SBR Recommended Rule List Discussion: Brawl

[Harbinger631]

Why is a Bowsercide always considered a win for Bowser if it goes into sudden death and not determined by percent?

 

[[FBC] ESAM]

Why is a Bowsercide always considered a win for Bowser if it goes into sudden death and not determined by percent?

Normally, if the bowser kills you on your last stock with a bowsercide, he has less % than you do, giving him the win. If the opponent makes him suicide, that is their own fault and thus bowser is given the win anyway.

 

[LeeHarris]

Why is a Bowsercide always considered a win for Bowser if it goes into sudden death and not determined by percent?

There were several reasons that people gave for this.

One was that determining it by % may be close to impossible if both players are struggling to DI and don't catch the % shown before the match ends. If no one else was around, what is to stop one guy from saying he was 10% above the other one? They may have both been caught up in the moment and not realized what they were at, but one guy decided to lie and say he had the advantage. There is no way to prove who was ahead unless you have several spectators.

 

[Overswarm]

Normally, if the bowser kills you on your last stock with a bowsercide, he has less % than you do, giving him the win. If the opponent makes him suicide, that is their own fault and thus bowser is given the win anyway.

^win

You have to be lower % anyway to do it for a KO, and it isn't really a good thing that controller ports decide whether bowser wins regardless of % or it goes to sudden death (in which we'd determine the win by %).

Since it is unreasonable to say that Bowser always loses and just as unreasonable to say "bowser wins if he is in a higher controller port", we made it so he always wins.

 

[TheKiest]

I remembered the other thing I forgot:

Does the Bowser SD rule apply to Gannon's Suicide as well? Why or why not?

I thought the 2 attacks were similar (yes Bowser's control is based on percentage, but both can lead to SDs or a flat out win).

Or is there something more specific that I'm missing here?

Thanks

 

[[FBC] ESAM]

I think any other type of suicide is based on percent since they aren't controlled by it.

 

[Overswarm]

I think any other type of suicide is based on percent since they aren't controlled by it.

^win


2 in a row.


D3, Kirby, and Ganon all have suicides that are controlled by the player rather than the port.

 

[Ace55]

Resolving Ties: Any games ending in time running out should always be decided by stock, and then percents. If percents are the same or both players die simultaneously, there will be a 1 stock overttime or the sudden death will be played out. The TO needs to decide which of these will be used before the tournament. Bowser's suicide klaw is exempt from this rule

Wouldn't Dedede's and Ganon's suicide fall into the both players die at the same time category?

 

[CT Chia]

just my thoughts if anyone cares lol

yea, i cant agree with many of the stage choices you have unfortunately...
pirate ship, distant planet (WHAT!?), onett, port town, skyworld, and mario circuit need to stay banned
lylat is definitely a neutral. seriously, the tipping barely hurts anyone.
castle, delfino, and halberd need to stay counter
stadium is debatable between starter and counter as u have it
hanenbow should stay counter

the color blind rule should be called Chibo's Color Blind rule lol, i made it first in my latest sats tourney

the way to determine the first match is interesting. odd though, i dunno if i will use it

 

[Overswarm]

Wouldn't Dedede's and Ganon's suicide fall into the both players die at the same time category?

They are attacks initiated by a player, rather than happenstance such as two players smashing each other at the same time (resulting in sudden death) or a hazard killing two players at the same time.

 

[Mmac]

So what about the Release Grab Infinites? Don't you need to reinforce a rule that you need to cause Jab Damage on every grab to prevent stalling?

 

[Sliq]

So what about the Release Grab Infinites? Don't you need to reinforce a rule that you need to cause Jab Damage on every grab to prevent stalling?

If you don't jab, they jump break out. T_T

 

[Ace55]

If you don't jab, they jump break out. T_T

For Wario that's the problem. We would like to stay grounded.

 

[Mmac]

Same thing with ZSS against Squirtle. For Wario and Squirtle, the opponents who are infiniting them need them to Jump breakout in order for the infinite to work, but the people can abuse this by doing no damage at all.

