SBR Recommended Rule List Discussion: Brawl

[Ace55]

I mean, nobody wants to see a match of Yoshi eating Wario for 8 Minutes.

Hear hear. And the match won't even end if they go up to 300%.

 

[metaXzero]

Personally, I dislike how MKs Cape glitch was handled, but otherwise good ruleset.

 

[Mmac]

Stages with wall/hazards that this could affect:

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

Norfair there's magma all over the place, So i don't even think you can get a solid Infinite for more than a Minute. Not to mention the magma will probably kill them anyways at 150+ if they happen to "Block" the kill.

Onett there's only a few places where you can get a solid Non-Wall infinite on someone without being bothered by the Cars/Awning's, which they can kill without the person flying being blocked by anything. Also if they happened to get a Wall infinite, the Utilted/Usmashed opponent shouldn't hit the wall anyways.

Corneria, Like I explained, could be killed by a Bthrow at 175% from behind the fin. I'll test this

Luigi's Mansion could be a problem, but I think unless they're at the very edge, facing the Mansion, or in the very bottom center of the Mansion, I don't think they would hit the ceiling.

-_ - I forgot about the Blocks. However I don't think any of the infinites can be done on the Slope (I could be wrong), so the only place where it could be effected is the very center.

Skyworld has Solid platform all over the place, but honestly, I don't even think you can even get a SAFE THROW at 300% in Skyworld

I think the main problem is positioning. However I think people will know how to position Infinites so that their kill won't be interrupted.

Edit: On Conreria, I was (mostly) wrong about the Bthrow, but Testing still proves that the Fin is of little interruption

Wario: Can grab the fin on Release, so they can't infinite there. Zelda can still kill with Usmash, so Wario can't be blocked by the Fin
ZSS: ZSS can't Infinite Squirtle on the black part, so she will be almost never facing the Fin when doing the Infinite
Charizard: Can just kill with Bthrow
Dedede: Utilt doesn't hit the Fin, plus he can just move them towards the Wall like a standard CG, and just use Utilt
Marth: Is affected by the Fin the most, but not at Point Blank at the wall. Marth can Dthrow CG Ness/Lucas at low %'s to the Wall.

So none of the infinites are affected by the fin

 

[Cubone]

So ROB's dtilt lock is permitted up to 300% correct?

 

[Overswarm]

ROB's d-tilt lock doesn't work up to 300%, I don't believe... but if you can do it, yup. Go for it.

You guys are missing hte point of the 300%; there's no reason to have a limit AT ALL on an infinite save for "it takes too long". The point of an infinite is to get a guaranteed kill; to say they have to stop at 150% means they might not get a kill. I survive Metaknight's d-smash at 150%! If there are other circumstances, I might survive even longer. 300% makes it to where the player doing the infinite doesn't have to worry about messing up. What happens if Marth MISSES the tipper but stopped at 150% just because we said so? That's pretty lame.

Besides, we don't care how entertaining the match is.

 

[comboking]

Why stop your opponent could make a comeback if you do
I have done it before

also what would it take to get into the SBR

 

[Vyse]

Indeed.
A 300% limit is necessary.

 

[Firestorm88]

How is the first person who bans the stage decided in the strike-out determined? The one picking second is at an obvious advantage here.

 

[Mr.E]

RPS, coinflip, whatever. Any fair or random method works, just as you'd do with choosing controller ports in cases of dispute (or teams). I have a related question, though. Who should be the first player to choose their stage ban?

To chime in on the suicide thing:

At first, I didn't think it was fair. I'm not concerned with the fact that a Ganoncide is "controlled by the player." Decided by controller port is indeed stupidly arbitrary, but that doesn't make in-game arbitrary measures any better. Based on percentage isn't bad, but sometimes relative character size plays a role as well and that's as bad as being port-decided. Bowser's suicide isn't any more "happenstance" than the others, since the Bowser player would have to consciously direct it off-stage to occur. (The opponent would have no reason to, if they're already so far ahead in damage that they can force it themselves.) A suicide kill is still a suicide kill, whether it be from Bowser or anyone else, but Bowser seems to be getting special treatment here.

