After seeing the performance of M2k at the last two SmashAcre tournaments against Hax, I think that it is reasonable to evaluate and discuss the reasoning behind choosing whether or not to institute a ledge grab limit.
I believe that in order to determine whether a ledge grab limit is needed, we must agree on a concise definition of a tactic that is worthy of restrictions. With that in mind, I will be attempting to influence all feedback towards that particular topic until I feel satisfied we have come to a reasonable decision.
With this in mind, I will attempt to come up with a definition on my own, and I will be free to adjust it as needed. The first definition, and the most basic of all, is a tactic that gives too much of an advantage to a competitor. In order to elucidate on this definition, we have to make some points. One could argue that simply becoming skilled at the game and using an advanced understanding of the game against their opponent would fit this definition. In order to accommodate skill, the definition must be altered. Although I am certainly not perfect, and this is very early in development, perhaps the definition must become something closer to "a tactic that, when used correctly, can be exploited to defeat a similarly skilled opponent in a vast majority of competitions." Although I do think there is much room for improvement in this definition, I think there are a few aspects of it that have merit. The most important concepts to focus on are the ability to emerge victorious a vast majority of time, meaning that it would become so rare for the other competitor to win that it becomes negligible. After all, the goal of defining this is to find the point that something becomes truly unfair. I think that a situation in which a similarly skilled opponent can not be expected to win satisfies the definition of unfair.
With all I've said, I'd like to describe a scenario in which this restriction could have been used in the interest of fairness. Imagine that the tournament we are all waiting for, possible the most important tournament to be held for melee yet, has finally arrived. Imagine that Haxshows up, after training as hard as possible for months, and manages to earn his way into grand finals against M2k. For whatever reason, hax is finally able to defeat M2ks sheik, bringing it to the last game without dropping a single game to M2k. Not only is he heavily up in the set, but M2k is coming from losers and must win two sets in a row. Obviously, this is a far fetched situation, but that's besides the point. I truly believe that even in this situation, in a case where hax had clearly shown himself to be either a better player or simply to be playing better on that day, M2k could simply switch to jigglypuff, incorporate his ledgecamping technique, and Hax could not reasonably be expected to win. It is situations like this, where a mechanic can be used to gain an otherwise undeserved win, that I think we must strive to prevent as a community in the interest of the spirit of competition. If exploitations arise which are unbeatable by reasonable human standards, we will lose the interest of players who may be observing competitive melee for the first time on the Evo stage, and we will lose the core of active new players who are struggling to improve. Feel free to leave feedback and suggestions, and I will update this post to add new points risen in the comments.
I believe that in order to determine whether a ledge grab limit is needed, we must agree on a concise definition of a tactic that is worthy of restrictions. With that in mind, I will be attempting to influence all feedback towards that particular topic until I feel satisfied we have come to a reasonable decision.
With this in mind, I will attempt to come up with a definition on my own, and I will be free to adjust it as needed. The first definition, and the most basic of all, is a tactic that gives too much of an advantage to a competitor. In order to elucidate on this definition, we have to make some points. One could argue that simply becoming skilled at the game and using an advanced understanding of the game against their opponent would fit this definition. In order to accommodate skill, the definition must be altered. Although I am certainly not perfect, and this is very early in development, perhaps the definition must become something closer to "a tactic that, when used correctly, can be exploited to defeat a similarly skilled opponent in a vast majority of competitions." Although I do think there is much room for improvement in this definition, I think there are a few aspects of it that have merit. The most important concepts to focus on are the ability to emerge victorious a vast majority of time, meaning that it would become so rare for the other competitor to win that it becomes negligible. After all, the goal of defining this is to find the point that something becomes truly unfair. I think that a situation in which a similarly skilled opponent can not be expected to win satisfies the definition of unfair.
With all I've said, I'd like to describe a scenario in which this restriction could have been used in the interest of fairness. Imagine that the tournament we are all waiting for, possible the most important tournament to be held for melee yet, has finally arrived. Imagine that Haxshows up, after training as hard as possible for months, and manages to earn his way into grand finals against M2k. For whatever reason, hax is finally able to defeat M2ks sheik, bringing it to the last game without dropping a single game to M2k. Not only is he heavily up in the set, but M2k is coming from losers and must win two sets in a row. Obviously, this is a far fetched situation, but that's besides the point. I truly believe that even in this situation, in a case where hax had clearly shown himself to be either a better player or simply to be playing better on that day, M2k could simply switch to jigglypuff, incorporate his ledgecamping technique, and Hax could not reasonably be expected to win. It is situations like this, where a mechanic can be used to gain an otherwise undeserved win, that I think we must strive to prevent as a community in the interest of the spirit of competition. If exploitations arise which are unbeatable by reasonable human standards, we will lose the interest of players who may be observing competitive melee for the first time on the Evo stage, and we will lose the core of active new players who are struggling to improve. Feel free to leave feedback and suggestions, and I will update this post to add new points risen in the comments.
