Running out the clock and stalling

[The Halloween Captain]

Yes, whether or not planking is broken enough to be banned aside, this is a much better solution. Because it's concrete. It's "This is banned!" and not "Well, something similar to this is banned. We'll tell you what is banned when we see it!".

I don't think it's a good idea to ban people just because they like to ledge-camp.

Incidently, what's the deal exactly with jigglypuff's tactics? There's no way I can win with jigglypuff and not be an *insert explitive here* according to these standards. How can I wait for mistakes if I'm not allowed to run away indefinitely?

 

[Yuna]

I don't think it's a good idea to ban people just because they like to ledge-camp.

I see I misread Plank as Planking. Well, banning Plank would be lulzy, at least.

 

[pure_awesome]

For the record, the principal difference between camping and running out the clock is intent.

The intent of camping is to take up an advantageous position and force your opponent to try to approach through it. Your weapon is stage position and character position. You want your opponent to engage you.

The intent of running out the clock is to... well, run out the clock. Your weapon is the timer. You don't want your opponent to engage you, you simply don't want to engage at all.

Unfortunately, the two often look very similar, so the point is moot anyway. If there's ever a rule banning running out the clock, the main problem is how to enforce it, not how vague it is. Vague rules sometimes work out for the best. We just can't have a TO hovering over every TV, and I don't think we can record every single match of smaller scale tourneys.

 

[Plairnkk]

Don't ban me!!!

Okay, I guess I've never really taken the time to explain myself so I'll do it a bit more now. People see the videos of me against SK92 and immediately assume that is how I play all of the time. If people would take the time to watch other sets I have online vs amazing players (atomsk, chillin) they would see that I don't actually play that way the majority of the time.

More or less when I "planked" SK92 at Axis I was making a point. I find Falco extremely annoying as all that he does in brawl is chaingrab, SHL, illusion, rack up a few more damage doing these things, then go for a random smash attack for a kill.

Falco spams lasers the ENTIRE match putting you at an unfavorable position. You have to approach HIM or you lose. Approaching the Falco puts you in a bad position because (as we all know) approaching in Brawl is a terrible strategy.

If i'm hanging on the ledge I negate Falco's chaingrabs, his lasers, his illusions, and his smash attacks. These are Falco's weapons, and I am negating them while making Falco come to me. I simply saw this as a strategy to beat Falco at his own (very annoying) game.

Believe it or not, I have "planked" with Metaknight two sets in my entire life. Once against Chillin's Falco, and once against SK92's Falco. Why don't I plank against other people? Partly because it's boring, but mainly because it's risky. Mess up once and lose a stock, and one stock in Brawl against someone your level is basically the match.

Personally I do not believe the tactic should be banned, but I wouldn't really be hurt if it was. I would just run away up on platforms to avoid Falco.

It makes me mad that people ban things purely out of speculation, though. If "Planking" is so unstoppable it should be winning tournaments across the country. Newbies should be beating pros just by "Planking". Matches should come down to who gets the first hit, because the other can just "Plank", right?

But this isn't the case. Anywhere.

And as for M2K's "Planking" being unstoppable, M2K has already been proven to be essentially unstoppable. If he wants it banned, maybe he should do it in a tournament and just 3 stock everyone. I'd like to see him try to "Plank" Azen.

Honestly I don't really care about the response I get from this post because I don't feel that I really even need to justify myself. I'm just doing it so maybe a few people can see where I'm coming from. Brawl is the 3rd videogame I have played professionally and from the other two I've learned that there is absolutely no place for honor at a professional level.

If there are rules I will abide by them, but I prefer they be backed up with facts and evidence rather than hypothetical situations and the fact that a strategy is "annoying" or "too good".

There is a difference between broken and effective, and people really need to see this.

 

[_Phloat_]

The intent of camping is to take up an advantageous position and force your opponent to try to approach through it. Your weapon is stage position and character position. You want your opponent to engage you.

The intent of running out the clock is to... well, run out the clock. Your weapon is the timer. You don't want your opponent to engage you, you simply don't want to engage at all.

Those two aren't mutually exclusive. The intent of camping could be to run out the clock in an advantageous situation. There, am I camping or running out the clock? Both.

If I grab the edge as MK/GaW or the skies as Wario, my weapon is stage position, character position (I guess.. wdf is that anyway?) and the timer.

If you are only abusing 2 of the 3, or 1 of the 3, you just aren't being smart/the situation doesn't call for it (ie 1 stock left each with 7 minutes left, the timer isn't yet a weapon.)