Reading through the topic, I think it's fair that Bowsercides specifically have their own special "rule." It's not because the games decides victory/SD based on controller port, rather because control of the landing itself is percentage-based. That is to say, Bowser can't normally Klawcide his opponent for the win unless he's already in the lead and near the edge! Other suicide techniques typically occur regardless of relative damage, so they can potentially be abused in severely disadvantaged positions (e.g. 100%+ against a fresh stock, both final stock) to pull a really cheesy win/SD. Bowser can still do it off-stage, but has a more difficult time doing so (the Choke is a Ganon recovery in itself and Kirby/D3 have distance to spare) and it can still be DIed back onstage if the opponent is way ahead on damage. That's not to say that a Dedede at 150% should always have to lose against a fresh opponent, but he shouldn't be able to just CG them to 30% and then waddle off the stage with them in his mouth and call it a match. Bowser certainly can't suicide that way, that's essentially an instant "infinite" against everybody. Maybe I'm just overreacting, though.

Hell, Dedede/Kirby can still win anyway if the opponent simply breaks out automatically before the blast zone hits, where the balloons can still recover from and few others can. If the rule included all suicides, Ganondorf's recovery would become extremely difficult to guard against since one screw-up could result in a successful Ganoncide and him winning the match regardless of the opponent's damage. :/

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yn36WgwIc0I

Lucario DAir didn't beat the Tornado from above? -_-

We've done several tournaments with stage striking in the midwest and it has added no more than a minute or two to a set; you lose more time from people needing to go to the bathroom.

A whole new meaning to "no johns."

 

[TheKiest]

How is the first person who bans the stage decided in the strike-out determined? The one picking second is at an obvious advantage here.

How is the second guy at an advantage?

The striking is between the Neutral stages only and both players get the same amount of picks.
You already know what characters both are using (since the strike happens after the characters are picked)

Really you are getting rid of the Neutral Stages you don't want to be on as opposed to trying to get the one Neutral stage you want.

So is it really an advantage that the person who picked second gets the last say-so? (Even though it would be down to 2 stages)

 

[Overswarm]

THe only advantage is that you get to pick inbetween the last two stages... which is why it is determined by RPS.

 

[Ace55]

Besides, we don't care how entertaining the match is.

I know that entertainment isn't a factor. But the 300% rule will give every Wario infinite user the ability to stall a match for at least 3 minutes. And with these rules the person grabbing could suffice with only hitting you once after every grab. That's gonna be over 300 jabs + grabs he can do on you. Let's say every jab + grab release to regrab takes 1 second (it takes longer). That's more than 5 minutes of almost inaction after every grab.

It would be the best legitimate stall technique ever. You could be 200% down on the Wario, but even in stocks with 5 minutes remaining. One grab later you're floating through the air for 5 minutes, you're at 299%, the match is over, you lose. 5 Minutes of not being able to do anything isn't a problem in a 8 min (sometimes less) match?

 

[Overswarm]

I know that entertainment isn't a factor. But the 300% rule will give every Wario infinite user the ability to stall a match for at least 3 minutes. And with these rules the person grabbing could suffice with only hitting you once after every grab. That's gonna be over 300 jabs + grabs he can do on you. Let's say every jab + grab release to regrab takes 1 second (it takes longer). That's more than 5 minutes of almost inaction after every grab.

It would be the best legitimate stall technique ever. You could be 200% down on the Wario, but even in stocks with 5 minutes remaining. One grab later you're floating through the air for 5 minutes, you're at 299%, the match is over, you lose. 5 Minutes of not being able to do anything isn't a problem in a 8 min (sometimes less) match?

The best I've got is:

Sucks for Wario. :\


If it becomes a legitimate threat to Wario's game, I am not sure what exactly we could do. I could see a forced suicide (i.e., they grab you and start to infinite and the wario decides he is willing to suicide to prevent the timer from being run out), but even that is fishy.

This will almost certainly have to be something we look into in the future; for now, I have yet to see it happen in a real match and it may be something that we don't have to worry about.

 

[Ace55]

Yeah, the characters that can do it arn't exactly overplayed. Not to mention if Wario has his double jump the timeframe to grab him is 1 (!) frame (according to Mmac) for some of them. That's like getting Samus's sliding bomb glitch right on command. So I actually doubt it will ever be much of a threat. But in theory, it scares the sh*t out of me.

Thanks for your response, I will now let the subject die until Pride starts beating Futile using this.

 

[Pikaville]

Nice work guys.

At least now my friends can't b***h at me saying blah blah blah is banned!

Now they'll know the score.

I still think that PS2 and Pictochat should be banned.But whatever.

 

[[FBC] ESAM]

Pikaville, this list isn't the 100% you must follow these rules guidelines. It's a basic understanding of what can be neutrals, counterpicks, and bans. Obviously tournament hosts will dislike some stages, so they can take them off of the list.

