Should anti-trip be a choice for tourney sets?

[Kuro~]

Dekar luigis misfire animation kills BOTH himself and his opponent on a regular basis. When luigi misfires not only is his trajectory lengthened but he is unable to control himself for longer. This is awful. One of the luigi mains in kentucky says luigis misfire is one of his larger weaknesses. Misfire can also cause him to stick into the stage and is almost always an instant stock. Conversely Luigis misfire can kill people at 50 who otherwise would have got a free punish.

So wait your point was Ganon won a tournament..... so his fair isn't messed up????? Or are you saying that Ganon is a fine character without the fair the designers intended? Because he ISN'T a fine character. Sure you can possibly win a tournament if you outplay the piss out of everyone, but check his MU's having no even or adv. MU's is a problem if you ask me.

And regardless of how many clips you show of DK beating a D3 (maybe the one or 2 you an manage to find) doesn't change the fact that D3 makes DK very un-viable. Like it's scaring me because your starting to post like jebus which makes me facepalm hardcore. Fixing the infinite on DK would CERTAINLY balance out the MU a decent amount, you really have no leg to stand on.

Btw my middle school didn't teach logical fallacies so guess what? your wrong again.

MK accidentally tornados offstage and dies, then ghost platform pops up and saves him! Did he make a mistake? yes. Did it go unpunished? yes. Is it your fault? no. its the games. Same can be said for anything random.

btw I have absolutely no stance on this argument, however because you decided to be such a douche bag in the past I'll gladly point out whats incorrect about your post.

But tripping isn't caused by a person making a mistake...unless i missed some posts earlier about tripping affecting mu cuz u can trip into an infinite like vs IC or dk vs d3. If i did miss those posts my bad. Ignore.

 

[Shockna]

Wait a minute, are people here seriously defending -tripping-?

Defending poor programming decisions when game balance is better served by removing them is, in all honesty, just plain sad.

 

[Arcansi]

Has anyone done any testing on the YI:B Ghosts?

 

[Dekar173]

Has anyone done any testing on the YI:B Ghosts?

Testing yes, I'm not positive people have looked at the coding, but I'd assume they have.

Overswarm has done extensive testing on pretty much... every stage.

 

[Arcansi]

Testing yes, I'm not positive people have looked at the coding, but I'd assume they have.

Overswarm has done extensive testing on pretty much... every stage.

Where can I find data?

Stage thread doesn't have it.

 

[FoxFireMage]

Wait a minute, are people here seriously defending -tripping-?

Defending poor programming decisions when game balance is better served by removing them is, in all honesty, just plain sad.

Actually from a physics standpoint it makes more sense the more you research certain matchups. We both have mains that trip a lot, for good reason

 

[WindMajor]

As in, half of the Wiis in the venue have Brawl hacked with anti-tripping (I'll call it mBrawl), and the other half is regular Brawl (vBrawl)? If not, clarify it again for me.

Anyways, if that's the case, then we present ourselves with some issues.

1. You're running two different games under one tournament. You have an event for Super Smash Bros Brawl, but under this event, you can play two different games, mBrawl, and vBrawl.

It's not two different games, it's the same game, except the random tripping one has a chance of differing from what people are inputting.

This would be the equivalent of saying, "This is a Super Smash Bros Brawl tournament", but half the setups are of vBrawl and the other half is Mario Party 6. This would also be the equivalent of playing Brawl with two rulesets, one with 13 stages, and one with 26 stages. Two different games being played under the same event.

Horrible argument. It'd be more like half the setups are similar to Mario Party 6, and the other half are hacked. Again, no it wouldn't be like playing with 13 stages and 26. A lot of stages in Brawl are anti-competitive, whereas taking away tripping is 100% competitive.

2. The division in setups can hold back tournaments. For example, There are 6 setups, 3 vBrawl, and 3 mBrawl. Lets say that I want to play vBrawl, and everyone agrees, but all the vBrawl setups are taken, but there are 2 mBrawl setups left over. I would either have to wait for a vBrawl setup to become available again (hold up the tournament), or I could remove the hacks from an mBrawl setup and play vBrawl (hold up the tournament very slightly).

The only reason anyone would want to play on the vBrawl setup is because they think it would give them a better chance of winning. I don't give a **** whether I win or lose. I want my set to be determined by skill- not random chance. Also, if that "skill" involves me getting hit by a judgment from a G&W- SO BE IT, I could have AVOIDED the judgment.