 

[[FBC] ESAM]

The grab release infinites should end at 250%, since the person will most likely be killed by then anyway. If it goes over 250%, it should be considered as excessive stalling since nobody has that large of a lack of killing potential. Not even sonic or samus.

 

[Ace55]

The grab release infinites should end at 250%, since the person will most likely be killed by then anyway. If it goes over 250%, it should be considered as excessive stalling since nobody has that large of a lack of killing potential. Not even sonic or samus.

It's gonna take a LONG time before they reach 250% (and 300% is the official rule now right) with the Wario infinites.

 

[Mmac]

Wario can be killed by all of his infinites before 150%, In fact, I think it's the same deal with Lucas/Ness/Squirtle. Marth can Fsmash Ness/Lucas out of it for the kill, while Charizard can Ftilt I think for a kill. ZSS Can just Sweetspot SideB on Release.

I think there should be a different Limit for the Release Infinites, compared to Throw Infinites. 300% Is just overkill for these infinites, especially when racking up damage with them is much more time consuming compared to the others

 

[Overswarm]

So what about the Release Grab Infinites? Don't you need to reinforce a rule that you need to cause Jab Damage on every grab to prevent stalling?

I believe making the game unplayable for the other party constitutes stalling anyways.

 

[IDK]

I see "Bridge of Eldin" on the banned list, but it seems you forgot to add the reasoning about it more then the votes. Thumbs up for the rules though...

because people can chaingrab/ lock off the edge: banana, ice block, laser, fireball... etc...

 

[Ilex]

Overswarm, I believe you counted up the points for your stages the wrong. You simply measured the amount that the leading answer was compared to the total, without taking into account what the other votes were. If we follow your counting method, a stage (Purely hypothetical) with 7-2-0 votes would be the same as a stage with 7-0-2 points. But wouldn't it make sense if the second stage was considered less neutral because the two ban votes 'pull' it down further than the 2 CP votes in the first stage?

I think you should have taken into account all of the votes instead of grouping up the two minorities as equal. What I think you should have done is made every neutral vote give 100 points, every CP vote give 50 points, and every Ban vote give 0 points; Then divide by the number of total votes. After doing this, a perfectly neutral stage would have 100 percent, a perfect counterpick stage with 50 percent, etc. This method would be more accurate because all stages would be on the same scale.

All neutral stages would have 75.1-100 percent, all CP would have 25.1-75, and all ban from 0-25. CP may have twice the range but Neutral and Ban points give twice the amount of influence so it evens out. This is the following result:
Neutral
Yoshi's Island (Brawl) 100
BattleField 97.9
SmashVille 96
Final Destination 93.1
Lylat Cruise 82
Halberd 76.5
Counterpick
Delfino Isle 72.7
Pokemon Stadium 1 71.9
Castle Seige 70.9
Norfair 55.4
Brinstar 52.3
Frigate Orpheon 51.7
Pokemon Stadium 2 50
Rainbow Cruise 48.4
Jungle Japes 46.7
Pirate Ship 45.8
Green Hill Zone 42.5
Luigi's Mansion 39.5
Corneria 39.2
Pictochat 36.8
Yoshi's Island (Melee) 35.7
Distant Planet 33.3
Skyworld 30
Mario Circuit 28
Banned
Greengreens 23.8
Port Town Aero Dive 23.2
Onett 22.7
Hanenbow 11.9
New Pork City 10.9
75m 10.7
Shadow Moses Island 8.6
Mario Bros. 8.3
Big Blue 7.5
Rumble Falls 6.25
Summit 4.5
Bridge of Eldin 3.7
Spear Pillar 3.2
WarioWare 2.9
Flat Zone 2 0.6
Hyrule Temple 0
Mushroomy Kingdom I 0
Mushroomy Kingdom II 0

Some notable changes using this method is that Distant Planet used to be straddling the CP/Ban barrier but now is clearly CP because it had more counterpick votes than ban. Other than that, Delfino surpassed PS1 for having fewer ban votes. Over all I think that this method is more accurate because instead of grouping the two minority voting options as one, it groups them separately to help influence the results.

