work on that.

The 1v1 version can be found here, while the 2v2 version can be found here. One note: make sure your margins are .5" all around, or else the formatting goes all the hell.

The links in that section are more broken than ! Can I get a copy of those docs (perhaps posted on Google Drive)? I'm plan on having a casual session with some friends this coming Saturday, and we may be running a 2v2 double elim bracket (it might only have four teams, but that's at least twelve games worth of data I could collect). I'm going to have to modify the rule set slightly to accommodate some of the players (I'll probably have to set Friendly Fire to "Off" and put the Smash Ball in all matches), but I'm sure that I can easily sway them to use items in our games in some form.

 

[Jack Kieser]

Haha... yeah, those links are from 2008. Especially if not many people have been DL'ing them, I'm not surprised the hosting service purged the files. I'll have them reuploaded by the morning.

I'm going to add an option for whether counterpicking was used, as well, so look out for that.

EDIT: Files re-uploaded and links updated.

 

[Illuvial]

I personally hate items all together. But if you can convince the top level players that these "ideal spawns" for items that make them fair is actually FAIR, then I support it. But that would he difficult since I can't think of a single scenario where items do ore good than harm.

 

[Jack Kieser]

Planking.

...well, that was easy.

 

[DiscoCokkroach]

Thanks for those files, Jack. I'll be using them tomorrow for sure.

Also, considering the (relatively) recent posts about the Smart Bomb, if it hasn't been said already, I think the Smart Bomb is a viable candidate for being moved to the Counterpick list in 2v2 at the very least (assuming Friendly Fire, naturally). It runs on the same logic as the Smash Ball from my point of view.

Also, I'm new. What's planking?
I was reading about allowing Food into tournament play, and they said something about planking, as well.

 

[Illuvial]

Planking.

...well, that was easy.

I have a hard counter to planking that does not involve items.

Not approaching so that they are considered stalling.

 

[Jack Kieser]

I personally hate items all together. But if you can convince the top level players that these "ideal spawns" for items that make them fair is actually FAIR, then I support it. But that would he difficult since I can't think of a single scenario where items do ore good than harm.

Ha... hahaha.... Yeah, no. That doesn't actually make them stalling, since stalling is explicitly defined in the ruleset as "taking an action that makes the game unplayable". Planking has never been, nor will it ever be, considered stalling, for any reason including your (valiant) attempt to make it so.

Items make planking completely unviable, especially if food is on. So, there is, at minimum, one situation in which items make the game better. Although, a significant number of people, even serious competitive players, have also tried to argue (I think successfully) that items also change the metagame enough to, if not eliminate, significantly reduce the problem of MK.

Thanks for those files, Jack. I'll be using them tomorrow for sure.

Also, considering the (relatively) recent posts about the Smart Bomb, if it hasn't been said already, I think the Smart Bomb is a viable candidate for being moved to the Counterpick list in 2v2 at the very least (assuming Friendly Fire, naturally). It runs on the same logic as the Smash Ball from my point of view.

Also, I'm new. What's planking?
I was reading about allowing Food into tournament play, and they said something about planking, as well.

No problem! ^_^ I had been meaning to fix that for a while now, but no one really... well, cared enough to use them, so it was never a priority. Feel free to post whatever results you get and I'll add them to the OP.

Also, "planking" is a slang term for the abuse of ledge invincibility. Basically, you just drop from and regrab the ledge repeatedly; because of ledge snap mechanics and the amount of invincibility frames you get in Brawl, this kind of ledge play is very powerful in the right hands, as the planker is in an advantaged position, especially if she has the life / stock lead.

 

[Jack Kieser]

I didn't mean to double post that. Sorry.

 

[Illuvial]

Ha... hahaha.... Yeah, no. That doesn't actually make them stalling, since stalling is explicitly defined in the ruleset as "taking an action that makes the game unplayable". Planking has never been, nor will it ever be, considered stalling, for any reason including your (valiant) attempt to make it so.

Items make planking completely unviable, especially if food is on. So, there is, at minimum, one situation in which items make the game better. Although, a significant number of people, even serious competitive players, have also tried to argue (I think successfully) that items also change the metagame enough to, if not eliminate, significantly reduce the problem of MK.

Ah, my apologies then. I was told that stalling was simply avoiding combat by using various cheap camping tactics of sorts. I wasn't aware that unplayable was part of the definition.

Thanks for clearing that up, and sorry for sounding sully

 

[Jack Kieser]

Haha... Oh, don't even worry about it. Trust me, I've seen my share of trolls and flame wars in the years I've been in charge of this thread; being a little "sully" is a welcome change of pace. Yeah, a startling number of people think that stalling is just being a **** and running away, but if that was the case, it'd be entirely unenforceable and WAY too broad a rule. The "unplayable" part of the rule ensures that it won't overstep its jurisdiction.

 

[Bobwithlobsters]

I have a question, how do items work with regards to friendly fire in doubles? In the side events thread there was the comment of friendly fire off doubles and I dont know how items interact with friendly fire off. I'm fairly certain you can catch but not be hit by thrown items but things like most explosions would still effect you. I'm wondering if there isn't strange projectile interactions that can occur with friendly fire off.

 

[Jack Kieser]

The short answer is that, any time FF is on, any item thrown, used, activated, or otherwise interacted with acts as though you are the intended target, period. So, if your teammate throws a beam sword, either air dodge catch it, or get out of the way. If you use a hothead, your teammate better be on a platform. If anyone set a MSB on the stage, you had better make sure not to set it off. All effects of all items apply to all players (with the exception, in some cases, of the user).

As for interactions between two or more items, they follow the exact same rules that they would in a FFA. There's nothing special about FF being on in terms of that.