3. Hacks like this can be abused in the sense that you could THINK you're playing vBrawl, but you're actually playing mBrawl (or vice versa), since the differences can only be noticed once the game is started (which might be too late).

No, because the setup would obviously say its hacked, or you would be notified beforehand by the TO of the hacked wiis presence.

In the previous example, I said that someone might have taken off the hacks of an mBrawl setup and changed it to vBrawl. What if they didn't put it back? Players would expect that setup to be an mBrawl setup, and they'll **** bricks when they see their character randomly trip. That's time wasted right there.

Time wasted is one of your arguments, that's pretty ****ing ********. Tournaments don't finish on time due to poor TOs and lack of wiis, not the rulesets.

4. Like AZ said, doing this sort of thing would open up Pandora's box. Why stop at fixing tripping? Let's balance out Toon Link! His bombs are now instant kill. But why stop there? This game is now Brawl+!!! Now everything is balanced to a T.

Are you ********? Do you like just reading half a post then replying to entire threads? This statement has already been addressed, and since you obviously don't understand it's a logical fallacy I'm going to have to assume you're either a dropout, or too young to have taken any classes that address arguments and logical fallacies.

http://www.nizkor.org/features/falla...ery-slope.html

5. Giving players the option to choose between games in a forced manner (RPS or GaW Ports) is horribly unfair. Just imagine how bad it would be if someone who didn't want to play on mBrawl was forced to play it because of a failed RPS game. Removing tripping isn't an option in vBrawl, but with cheats, you could do so, changing the game into a completely different game. Or to better illustrate my point, just imagine being forced to play Brawl with TL's bombs being instant kill instead of vBrawl. Or being forced to play Brawl- instead of Brawl. Or what about Mario Party 6? Or an SMB1 speed run? Or hide and seek?

Imagine if someone is paired up against a Snake player, and they're forced to take port 1, simply due to rock paper scissors.

Also, none of these other things you mention make sense whatsoever. Tripping is anti-competitive- how can you support it? Have you ever seen an entire tournament's outcome determined by tripping? Do you even play Brawl? Are you even a person?

Same could also be said about running alternating rulesets. Again, gambling between two different games when we're clearly supposed to be testing our skills in one.

If your concern is testing skill then you should have no problem with the CHOICE of removing tripping.

Answers to your awful reasoning (which has already been responded to in other posts) in red. Learn to read the thread.

Whyyyyyyy must you respond in this format???

Just separate everything in quotes, it's so much easier to format everything that way. >_>








Anyways, my arguments still remain the same, but I don't think you're reading things right.

1. You're running two different games under one tournament. You have an event for Super Smash Bros Brawl, but under this event, you can play two different games, mBrawl, and vBrawl.

It's not two different games, it's the same game, except the random tripping one has a chance of differing from what people are inputting.

This would be the equivalent of saying, "This is a Super Smash Bros Brawl tournament", but half the setups are of vBrawl and the other half is Mario Party 6. This would also be the equivalent of playing Brawl with two rulesets, one with 13 stages, and one with 26 stages. Two different games being played under the same event.

Horrible argument. It'd be more like half the setups are similar to Mario Party 6, and the other half are hacked. Again, no it wouldn't be like playing with 13 stages and 26. A lot of stages in Brawl are anti-competitive, whereas taking away tripping is 100% competitive.

What I understood from your argument was "It's the same game, except there is another version that alters a core mechanic of the game, but it's still the same game!".

If you're understanding what I'm saying correctly, then you should be able to deduce that both games AREN'T the same game. Instead, they are TWO different games that are very similar, but different. The proof is all over your own argument. You would prefer to play one type of game over another because you think that one game has anti-competitive mechanics, while the other one doesn't. You want to give players the "option to choose from one game or another (in other words, 1 of 2 different games)", instead of everyone playing the same game. You treat them as two different games, but you don't admit that they are two different games because you're convinced that both games are so similar that they are in fact, the same exact thing, and that is not true.

Like I said, that would be like playing Brawl with two different rulesets (in other words, playing two different versions of a game that in the same disc). Instead of understanding how I related the two, you went off tangent by saying that 13 of the 26 stages are anti-competitive, and that removing tripping is 100% competitive (which is untrue, but besides my point).