 

[Overswarm]

We did revotes when necessary, and many of the stages had "joke votes" we knew to ignore. Regardless, two separate votes for counterpick hold the same weight; this does not mean they are both votes that were used under the same context.

Under your system, it would be prudent for someone wanting a stage to be counterpick to vote for neutral, while someone wanting it to not be a counterpick to vote for banned. This would lead to corruption of the votes. I prefer our system which is much more human. While it takes more time, it does not lead to 'accidental' placement of stages. There were times when someone merely said "this stage would have been X if I had voted / there had been more votes / whatever", and we simply did a revote at that time.


Most important though is that we want to give TOs options. The SBR, while a good group, is not perfect. The fact that we have stages in neutral/counterpick and counterpick/banned categories shows that we have differing philosophies. Often times we all agree nearly unianimously; this leads to a 2/3 majority that cements a stage. Otherwise, we place it in a halfway category and leave it up to the TO. If we can't come to a 2/3 consensus, how could we tell a TO what to do simply because we had a vote or two more in a certain category?

 

[ph00tbag]

For clarification, if a Diddy Kong somehow freezes themself with their opponent's projectile, is that considered a forfeit, or just stupidity on the Diddy's part? That is, should the match simply continue, with the other player at the massive advantage, or should it end with the Diddy losing?

I imagine the match continues anyway, but I'd just like to be sure.

 

[Ace55]

Forgot to say that I really like the stage list. I was getting sick of people saying the rain and Bulborb (oh no, it's standing still in the corner) made DP unplayable (or were even dangerous for that matter). Or the incredibly powerful items on the stage. Pirate Ship is another example of a unneccasary ban, only real threat are the bombs, and it's not like they appear out of nowhere, I find the claw on Halberd much more dangerous.

Awesome list is awesome.

I believe making the game unplayable for the other party constitutes stalling anyways.

Hate to be a pest again but this means it's banned? You're doing very minimal damage over a long periode of time without Wario even having a chance to escape (if done perfectly). But the purpose is definitely not to stall, but to rack up damage (but if you guys say ban it I'm certainly not gonna protest).

 

[Overswarm]

For clarification, if a Diddy Kong somehow freezes themself with their opponent's projectile, is that considered a forfeit, or just stupidity on the Diddy's part? That is, should the match simply continue, with the other player at the massive advantage, or should it end with the Diddy losing?

I imagine the match continues anyway, but I'd just like to be sure.

If the game can continued to be played, then yes; all the opponent needs to do is hit diddy out of it (or diddy hit them out of their freeze).

Hate to be a pest again but this means it's banned? You're doing very minimal damage over a long periode of time without Wario even having a chance to escape (if done perfectly). But the purpose is definitely not to stall, but to rack up damage (but if you guys say ban it I'm certainly not gonna protest).

It is only banned if you continually grab and do no damage with the intent of running the timer.

 

[Mienaikage]

What are the rules on modified controllers (for example, removed springs from shoulder buttons)

 

[fkacyan]

GHZ, JJ, and Pirate Ship should be banned, and I know the the ECRC has an extremely different ruleset than this one, which is even more conservative than I am.

However, I doubt I'll change the SBR's minds, and won't bother trying.

I'd love to see a vote count broken down by region... Regional trends as to how the SBR votes might be most..... revealing.

 

[TheKiest]

Any infinite chain grabs most end quickly after 300% has been reached so as to prevent excessive stalling.
(I'm assuming it's must and not most)

Not to sound like a "john" , but why 300% instead of something lower?

If I'm losing and the opponent has 200%, then (assuming that I manage to get this off) I can get about 8 (sorry for not knowing exact number) grabs off before the 300%. Or does that time wasted not really mean anything in the long run? (Or is 300% that much more significant than 200%)

Sorry if it seems like a dumb question. I ask because I'm still trying to learn the "pro" mechanics to the game.