 

[Yuna]

True stuff.

This is Brawl. This is SWF. This is tons of 2008+2009 people.

They want everything banned. If they can't handle it, they immediately assume it's broken and needs to be banned. And they ignore all logic and valid arguments against their position. They think that if something is impeding on their chances of winning/enjoying themselves, it needs to be banned.

They are simply Scrubs.

 

[pure_awesome]

I don't think the people who want it banned want it banned because it's broken or over-powered. I'm fairly sure they want it banned because...

1- That's not what competitive Smash is about
The timer is supposed to be there just to make sure that matches don't go on too long to keep tournaments at a reasonable length. It's not supposed to be an active part of the match.

2- They go on too long anyway.
If running out the clock becomes a more popular strategy (I don't think it will), then tournaments would be going on longer and longer. One-day tourneys would become two-day, and so on. The only solutions would be to either make the games shorter, which would make running out the clock even more effective, or to ban running out the clock.

Personally, I don't think any action is necessary at this point. It's kind of lame, but we aren't even seeing that much of it right now.

If I grab the edge as MK/GaW or the skies as Wario, my weapon is stage position, character position (I guess.. wdf is that anyway?) and the timer.

Character position = Where your opponent is in relation to you.

Those two aren't mutually exclusive. The intent of camping could be to run out the clock in an advantageous situation. There, am I camping or running out the clock? Both.

Your intent is to run out the clock. Therefore, you're running out the clock. Doesn't matter how you're doing it.

If your intent is to force an approach, camping.
If your intent is to run out the clock, running out the clock.

 

[Veril]

Incidently, what's the deal exactly with jigglypuff's tactics? There's no way I can win with jigglypuff and not be an *insert explitive here* according to these standards. How can I wait for mistakes if I'm not allowed to run away indefinitely?

First off, you should get better with Jiggs if you can't win without doing this (Luigi is an exception...)

On the actual rising pound.


Reason 1. The rising pound issue revolves around the fact that Jigglypuff can use her upward angled side-b in addition to her bazillion jumps to stall the match. By remaining at an altitude in which an opponent cannot possibly reach her she is enabled to stall for quite a while.

This is bs. Rob, Pit, Wario and Yoshi can intercept Jiggs, in addition, when they do she is in a very bad position since she can be KO'd off the top very very very early.

Reason 2. Rising pound allows her to stall under the stage for a long period of time thereby running down the clock.

This makes more sense but is really just another form of planking. Eventually Jiggs has to return to the edge, and when she does, its pretty dangerous since she's very susceptible to spikes.

Reason 3. Its very clear when this tactic is used, its really annoying and makes matches last longer. Thus it is more easily enforced than a general no planking rule.

This really is the best reason for it being banned. It CAN be banned and enforced.


Stalling with rising pound to the side of the stage is really just garden variety planking. Deal with it.

 

[Yuna]

1- That's not what competitive Smash is about

What the hell is Competitive Smash all about and who are you to say what it is all (and what it isn't) all about?

The timer is supposed to be there just to make sure that matches don't go on too long to keep tournaments at a reasonable length. It's not supposed to be an active part of the match.

Why not? This is just a more effective version of, say, Marth's Fair-spamming. Position and forcing the opponent to approach with a disadvantage (if you're talking about Planking).

If you're talking about camping and running the clock out (using entirely legit means) in general, why not? It's just me positioning myself, while at an advantage, so that you'll either just stand back and not intercept me (and who is at fault then? Why should I be at fault when you just choose not to intercept me? Or if you just fail to catch up to me while I'm in no way making myself untouchable, just making it harder for you to touch me) or try to approach me and give me an advantageous situation?

2- They go on too long anyway.
If running out the clock becomes a more popular strategy (I don't think it will), then tournaments would be going on longer and longer. One-day tourneys would become two-day, and so on. The only solutions would be to either make the games shorter, which would make running out the clock even more effective, or to ban running out the clock.

Some characters/strategies make matches more prolonged than others. Brawl is slow in general. I say Brawl goes against the spirit of Competitive Smash and should be banned!

This is a lame reason for banning. "It makes matches too long (and boring to watch/play)!".

Personally, I don't think any action is necessary at this point. It's kind of lame, but we aren't even seeing that much of it right now.

This is the only thing I agree with.

Your intent is to run out the clock. Therefore, you're running out the clock. Doesn't matter how you're doing it.