Then to give you a comparison through extremes, I said that it's also like having half the setups be Brawl setups, and the other half Mario Party. It's funny though, because your response backs up my argument perfectly.

"It'd be more like half the setups are similar to Mario Party 6, and the other half are hacked."

Yes yes, one half of the setups are ONE game, the other half is of a changed version (ie. different version) of the game.

If you disagree though, then you can start by explaining how vBrawl and mBrawl are exactly the same game.

2. The division in setups can hold back tournaments. For example, There are 6 setups, 3 vBrawl, and 3 mBrawl. Lets say that I want to play vBrawl, and everyone agrees, but all the vBrawl setups are taken, but there are 2 mBrawl setups left over. I would either have to wait for a vBrawl setup to become available again (hold up the tournament), or I could remove the hacks from an mBrawl setup and play vBrawl (hold up the tournament very slightly).

The only reason anyone would want to play on the vBrawl setup is because they think it would give them a better chance of winning. I don't give a **** whether I win or lose. I want my set to be determined by skill- not random chance. Also, if that "skill" involves me getting hit by a judgment from a G&W- SO BE IT, I could have AVOIDED the judgment.

You ignored my argument and went off in another tangent.

I'm talking about tournaments being held up because they would have to divide setups, and you're talking about why people would even want to play vBrawl in the first place.

You want your sets to be determined by skill, not by random choice. But who said that everyone wants that? I certainly don't. I refuse to play Brawl without tripping. So now what? We have a conflict of interest, right? I guess we're back to my point. We have two different versions of Brawl available in the venue, and it's our turn to play vBrawl, but all the vBrawl setups are taken.

What do?

On another note, you can avoid tripping. Don't dash.

4. Like AZ said, doing this sort of thing would open up Pandora's box. Why stop at fixing tripping? Let's balance out Toon Link! His bombs are now instant kill. But why stop there? This game is now Brawl+!!! Now everything is balanced to a T.

Are you ********? Do you like just reading half a post then replying to entire threads? This statement has already been addressed, and since you obviously don't understand it's a logical fallacy I'm going to have to assume you're either a dropout, or too young to have taken any classes that address arguments and logical fallacies.

http://www.nizkor.org/features/falla...ery-slope.html

Please quote the exact line where I say that doing X would directly lead to Y happening.

As far as I'm concerned, my point stands at "by doing X, we are opening the doors for Y to happen, BUT

Spoiler

and here's the important part

I'm not saying that Y will actually happen".

In other words, I'm making a simple prediction, a prediction based on how I see the Smash community react towards double standards.

Right now, just like how AZ said, we don't have gameplay-altering hacks allowed. This is to prevent people from saying, "Oh, but we have this hack available, why don't we add this one?". It's basically a zero-tolerance thing. We never allowed hacks, and therefore never will. However, the second we do allow hacks, people can call us out and say, "But you allowed this hack, why can't you allow this other one?". And pay attention to the italicized word (can). I'm not saying that they WILL do it, I'm just saying that the doors are opened, and everybody is welcomed to do so.

Big difference.

5. Giving players the option to choose between games in a forced manner (RPS or GaW Ports) is horribly unfair. Just imagine how bad it would be if someone who didn't want to play on mBrawl was forced to play it because of a failed RPS game. Removing tripping isn't an option in vBrawl, but with cheats, you could do so, changing the game into a completely different game. Or to better illustrate my point, just imagine being forced to play Brawl with TL's bombs being instant kill instead of vBrawl. Or being forced to play Brawl- instead of Brawl. Or what about Mario Party 6? Or an SMB1 speed run? Or hide and seek?

Imagine if someone is paired up against a Snake player, and they're forced to take port 1, simply due to rock paper scissors.

Also, none of these other things you mention make sense whatsoever. Tripping is anti-competitive- how can you support it? Have you ever seen an entire tournament's outcome determined by tripping? Do you even play Brawl? Are you even a person?

You're missing the key difference between the two. Picking ports against a regular Brawl match via RPS is basically managing a variable that HAS to be dealt with, and that can affect the outcome of how you play one game (ie. vBrawl).

With vBrawl and mBrawl, you're forcing me to play one game and not the other.