 

[Chip.]

Pictochat is a really really bad stage.

 

[petrie911]

THe only advantage is that you get to pick inbetween the last two stages... which is why it is determined by RPS.

One thing I've been wondering about--why RPS? It seems like a coin flip would be more fair.

 

[JCaesar]

RPS is quicker, and in what way is it not fair? It's pure, random chance, 50/50.

 

[NinjaFoxX]

pictochat isint that bad,its almost neutral aside from some of the transformations hurting you

 

[Chip.]

Aside from the completely random transformations that can come in your way to determine the result of a match you mean >_>.

Such as the big diagonal line with the two eyes mirroring eachother transformation. The line COMPLETELY covers up the left edge and allows for no one being able to grab it. ********.

Or the 3-pronged spikes that appear on the left or right hand sides of the stage. Before the picture is completely animated, there is and invisible "wall" in the shape of the spikes that enables stage spike that are impossible to tech. ********.

I could go on, but I've studied the true dumbness of that stage here and there to understand it's not fit for competitive fair play.

 

[petrie911]

RPS is quicker, and in what way is it not fair? It's pure, random chance, 50/50.

How is RPS quicker? It's impossible to tie in a coin flip, but people can often go 4-5 rounds of RPS before having a winner.

As for more fair, there are always disputes about one player slightly delaying their throw to try to see their opponent's first, and other such odd things. with a coin flip, it's simple. One player flips the coin, the other calls it in the air, and then you let it land on the ground and see who wins. Quick, simple, effective.

 

[Alopex]

Green Hill Zone is walk-off central. Hanging at the edges and camping people until they come into grab range is way too effective in this stage. It's like the old Mushroom Kingdom in 64. Don't fight, just hang by the sides and grab.

It needs to be banned.


Also, I believe Spear Pillar is viable depending on the Pokemon.

Spear Pillar Palkia = Banned - Palkia is the one that reverses controls.

Spear Pillar Crescelia = Counter/Banned - Lots of fast hazards, but all still avoidable.

Spear Pillar Dialga = Counter - Dialga doesn't really do much. Time slowing down for both players isn't a problem. It's hazards are easily avoided.

The only real problem here is the cave of immortality, but I don't think it's as huge a problem as Hyrule Temple.



I would also like to direct you to this thread about Ganoncide:
http://www.smashboards.com/showthread.php?t=188658

You guys cover Bowsercide in your rules, what about Ganoncide? It's a Draw or Lose based on port number advantage.

 

[MysticKenji]

Aside from the completely random transformations that can come in your way to determine the result of a match you mean >_>.

Random =/= broken

Such as the big diagonal line with the two eyes mirroring eachother transformation. The line COMPLETELY covers up the left edge and allows for no one being able to grab it. ********.

Because obviously this will occur every time that form appears.

Or the 3-pronged spikes that appear on the left or right hand sides of the stage. Before the picture is completely animated, there is and invisible "wall" in the shape of the spikes that enables stage spike that are impossible to tech. ********.

I'm pretty sure any stage spike can be teched, you just didn't see it coming.
Good to know.

Also, Ganoncide is player-controlled, so percents/stocks can determine it.

 

[Alopex]

That's interesting... I guess I'll have to do more tests on it.


But multiple tests with Pit and Ganondorf, with both characters at 0% and 3 stocks, causes P1 Ganon to always have a draw, and P2 Ganon to always lose. Against the Pit.

So port number advantage has to play a role in it somewhere.

Is there a thread that breaks down exactly how the outcome of Ganoncide is determined? Because I would love to read that, as I don't think it's been fully cracked yet if you say there are more elements to it then just port number advantage.

 

[The Real Inferno]

That's interesting... I guess I'll have to do more tests on it.


But multiple tests with Pit and Ganondorf, with both characters at 0% and 3 stocks, causes P1 Ganon to always have a draw, and P2 Ganon to always lose. Against the Pit.

So port number advantage has to play a role in it somewhere.

Is there a thread that breaks down exactly how the outcome of Ganoncide is determined? Because I would love to read that, as I don't think it's been fully cracked yet if you say there are more elements to it then just port number advantage.

I know there is a topic that shows everything Ports affect and I've read it before, you could just do a search for it, but the topic did say that Ganon will always go to a Sudden Death if he's in a higher port, but otherwise he loses.

 

[Alopex]

So then the discussion still stands.


Bowsercide is always a win with SBR rules.

Ganoncide?

 

[[FBC] ESAM]

So then the discussion still stands.