 

[crescentia]

Is there any reason why the votes don't all add up to the same total?

Other than that, I love this ruleset! Great job, guys.

 

[Overswarm]

GHZ, JJ, and Pirate Ship should be banned, and I know the the ECRC has an extremely different ruleset than this one, which is even more conservative than I am.

The ECRC is only one segment, and can continue to use their rules if they so choose. The SBR ruleset is obviously not conservative in nature; our goal was not to make just a solid ruleset, but to make a solid ruleset without banning stage because they are "gay" or "stupid". We looked for reasoning behind our decisions, and while some people simply voted based on personal preference, that was generally only when the line was blurred anyway.

It may be possible that stages like Green Hill Zone could be banned in the future, but currently we have no evidence or even theoretical reasoning that points to it being banned, so it is best to leave it alone.

I'd love to see a vote count broken down by region... Regional trends as to how the SBR votes might be most..... revealing.

Regional trends exist; it's just the way it is. There are members of all regions back there though, each one able to post just as much as another.

Is there any reason why the votes don't all add up to the same total?

We have members that just weren't around for some votes, and sometimes people wouldn't feel the need to vote because their stage was already obviously going to be what they wanted in the first place. The polls had a 7 day time limit on them, so many people didn't feel the need to vote for some stages. Sometimes people just didn't know what to vote, and knew that simply choosing counterpick, starter, or banned without knowing what they really thought was the best choice would be irresponsible.

Not to sound like a "john" , but why 300% instead of something lower?

300% is a percentage high enough to kill any character in the game with ease. Some characters don't have killing throws, and as such, forcing them to end their infinite earlier (at about 200%) could lead to that opponent surviving the throw or attack. If this is the case, it would be the ruleset that allow the opponent to make a comeback when he normally would have not had an ability to. This is tampering too deep in individual matches, so we made it 300%.

What are the rules on modified controllers (for example, removed springs from shoulder buttons)

These would be up to the TO; however, no one in the back room really has a problem with removing the springs. Those springs are needed for your GC controller to light shield in Melee... but light shielding doesn't exist in Brawl, and the other controller options (wiimote, classic, nunchuck) already act as a GC controller would if the spring was removed.

 

[Magik0722]

What happens if two color blind people are on opposite teams and both main lucario/sonic?
lol jk you dont have to answer that. What i was really wondering is how the striking system works exactly, I couldn't really understand the post. So a player strikes a stage, then the opponent strikes a stage until one is left? So the first player to strike picks the stage between the last two and has one more strike than his opponent? and banning stages only for counter pick stages?

 

[Overswarm]

Yes and yes good sir

 

[TheKiest]

So the first player to strike picks the stage between the last two and has one more strike than his opponent?

As mentioned just above the stage list, there has to be an odd number of Starter stages in order for this to work. That way, both players have an equal amount of strikes to use.

Great job everyone at SBR!

 

[Orb13]

Why is bowser's suicide kill mentioned but not dedede's or ganon's?

 

[[FBC] ESAM]

Why is bowser's suicide kill mentioned but not dedede's or ganon's?

Because bowser's is the only one that the direction is influenced by the %s of the players. For ganon, kirby, and DDD, you go by who has lower %

 

[Mmac]

I'm sorry, but I just think the Limit for Infinite Stalling is just too high. Almost all of the Infinites can be killed out of at a reasonable percent.

-Marth can kill out of the Ness/Lucas Infinite with a Sweet Spot Fsmash
-Charizard can kill Ness with a Dtilt
-ZSS can kill Squirtle with a Sweetspot SideB
-Dedede can kill his Non-Wall Infinites with a Dtilt
-The people who Infinite Wario can kill with Their Usmash on release (For Ike and Bowser, their Utilt, and Zelda can kill with a Sweetspot Fair.

All of these can Kill under 150%.