And again, the issue here is playing two different games under one event. It makes no sense that you can advance through brackets in a vBrawl tournament by playing something other than vBrawl. It's basically a smaller version of the Gentleman's Clause (if both parties agree to changing a rule, they may do so), which is so abusable that anyone with a brain can should be able to figure out why it shouldn't be used.

 

[Ghostbone]

Dekar, the problem isn't no tripping in itself, it's giving players the choice.
You're also suggesting we force players to play without tripping if they don't want to (well a 50/50 chance but whatever). And that's just ridiculous. Ports are a part of Brawl, hacks aren't there's a difference so don't bring that up.
Also infinite replay doesn't change the gameplay at all, it's not comparable.

Anyway read AZ and Twinkie's posts for why having it as an option is unviable.
And why stop at tripping? Why not allow players to play BBrawl for their set, or Brawl-, or Brawl+, or Muscle March? Really it's up to the TO I guess, but you shouldn't expect to be able to play without tripping, when that will delay the tournament, with not only your match but other matches having to restart wiis.

Finally, there's a difference between a Brawl match that had no tripping because of chance, and a hacked Brawl match where nobody tripped from a dash because it was turned off. It's the knowledge of whether tripping is on or off, certain tactics become more viable without tripping, like dash chain-grabs with IC, or dash dancing. Even if nobody trips in vBrawl, they're not going to try to dash dance because that will give them a high chance of tripping. If tripping is turned off, than that option becomes viable, and people will start doing it.
The knowledge that tripping is turned off affects playstyles, and thus changes who the better player is, thus making it a different game, which shouldn't be played at a Brawl tournament.

If you want to play without tripping run a no tripping Brawl tournament, don't vouch for the option of playing no tripping Brawl at a Brawl tournament.

 

[Dekar173]

Ok Twinkie- If I've only EVER played vBrawl in my life, and someone introduces "mBrawl" to me, will I know how to play?

 

[Ghostbone]

Ok Twinkie- If I've only EVER played vBrawl in my life, and someone introduces "mBrawl" to me, will I know how to play?

You should know how to play BBrawl if you've played vBrawl as well.
Both "mBrawl" and BBrawl require some getting used to, but are almost the same game as vBrawl.
One is just even more competitive than the other.

 

[Dekar173]

You should know how to play BBrawl if you've played vBrawl as well.
Both "mBrawl" and BBrawl require some getting used to, but are almost the same game as vBrawl.
One is just even more competitive than the other.

Does BBrawl have ANY altered movesets? (the answer is yes)

Does "mBrawl" ? No, it doesn't. If I go back and forth from setup to setup (anti-trip and vanilla) I won't get ****ed up in my technical skill, period. You can transition seamlessly between the two, hell, you could watch a match and not even know the wii is hacked, because they are SO close to being the exact same game.

 

[Elyssa Xey Hexen]

One, surprised how long it took BPC to get here. Two, equally surprised how long it took for really, really long posts to start showing up for responses.

Also, is there a code out there that removes tripping only from dashing? Or does it apply to moves that cause tripping as well? Such as Kirby's Dair or Snake's Ftilt1 occasionally. I recall one didn't affect diddy's naners at all. That seems worth noting at the very least what parts of tripping.

 

[John12346]

There's only been one version of the "No Tripping" code AFAIK, and it's always removed tripping from dashing only. All attack moves and such that are capable of causing opponents to trip remain unaffected.

 

[Elyssa Xey Hexen]

Well, that solves one puzzlement I had. Now, I wonder if anyone will advocate in stanching the tripping from all moves other than diddy's bananas.

Does that have little affect on game play too?

 

[WindMajor]

Ok Twinkie- If I've only EVER played vBrawl in my life, and someone introduces "mBrawl" to me, will I know how to play?

Whether or not you'll know how to play mBrawl is irrelevant, because no matter how you try to word it, it won't change the fact that mBrawl is still different from vBrawl. For kicks though, I'll play your little game.

If the mBrawl you're talking about is just Brawl with no random trips then my answer would be the same as always: It'll play very similarly to vBrawl, but not the same.

The focus in certain skills are different between games, and the balance between games also changes, so one would obviously have to make adjustments to how they play.

Even if the games are sooooooooo similar to each other that the games are practically the same thing, it doesn't mean that the two games are the same thing. They don't play the same exact way, and that's why they will never stop being different.