My intent is to force you to approach me while I've positioned myself in such a way that you approaching me would be advantageous. Either you stand back (and run the clock out yourself) and lose or you approach me while I've got the advantage in the upcoming yomi since I could just stop running and whack you across the face with a Bair or something while you aren't expecting it.

Also, why shouldn't I be allowed to simply try to run the clock out? It's a legit way of camping. It's also a legit tactic.

If your intent is to force an approach, camping.
If your intent is to run out the clock, running out the clock.

You can camp and run out the clock at the same time.

This is bs. Rob, Pit, Wario and Yoshi can intercept Jiggs, in addition, when they do she is in a very bad position since she can be KO'd off the top very very very early.

In other words, you think it's not bannable because it only renders 35 characters useless against her?

This makes more sense but is really just another form of planking. Eventually Jiggs has to return to the edge, and when she does, its pretty dangerous since she's very susceptible to spikes.

Why would she be any more susceptible than anyone else? Especially when she has multiple friggin' jumps.

Stalling with rising pound to the side of the stage is really just garden variety planking. Deal with it.

Except you cannot possibly touch Jiggz while she's doing it... unless you play as one of four characters and sacrifice most if not all of your jumps blindly flailing in the hair, hoping to hit Jiggz who is Rising Pounding across the stage to prevent you from reaching her (and the fact that the pound itself has a hitbox).

Also, Zelda has Din's Fire. It's still a tactic which friggin' renders thirty-four (or 87%) of the cast unplayable against Jiggz whenever she gets ahead. It's not just an advantage, it's a "You just lost!" whenever she gets ahead. That is not acceptable.

 

[Mr.Victory07]

Planking is very annoying, but Ive only truly had the clock run out on me once. On Jungle Japes, vs MK. Worst.Match.Ever.
ut it can be "regulated" as in dont plank for over a minute, as it just turn to stalling by then; you do not need a whole minute to adjust your position

 

[$haDy]

Jigglypuff still needs to get a lead, which is tough at a high level.

 

[Plairnkk]

Planking is very annoying, but Ive only truly had the clock run out on me once. On Jungle Japes, vs MK. Worst.Match.Ever.
ut it can be "regulated" as in dont plank for over a minute, as it just turn to stalling by then; you do not need a whole minute to adjust your position

Sure, so then I get off of that ledge after a minute, do a fair or a tornado or something, then go to the other edge for a minute?

 

[Popertop]

Wow, Yuna fails against Jiggs.
You can hit her out of pound you know.

And she is susceptible to spikes because she essentially doesn't have an up b, and her jumps just don't cut it sometimes.

 

[da K.I.D.]

i still like the ruling that inui has at his tourney, which basically amounts to "if you are being a douche, you will get DQ'd"

its pointless to talk about it here, deal with it at your own individual tourneys.

and plank, theres also the few times you timed out matches on luigis mansion, although i dont know if that counts as planking (on the ledge) as opposed to just circle camping (on the stage)

 

[Plairnkk]

Sure, I timed the match out on a ROB (on his counterpick) because I thought the level was stupid.

It was so effective that I beat him by a larger margin on a neutral.

 

[Sean²]

Its threads like these that make me wonder why Brawl is even played competitively.

 

[Yuna]

Jigglypuff still needs to get a lead, which is tough at a high level.

Yes, but the tactic makes every match she gets even slightly ahead of an auto-win. Not acceptable.

Wow, Yuna fails against Jiggs.

You must have missed the part where I say that Zelda has Din's Fire. Seeing as how I main Zelda, I cannot possibly fail against infinite pounding.

You can hit her out of pound you know.

It makes it harder to hit her than if she were stalling by simply jumping around. Also, please enlighten me how every single or even half of the characters in Brawl can even touch Jiggz while she's infinite pounding. I can, Zelda, after all, has Din's Fire.

And she is susceptible to spikes because she essentially doesn't have an up b, and her jumps just don't cut it sometimes.

Yes, but she also has multiple jumps.

 

[pure_awesome]

Its threads like these that make me wonder why Brawl is even played competitively.

Because some of know it's not a problem?

i still like the ruling that inui has at his tourney, which basically amounts to "if you are being a douche, you will get DQ'd"

The problem, again, lies in how to enforce it. Rules that are vague are fine in practice (and I particularily like this one), but we can't have TOs hovering over all the TVs, and we can't record every match.

Why not? This is just a more effective version of, say, Marth's Fair-spamming. Position and forcing the opponent to approach with a disadvantage (if you're talking about Planking).