Bowsercide is always a win with SBR rules.

Ganoncide?

Please...read the thread before you post. This question has been answered time and time again.
READ THE THREAD BEFORE YOU POST!
Anyway, ganoncide isn't determined by %, so whoever is at lower % will win.

 

[Chip.]

Random =/= broken

random ******** stuff you cant avoid = broken

Because obviously this will occur every time that form appears.

what if it happens when your trying to sweetspot recover? yeah its dumb

I'm pretty sure any stage spike can be teched, you just didn't see it coming.
Good to know.

Also, Ganoncide is player-controlled, so percents/stocks can determine it.

what if it happens when your trying to sweetspot recover? yeah its dumb
you dont see it coming lol. broken



the stage is ******** it should be banned.

 

[Mr.E]

It's not an actual issue with a fair coin but some people might feel slighted if they lose a coin flip because their opponent got to call it. Both have an equal "say" in the matter with RPS. The best way to do it is clearly to draw the name out of a hat, though! amirite

Now what's this terrible "player-controlled" argument about Ganoncides? You think Bowser just accidentally throws himself (and the opponent) offstage and into the blast zone or something?

 

[MysticKenji]

Now what's this terrible "player-controlled" argument about Ganoncides? You think Bowser just accidentally throws himself (and the opponent) offstage and into the blast zone or something?

Actually I typed the wrong thing.
I meant percent controlled.
I'm pretty sure, Bowser can only suicide if he's winning, the others can do it at any time.

 

[Overswarm]

Ganoncide hasn't been fully understood yet; sometimes Ganon loses, sometimes he wins, and it seems it is determined by his opponent's size. If it turns out that the port determines what Ganon does, we will probably remove the port advantage. Meaning, if Ganon has the options of sudden death or losing, he'd have the option of losing 100% of the time as well as winning depending on our investigations on it.


RPS is used because people don't always have a coin, and RPS allows you to be in control in some fashion. It isn't luck.

 

[munkus beaver]

For the record, when playing against ROB, I've had some matches that ended in gannoncides be Super Sudden Death matches and some be victory for ROB. It appears to have elements of randomness to it.

 

[Magus420]

It's a combination of the distance from the blastzone when it connects and is also influenced by which character he's holding, and then controller port priority from there (including some conditions where it really wasn't necessary). The port priority for it also works differently when in sudden death.

 

[[FBC] ESAM]

Now what's this terrible "player-controlled" argument about Ganoncides? You think Bowser just accidentally throws himself (and the opponent) offstage and into the blast zone or something?

The thing is, before, all suicides were determined by %. Ganon can be at 100% and the opponent at a fresh stock and ganon can forward b and either win, lose, or sudden death, depending on size. Bowser's is % controlled. So, if it was based on %, every time he did it he would win. But, if he was losing, the opponent can just force him off the cliff, giving him the win.

 

[DRaGZ]

I've honestly never won with a Ganoncide. It's always been a tie or loss.

Wasn't it determined a long time ago that Ganoncides were port related? If the Ganoncider is of a higher port, it would go to Sudden Death. If it was a lower port, Ganondorf would lose.

So...?

I'm sure there was a post about this in the Tactics forum somewhere.

EDIT: Hmmm...nvm. http://www.smashboards.com/showthread.php?t=188658

Strange stuff. I've honestly never won from a Ganoncide though.

What a world.

REDIT: Although...in either case, it could be easily resolved by just giving the Ganoncider the win/loss. Why not just do that?

 

[memphischains]

Before I post, I believe this was created to early.

BUT, never the less, I'm still not a fan
for some reason I'm not surprised though at this....

I'm sure you started posting for the tier list votes. TOO EARLYYYYYYYYYYYYY

imo, this could have waited

 

[Overswarm]

ESAM also brings up another point.

Bowser had an inconsistency in the way the results were shown. He should be winning 100% of the time when he suicides, since he needs lower % to do it anyway. But, sometimes it says sudden death solely because of controller port. This simply removes the confusion that would occur otherwise.

 

[memphischains]

There is a way to consistently jump out of those boswersides.

That video wasn't a fluke

That whole controller port issue should be re worked
so, like i stated before, TO EARLY

 

[Overswarm]

Before I post, I believe this was created to early.

BUT, never the less, I'm still not a fan
for some reason I'm not surprised though at this....

I'm sure you started posting for the tier list votes. TOO EARLYYYYYYYYYYYYY

imo, this could have waited

What do you think is wrong about it?