 

[ElDominio]

I want to play with Smash Balls on if my opponent agrees to it.

 

[WindMajor]

I want to play hide and seek for Grand Finals if my opponent agrees.

 

[ElDominio]

I want to play hide and seek for Grand Finals if my opponent agrees.

That's too different from vBrawl, mine's better.

 

[Elyssa Xey Hexen]

I want to play hide and seek for Grand Finals if my opponent agrees.

I'm so glad some mods are lenient. It's more fun this way.

 

[felipe_9595]

OMFG nobody heres knows you can take out your sd card, and then reinsert it to activate the codes again o-o???? the "You have to reboot your wii to blabka... and delay blabla..." is completly unvalid, just boot the game with codes and extract your SD, then reinsert it when someone wants to play with no trip.

 

[ElDominio]

OMFG nobody heres knows you can take out your sd card, and then reinsert it to activate the codes again o-o???? the "You have to reboot your wii to blabka... and delay blabla..." is completly unvalid, just boot the game with codes and extract your SD, then reinsert it when someone wants to play with no trip.

No one's questioning it's easiness to implement, and it holds no value as to the argument that the game changes.

There's a reason they are run as side tournaments, and not as main events.

 

[Elyssa Xey Hexen]

It's still one less thing to worry about when setting up a tournament without having to bother around with hacks.

Edit: Response to the below quote. Dash dancing is not a good strategy because of tripping bah
Dash dancing in brawl sucks because there are no options to easily stop dashes without enduring stupid lag. Also, every character in brawl is allowed only a 6 frame window to pivot without having to enduring a slide animation. In melee characters had much longer windows than that, and the ability to stop the dashes without having to worry about sliding. Wavedashing or crouching took care of any helpless sliding animation where you cannot do anything.

 

[Ussi]

Neither does L-canceling. This is Super Smash Brothers Brawl, and it shouldn't be expected to play just like Melee. Dash-dancing isn't a good strategy in Brawl because of tripping, and that's the way the game is designed.

I don't want it to play like melee, i want playing brawl to be fun

 

[ElDominio]

I don't want it to play like melee, i want playing brawl to be fun

Then play Brawl.

If your idea of playing a fun "Brawl" is by removing tripping, then it's just the same if my idea of a fun Brawl to play with Smash balls on in coin mode (assuming my opponent agrees to it)

 

[Arcansi]

I'm talking about tournaments being held up because they would have to divide setups, and you're talking about why people would even want to play vBrawl in the first place.

See one of the 3-5 posts above you that refute this.

You want your sets to be determined by skill, not by random choice. But who said that everyone wants that? I certainly don't. I refuse to play Brawl without tripping. So now what? We have a conflict of interest, right? I guess we're back to my point. We have two different versions of Brawl available in the venue, and it's our turn to play vBrawl, but all the vBrawl setups are taken.

Cool, just take 1 min to make a non tripping wii tripping (if I was arguing for option, this would make more sense to me.)

On another note, you can avoid tripping. Don't dash. [/COLOR]

And you can avoid being Illogical

Stop Posting.

As far as I'm concerned, my point stands at "by doing X, we are opening the doors for Y to happen, BUT

Spoiler

and here's the important part

I'm not saying that Y will actually happen".

In other words, I'm making a simple prediction, a prediction based on how I see the Smash community react towards double standards.

Cool, we open the doors for more discussion that allows our game to grow as a game.

This is good, no?

Right now, just like how AZ said, we don't have gameplay-altering hacks allowed. This is to prevent people from saying, "Oh, but we have this hack available, why don't we add this one?". It's basically a zero-tolerance thing. We never allowed hacks, and therefore never will. However, the second we do allow hacks, people can call us out and say, "But you allowed this hack, why can't you allow this other one?". And pay attention to the italicized word (can). I'm not saying that they WILL do it, I'm just saying that the doors are opened

What I'm getting from this is 'O God people are gonna have to look at suggestions and do testing and maybe alter the game!?'

Ok, this is bad why?

and everybody is welcomed to do so.

I believe this as much as I believe people are welcomed to question MK's Legality.

COLOR="LightBlue"]You're missing the key difference between the two. Picking ports against a regular Brawl match via RPS is basically managing a variable that HAS to be dealt with, and that can affect the outcome of how you play one game (ie. vBrawl).