If you're talking about camping and running the clock out (using entirely legit means) in general, why not? It's just me positioning myself, while at an advantage, so that you'll either just stand back and not intercept me (and who is at fault then? Why should I be at fault when you just choose not to intercept me? Or if you just fail to catch up to me while I'm in no way making myself untouchable, just making it harder for you to touch me) or try to approach me and give me an advantageous situation?

Like I said. They often look the same, and the only real difference lies in intent. If you're trying to camp and your opponent just sucks, it's still just camping. If you intend to run out the clock, then if your opponent is terrible or not, you're still intentionally running out the clock.

Some characters/strategies make matches more prolonged than others. Brawl is slow in general. I say Brawl goes against the spirit of Competitive Smash and should be banned!

This is a lame reason for banning. "It makes matches too long (and boring to watch/play)!".

Assuming running out the clock eventually became common-place, this would be a big deal. Tourneys are kind of important to competitive smash and having them drag on where each set takes half an hour... kind of a problem

My intent is to force you to approach me while I've positioned myself in such a way that you approaching me would be advantageous. Either you stand back (and run the clock out yourself) and lose or you approach me while I've got the advantage in the upcoming yomi since I could just stop running and whack you across the face with a Bair or something while you aren't expecting it.

I see no problem here.

Also, why shouldn't I be allowed to simply try to run the clock out? It's a legit way of camping. It's also a legit tactic.

That's what people are arguing.

You can camp and run out the clock at the same time.

As I said, if you're camping with the intent of running out the clock, you're running out the clock. You're still camping, but you're running out the clock. Your principal intent is what matters.

 

[Yuna]

As I said, if you're camping with the intent of running out the clock, you're running out the clock. You're still camping, but you're running out the clock. Your principal intent is what matters.

And, as I said, why should it matter if I intend to run the clock out or not? Why should I not be allowed to try to?

As long as the way in which I do/try to do it does not give me such an advantage it renders the tactic/technique/my character broken and over-centralizes the game. Why should I not be allowed to do something if it's not even that hard to combat?

We don't ban things just because they "make the game less fun". If we did, we'd have to get rid of half of the tactics and strategies most common in Competitive Brawl.

 

[Mr.Victory07]

If this eventually became common place, wouldt it just be smart for the TO to just not time matches? I mean, stalling essentially loses it's purpose if there is no clock to stall out, and regular matches would still run about the same time

 

[Sky`]

You can't...
Enforce rules against camping to any degree. =/

 

[Sean²]

Because some of know it's not a problem?

When you have a community full of people that constantly complain and want **** banned rather than playing the game and being productive, it's not exactly fun to be around. I think I'll stay away from GBD and Tactical from now on.

 

[pure_awesome]

When you have a community full of people that constantly complain and want **** banned rather than playing the game and being productive, it's not exactly fun to be around. I think I'll stay away from GBD and Tactical from now on.

I've come to the conclusion that the majority of people who post in GBD and Tactical are here as a mainly social experience, and competitive Smash is merely a sidenote. See: the Best/Worst of the Worst/Best thread.

If this eventually became common place, wouldt it just be smart for the TO to just not time matches? I mean, stalling essentially loses it's purpose if there is no clock to stall out, and regular matches would still run about the same time

I was thinking about this myself. But if one of the biggest problems is the actual length of the set itself, then considering we sometimes get little gems like this which would end up taking hilarious lengths of time, I don't think it's very feasible.

And, as I said, why should it matter if I intend to run the clock out or not? Why should I not be allowed to try to?

As long as the way in which I do/try to do it does not give me such an advantage it renders the tactic/technique/my character broken and over-centralizes the game. Why should I not be allowed to do something if it's not even that hard to combat?

Let's not starting throwing around the O-word again.


Anyway, like I said before, I don't see a problem with it.

But since you asked so nicely, the biggest arguments being thrown around that you shouldn't be allowed to are:

1- Timer isn't supposed to be an active part of the match.
I kind of agree with this, since it's true that the timer was introduced as a ceiling for matches, and not as a goal. It comes extremely close to breaking the most basic rule of all fighting games: Two(or more) characters engage each other until one(or more) comes out on top.

Then again, this was never a problem in any other fighting game.
Then again again, Brawl isn't like any other fighting game.

Eh.

2- Tourneys will end up taking unnecessarily long.
When (if) it becomes a problem, then we'll deal with it. For now, tourneys are running fine and we have no reason to believe that the future will be any different

 

[Yuna]

If this eventually became common place, wouldt it just be smart for the TO to just not time matches? I mean, stalling essentially loses it's purpose if there is no clock to stall out, and regular matches would still run about the same time

No, because then matches could literally drag on forever.