I'm not sure about the Wall infinite, but can't Dedede just finish them off with a Utilt? I don't know who else can Wall Infinite, but I think it's the same deal

 

[peeup]

I'm sorry, but I just think the Limit for Infinite Stalling is just too high. Almost all of the Infinites can be killed out of at a reasonable percent.

-Marth can kill out of the Ness/Lucas Infinite with a Sweet Spot Fsmash
-Charizard can kill Ness with a Dtilt
-ZSS can kill Squirtle with a Sweetspot SideB
-Dedede can kill his Non-Wall Infinites with a Dtilt
-The people who Infinite Wario can kill with Their Usmash on release (For Ike and Bowser, their Utilt, and Zelda can kill with a Sweetspot Fair.

All of these can Kill under 150%.

I'm not sure about the Wall infinite, but can't Dedede just finish them off with a Utilt? I don't know who else can Wall Infinite, but I think it's the same deal

Agreed, once you hit the limit, nearly anything can kill you. It needs to be closer to 150 or 175.

 

[LeeHarris]

I'm sorry, but I just think the Limit for Infinite Stalling is just too high. Almost all of the Infinites can be killed out of at a reasonable percent.

-Marth can kill out of the Ness/Lucas Infinite with a Sweet Spot Fsmash
-Charizard can kill Ness with a Dtilt
-ZSS can kill Squirtle with a Sweetspot SideB
-Dedede can kill his Non-Wall Infinites with a Dtilt
-The people who Infinite Wario can kill with Their Usmash on release (For Ike and Bowser, their Utilt, and Zelda can kill with a Sweetspot Fair.

All of these can Kill under 150%.

I'm not sure about the Wall infinite, but can't Dedede just finish them off with a Utilt? I don't know who else can Wall Infinite, but I think it's the same deal

There is a factor you left out.

Almost all of those moves require the player to kill in one direction. If there is a wall, hazard, etc in that direction, then the infinite has become useless because they can tech the wall or bounce off the hazard. 300% allows the player to get the other character up to a % where he can make a secure kill with a throw or put the other player into a danger zone where any reasonable move will kill.

 

[Ace55]

Just took me two and a halve minutes to get a Wario up to 300% using the infinite with Yoshi, without the Wario resisting. With a resisting player, I'm sure it would take well over 3 minutes. I used Yoshi because he's the only one that can grab attack all he wants without fear of a ground release. Any other chararacter would take even longer.

Wouldn't this be a problem?

 

[Mmac]

The only place where I see this is a factor is Corneria, which is ironically the only one with a Big enough wall to effect this (Rainbow Cruise has a few, but would you seriously Infinite on it? Plus Shadow Moses is banned, and Onett will probably be banned in most tournaments as well). I don't see why we should Limit the amount to twice as it should be for just one stage. So they can tech out of it. So what? They're practically screwed anyways.

And Ace is right, it also gives people the power to abuse the current limit to take 3 times as long than it should be, while still being legal. I mean, nobody wants to see a match of Yoshi eating Wario for 8 Minutes. It's just not him, it's all the other characters too. Even Dedede can abuse this

Edit: Wait, I don't even think that's a factor anyways, Everyone should beable to kill behind the fin with a Backthrow at 175% anyways

 

[LeeHarris]

The only place where I see this is a factor is Corneria, which is ironically the only one with a Big enough wall to effect this (Rainbow Cruise has a few, but would you seriously Infinite on it? Plus Shadow Moses is banned, and Onett will probably be banned in most tournaments as well). I don't see why we should Limit the amount to twice as it should be for just one stage. So they can tech out of it. So what? They're practically screwed anyways.

And Ace is right, it also gives people the power to abuse the current limit to take 3 times as long than it should be, while still being legal. I mean, nobody wants to see a match of Yoshi eating Wario for 8 Minutes

Stages with wall/hazards that this could affect:

Norfair, Onett, Corneria, Luigi's Mansion, Yoshi's Island (Pipes), Skyworld