What I'm getting from you is "Well Sakurai said ports are manageable and tripping chance isn't, so we're going to listen."

Why, again?

Then play Brawl.

If your idea of playing a fun "Brawl" is by removing tripping, then it's just the same if my idea of a fun Brawl to play with Smash balls on in coin mode (assuming my opponent agrees to it)

What I'm getting from you is "If you want to eat raspberry pie instead of bluberry at the pie eating contest then I want to eat ice cream."

 

[ElDominio]

lolpost

First congrats on your reply full of questions. Amazing way to dodge an actual answer.

Cool, we open the doors for more discussion that allows our game to grow as a game.

This is good, no?

No.
It's a hacked up game, not Brawl. I think you missed the point.

What I'm getting from you is "If you want to eat raspberry pie instead of bluberry at the pie eating contest then I want to eat ice cream."

I tried a more relevant quote than TWiNK by using an example already in Brawl, but since you're intelligent.

First, check your lame argument. "If you want to eat raspberry pie instead of bluberry at the pie eating contest then I want to eat ice cream" doesn't translate to "If you can play with no tripping then I want to play with Smash Balls"

In fact, I'm still playing Brawl, so my idea would be even more viable.
But I'll play devil's advocate. What if in your pie eating contest me and my opponent agree on eating ice cream, are we still participating in a pie eating contest?

And just to use your pies, I'm %100 sure eating apple pie is very different from eating raspberry pie. We're still eating pies, is it fair that apple pie is easier to digest and I can eat more?

 

[Arcansi]

First congrats on your reply full of questions. Amazing way to dodge an actual answer.

Thanks for making fun of me as I attempt to make sure I'm getting the points correctly.

No.
It's a hacked up game, not Brawl. I think you missed the point.

You think we're playing brawl?

What about sudden death? Win conditions being ledgegrabs? Where do these appear in all the menus of brawl?

First, check your lame argument. "If you want to eat raspberry pie instead of bluberry at the pie eating contest then I want to eat ice cream" doesn't translate to "If you can play with no tripping then I want to play with Smash Balls on and in coin mode"

With coin mode on it certainly does. You've completely changed the win condition.

Don't appreciate you butchering your own quote to make your point good, though.

In fact, I'm still playing Brawl, so my idea would be even more viable.
But I'll play devil's advocate. What if in your pie eating contest me and my opponent agree on eating ice cream, are we still participating in a pie eating contest?

No. (I see where your going with this and I would like you to tell me where I said we were playing brawl.)

And just to use your pies, I'm %100 sure eating apple pie is very different from eating raspberry pie. We're still eating pies, is it fair that apple pie is easier to digest and I can eat more?

Because your opponent can too? Yes.

NOTE: Being 'easier to digest' does not translate to 'can eat more in one sitting' unless the sitting is so large you start to digest noticeable portions of the food.

 

[WindMajor]

See one of the 3-5 posts above you that refute this.

No.

I'm not gonna compensate for your laziness by guessing which posts you're referring to. Bring your points to me directly and explain them, or don't bring them up at all.

Cool, just take 1 min to make a non tripping wii tripping (if I was arguing for option, this would make more sense to me.)

I'm sure you know that the entire process for making sure if this setup has hacks or not can, and making the change if it does/doesn't can take well over a minute if the circumstances are right. A lot can go wrong to make the situation bumpy instead of smooth.

And even then, events like these can happen more than once, which means that it's possible for the minutes to stack up on you.

Even if the tournament doesn't get held up my much, it still gets held up, and can be tricky to manage at times. And that's not even the only problem with the entire ordeal of choice between games.

And you can avoid being Illogical

Stop Posting.

It's not illogical. The logic is sound. You can't trip out of a dash if you don't dash in the first place.

What I'm getting from you is "If you want to eat raspberry pie instead of bluberry at the pie eating contest then I want to eat ice cream."

Because eating ice cream instead of pie in a pie eating contest is completely fair, right?

And in there lies the point.



For the rest of your quotes, I don't feel like I have to answer anything cause I feel like I would be repeating myself. Two games under one tournament is bad, balancing with hacks should be off limits, yada yada yada, you get the point.