1- Timer isn't supposed to be an active part of the match.
I kind of agree with this, since it's true that the timer was introduced as a ceiling for matches, and not as a goal. It comes extremely close to breaking the most basic rule of all fighting games: Two(or more) characters engage each other until one(or more) comes out on top.

Says who? It's there, it forces you to approach me or lose if I'm ahead. Plenty of characters in plenty of games have good keepaway games that they abuse for camping and for eventually running the clock out once they're ahead enough.

Then again, this was never a problem in any other fighting game.
Then again again, Brawl isn't like any other fighting game.

Brawl is not different in such a way we have to ban keep-away (rhyme).

 

[Sky`]

If we made rules and enforced them, in the end, it would come down to the morality of the leader.

If I were the TO's best friend, I'd never be DQ'd, is what I'm trying to say.

If I had the majority of the populous on my side socially, I would never get DQ'd.

Meanwhile, Annoying A$$ Anthony over there, would probably be watched like a hawk. And because nobody really likes him, he'd be DQ'd the second he did something wrong, just cause nobody really likes his company anyway.

So...

 

[cutter]

This is Brawl. This is SWF. This is tons of 2008+2009 people.

They want everything banned. If they can't handle it, they immediately assume it's broken and needs to be banned. And they ignore all logic and valid arguments against their position. They think that if something is impeding on their chances of winning/enjoying themselves, it needs to be banned.

They are simply Scrubs.

Please tell that to the Atlantic North and also to Xyro

@ Plank: Thank you so much for elaborating on this.

 

[Plairnkk]

I say we ban Falco's laser camping and illusion spamming because he can laser camp and illusion camp from across the stage and it deals damage, so he can catch up and continue camping and putting the opponent at an unfavorable position.

So even if Falco is BEHIND, he can camp his *** off and catch up then continue camping. That's my main beef. At least you have to be ahead to Plank =)

 

[Sky`]

I say we ban Falco's laser camping and illusion spamming because he can laser camp and illusion camp from across the stage and it deals damage, so he can catch up and continue camping and putting the opponent at an unfavorable position.

So even if Falco is BEHIND, he can camp his *** off and catch up then continue camping. That's my main beef. At least you have to be ahead to Plank =)

Ahahhaa.
You are plank, huh?

 

[pockyD]

why don't we just ban all non-moving stages with edges?

 

[Sky`]

why don't we just ban all non-moving stages with edges?

Or.
Just play Melee. =D

But like I said.
You can't enforce, "No planking."

 

[pockyD]

plank's stall in melee is pretty gay too

 

[Plairnkk]

My melee stalling is epic, too. Pocky is right.

 

[Yuna]

If we made rules and enforced them, in the end, it would come down to the morality of the leader.

If I were the TO's best friend, I'd never be DQ'd, is what I'm trying to say.

If I had the majority of the populous on my side socially, I would never get DQ'd.

Meanwhile, Annoying A$$ Anthony over there, would probably be watched like a hawk. And because nobody really likes him, he'd be DQ'd the second he did something wrong, just cause nobody really likes his company anyway.

So...

Yes, biased and arbitrary on-the-spot judgments where people get passes because the TOs just like them better. Obviously a good thing!

Please tell that to the Atlantic North and also to Xyro

What makes you think I haven't already (and I have) called them Scrubs for banning DeDeDe's infinite?

But like I said.
You can't enforce, "No planking."

You can. It'd just be extremely annoying.

 

[Plairnkk]

Yuna, we almost always agree on everything, but I really feel DDD's infinite SHOULD be banned. I'm sure you have legitimate points because you are intelligent, but I feel that a tactic that takes complete control away from the opponents character for an indefinite amount of time to be determined by the player executing the tactic and ending in guaranteed death should not be legal. This applied to wobbling in melee, ddd's infinite, and ic's throw infinite.

 

[Sky`]

So, you're agreeing with me Yuna?

 

[GofG]

Omg!

Hi Sky!

 

[cutter]

Yuna, we almost always agree on everything, but I really feel DDD's infinite SHOULD be banned. I'm sure you have legitimate points because you are intelligent, but I feel that a tactic that takes complete control away from the opponents character for an indefinite amount of time to be determined by the player executing the tactic and ending in guaranteed death should not be legal. This applied to wobbling in melee, ddd's infinite, and ic's throw infinite.