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

OMFG nobody heres knows you can take out your sd card, and then reinsert it to activate the codes again o-o???? the "You have to reboot your wii to blabka... and delay blabla..." is completly unvalid, just boot the game with codes and extract your SD, then reinsert it when someone wants to play with no trip.

Not true. GCT codes do not get scrapped when you remove the SD card; only files loaded with the File Patch Code revert.

 

[Arcansi]

No.

I'm not gonna compensate for your laziness by guessing which posts you're referring to. Bring your points to me directly and explain them, or don't bring them up at all.

Trying not to discuss things that have been gone over before, but w/e.

There's a way to simply put an sd card in a non-hacked wii and load it with no tripping only(or whatever other codesets you had like inf. replay and show tags)

Texture and music hax are not included whatsoever and no programs like homebrew are required afaik.

This is unrelated, but "No Tripping" has less enforceability issues than certain Brawl mods, like Plus, Minus, Balanced, and Project M.

- For the "No Tripping" code, you just load it up on each Wii, and you're good to go.
- For Brawl Mods, the SD Card needs to stay in the Wii for it to work properly, meaning that you need an extra SD Card for each extra Wii.

As far as my opinion, I think it probably would be better if we left the gameplay changing 1337 hax off, but I guess I'd be fine with it either way; I just wanted to point the above tidbit out.

I'm sure you know that the entire process for making sure if this setup has hacks or not can, and making the change if it does/doesn't can take well over a minute if the circumstances are right. A lot can go wrong to make the situation bumpy instead of smooth.

And even then, events like these can happen more than once, which means that it's possible for the minutes to stack up on you.

Even if the tournament doesn't get held up my much, it still gets held up, and can be tricky to manage at times. And that's not even the only problem with the entire ordeal of choice between games.

Yes, perhaps in a worst case scenario you could hold a tournament up for more then a negligible amount of time.

I don't see why this is reasonable to use as a point because it is a worst case scenario only. MK has a 0-death on every character, in a worst case scenario he breaks every matchup instantly. Under my logic there is 0 reason for him not to be banned.

It's not illogical. The logic is sound. You can't trip out of a dash if you don't dash in the first place.

You seem to have missed my point.

You can trip without dashing.

(I just realized this makes my post true. Funny.)

Because eating ice cream instead of pie in a pie eating contest is completely fair, right?

And in there lies the point.

No, which is why I would not play a match with smash balls on in coin mode.

Splendid point.

For the rest of your quotes, I don't feel like I have to answer anything cause I feel like I would be repeating myself. Two games under one tournament is bad, balancing with hacks should be off limits, yada yada yada, you get the point.

You...seem to think I'm arguing for the choice of it to be in a tourney set.

I'm not, although I'm cool with that option. I'm arguing it should be a choice for the tournament, if not mandatory. (useability issues prevent me from arguing mandatory.)

Also, that's not how an argument works. I have points, and unless you can refute them, they stand.

You don't want discussion that improves our game.

You don't want the ruleset people(and by extension, us. to have to look at suggestions and stuff.

And you think we should balance our game based on what Sakurai said it was OK to balance a game on.

I would be cool and refute these, but they already support my point.

 

[ElDominio]

I don't see why this is reasonable to use as a point because it is a worst case scenario only. MK has a 0-death on every character, in a worst case scenario he breaks every matchup instantly. Under my logic there is 0 reason for him not to be banned.

/strawman

You can trip without dashing.

Really? Please explain. Moves that trip don't count.

No, which is why I would not play a match with smash balls on in coin mode.

Why not? Both parties agreed to it! It's still Brawl!

You...seem to think I'm arguing for the choice of it to be in a tourney set.

I'm not, although I'm cool with that option. I'm arguing it should be a choice for the tournament, if not mandatory. (useability issues prevent me from arguing mandatory.)

Here's the deal. The OP said it was for a set. Maybe you haven't read it, so I'll highlight it for you.
It's being discussed about being allowed for a set. For an entire tournament it has always been allowed as a side, and if everyone would agree to it, for a tournament (wouldn't be Unity though)

Has this been your war all along?

 

[Arcansi]

/strawman

I'm not falsely representing the point in any way, simply attacking its validity with something valid, but other then what is usually used.

Really? Please explain. Moves that trip don't count.

Really, there are other red fruits then strawberrys? Tell me what! Other red fruits don't count. -_-.

Of course I meant moves that trip.

Why not? Both parties agreed to it! It's still Brawl!

It's uncompetitive.

Here's the deal. The OP said it was for a set. Maybe you haven't read it, so I'll highlight it for you.
It's being discussed about being allowed for a set. For an entire tournament it has always been allowed as a side, and if everyone would agree to it, for a tournament (wouldn't be Unity though)

Doesn't wouldn't be Unity mean it's not allowed under Unity ruleset?

 

[ElDominio]

First of all, the discussion is about allowing sets of a normal tourney have no tripping under agreement. If you get all entrants of a tournament to have no tripping, by all means go ahead, but then that tournament can't be used for Unity ruleset data (essentially making the tounament worthless)

About the moves that trip, TWiNK was talking about the trips that codes remove, aka dash tripping. Moves that trip are unnaffected by these codes.

 

[Shockna]

And just to use your pies, I'm %100 sure eating apple pie is very different from eating raspberry pie. We're still eating pies, is it fair that apple pie is easier to digest and I can eat more?

Tripping is like less Apple vs Raspberry, and more like the baker deciding to bake a razor blade into every tenth pie, and the TOs of the pie eating contest refusing to take the blades out because "If we took out the razor blades, it wouldn't be the pie the baker intended us to eat".

Tripping punishes proficiency, and rewards luck. That alone should be reason enough for it to go, all of this one-sided Nintendo worship be damned.

 

[Arcansi]

First of all, the discussion is about allowing sets of a normal tourney have no tripping under agreement. If you get all entrants of a tournament to have no tripping, by all means go ahead, but then that tournament can't be used for Unity ruleset data (essentially making the tounament worthless)

About the moves that trip, TWiNK was talking about the trips that codes remove, aka dash tripping. Moves that trip are unnaffected by these codes.

1. Cool, I'm arguing to make them not worthless, tyvm.

2. The quote that the eventual tripping thing derived from is "You can avoid tripping, don't dash".

This is not true.

3. Refute my points?

 

[ElDominio]

1. Cool, I'm arguing to make them not worthless, tyvm.

2. The quote that the eventual tripping thing derived from is "You can avoid tripping, don't dash".

This is not true.

3. Refute my points?

I'll refute your points when you answer me: Are you defending the idea of running no-trip tourneys or allowing people to activate no trip codes for certain sets in a normal tourney?

If the former, then I have nothing to discuss, since it's perfectly fine to have a completely no trip tournament.

Not no-trip sets in an otherwise normal tournament.

Tripping is like less Apple vs Raspberry, and more like the baker deciding to bake a razor blade into every tenth pie, and the TOs of the pie eating contest refusing to take the blades out because "If we took out the razor blades, it wouldn't be the pie the baker intended us to eat".

Tripping punishes proficiency, and rewards luck. That alone should be reason enough for it to go, all of this one-sided Nintendo worship be damned.

Sadly, this is not the case. You agree to eat the razor blade pie when you want to partake in that particular pie eating contest with razor blades.

If you want to have your own tournament where all the pies have no razor blades, by all means. But some people are purists and want to play in a razor blade infested tournament, so you can't deliberately go in that tourney and agree with your opponent to take out the razor blades, since it's not in the original idea of the tournament.

You can host your own blade free tournament though.
Understand yet?

 

[Tesh]

we should just ban the use of control sticks. people can move around by rolling oos with the cstick and the problem is solved.

 

[Arcansi]

I'll refute your points when you answer me: Are you defending the idea of running no-trip tourneys or allowing people to activate no trip codes for certain sets in a normal tourney?

If the former, then I have nothing to discuss, since it's perfectly fine to have a completely no trip tournament.

According to Unity it isn't. (Which means yes)

If you want to have your own tournament where all the pies have no razor blades, by all means. But some people are purists and want to play in a razor blade infested tournament, so you can't deliberately go in that tourney and agree with your opponent to take out the razor blades, since it's not in the original idea of the tournament.

You can host your own blade free tournament though.
Understand yet?

Unfortunatley, when you host your razor blade free contest, the national contest organizers will fail to recognize your contest due to the lack of razor blades.

This I find unfair and unfounded.

 

[Exdeath]

I want to play hide and seek for Grand Finals if my opponent agrees.

What is the difference?

 

[Tesh]

u guys make it sound like tripping is the only random thing in the game