The thing is, DDD's infinites do not overcentralize the metagame. You are not coerced into "Infinite to win or lose". There are A LOT of characters that you can pick that are not victimized by the infinite. He does not infinite every single character in the game.

Wobbling proved not the break the game either. Again, why ban something when it has proven not to warp the game. Even if Wobbling is banned, ICs can still chaingrab and 0-death.

As for ICs infinites in brawl, here's a post from Hylian:

Someone asked me to come in here and shed some light reguarding the IC infinites.

I'm just going to make a few solid points so I won't go really in depth unless I need to.


Here we go:

- First of all I'm going to point out how you would justify banning D3's infinite and not IC's. Personally, I don't think D3's infinite should be banned I'm just providing reasoning for people who think it should be but the IC infinite is fine and are at a loss of words. Basically, the D3 infinite is always present in the match-up. The IC infinite is not. IC's cannot infinite if they are seperated or nana is dead. That means you have options to shut down the infinite and it actually adds depth to the matches which start to focus on strategizing ways to seperate the climbers and keep them so. The only option the 5 characters have against D3 is to not get grabbed which is pretty hard considering D3's amazing grab range and longevity. Note: I don't think D3's infinites should be banned.

- The IC infinites are not broken. The have not proven to be broken in any region, they have never upset a top player(M2K/Azen/DSF), they have never dominated a tournament. IC players struggle to make top 5 at tournaments much less win. I can't think of the last tournament an IC player won. Logically, there is no reason to remove a tactic and make a character not viable in tournaments when they are hardly viable in the first place according to results.

- Yes the Infinites are hard. That doesn't matter though. I can do them pretty much 100% and I know a few others that can as well. People shouldn't argue about how hard something is unless it dwells on the realm of impossibility in reguards to consistancy. Just pointing this out.

- Even though the IC's are able to 0-death every character they still have horrible match-ups. Rob,MK,Diddy, and a lot of other characters have significant advantages vs the climbers and are able to seperate them and avoid being grabbed at viatle moments. This have been proven true through tournament results.

- Not only do the IC's have many bad match-ups, they also are one of the easiest characters in the game to counterpick. Did you know the simple tilting of Lylat can completly throw off a chaingrab? The slants on Yoshi's island don't allow for Dthrow fair to IceBlock regrab? Any moving stage or stage with Hazards is potientially horrible for the Ice Climbers. They have so many bad stages that it's almost impossible for them to ban a stage and play on one they don't mind. Combine this with character match-ups and smart play and you have a character that can't even place high in tournaments with the ability to 0-death the entire cast.

- You have options to dismantle and shut down the infinite. The IC's can not infinite if they are not by each other when they grab an opponent. If you make it a point to seperate the climbers you create options for yourself. When you seperate them attack the CPU as it cannot DI and dies easily. As long as you can effectivly seperate them then they cannot infinite you. You have options to shut it down. Use them. Kill nana.

- You cannot feasibly ban the infinites. It is almost impossible to create a rule the covers all variations of the IC infinites(I can think of over 20 off the top of my head and that doesn't include the alt grabs.) without just banning them from grabbing in the first place. That in itself is impossible to control in a tournament setting so you would just have to ban the character alltogether. If you do manage to take away every combo they have(the infinites which can only be banned by banning pretty much every IC combo) then you just killed the character. IC's already preform horribly in tournament and you just took away the only thing they can actually use to gain leverage against their opponents. Congrats.

Feel free to copy and paste this post anyone who wants to show someone why the IC infinites shouldn't be banned. I didn't even go in depth with this either . I'm saving that for a topic I'm going to make reguarding all chaingrabs and infinites.

-Hylian.

 

[choice_brawler]

Planking hasnt really won any major tourneys. It hasnt vastly changed the outcome of like anything. Why would you ban something that has done squat. Its another way to camp, its a smarter way to camp, and just cuz you find it annoying and stuffs isnt reason enough to ban it. I find tornado annoying, i dont see that being banned.

 

[GofG]

Planking hasnt really won any major tourneys. It hasnt vastly changed the outcome of like anything. Why would you ban something that has done squat. Its another way to camp, its a smarter way to camp, and just cuz you find it annoying and stuffs isnt reason enough to ban it. I find tornado annoying, i dont see that being banned.

except when plank won a major tourney by planking against sk92

 

[Sky`]

except when plank won a major tourney by planking against sk92

and then Plank TAunted SK92 for no reason. IRL. =/