Should King Dedede's infinite chaingrab be banned?

[adumbrodeus]

False.

---

The argument "there are no negatives" is completely false, I don't know why it keeps coming up all over the place. There are negatives. You are weakening one character in favor of another. If that is the mentality, then lets apply it to every match up (or even just the lopsided ones-Diddy can no longer use bananas against Captain Falco). We are playing a fighting game. Fighting games have tiers. Some characters just suck. Either switch characters (and use DK as a secondary) or get really freaking good.

If you ban Diddy Kong from using bananas you make probably an equal number of characters (if not more) viable as you would if you banned D3's CG, the difference is that the CG doesn't look as cool.

How'd you draw this out of my post? My suggestion was that the line between the two techs is arbitrary and neither is really bannable.


As for what I actually said, I haven't done it against DK, but I did it against Fox. Since DDD's infinite seems significantly easier then Pikachu's chaingrab, I don't see how this is not true.

but you DO know that adum is anti-ban right....?

VERY anti-ban.

 

[M15t3R E]

How'd you draw this out of my post? My suggestion was that the line between the two techs is arbitrary and neither is really bannable.


As for what I actually said, I haven't done it against DK, but I did it against Fox. Since DDD's infinite seems significantly easier then Pikachu's chaingrab, I don't see how this is not true.

AZ's post confused me as well. lolz

 

[AlphaZealot]

The "---" was supposed to designate that I was not replaying to your post, but simply commenting in general. Sigh.

 

[XxBlackxX]

Then AZ's points don't matter as well. I was simply replying to AZ's post. How about you ask him why he made that post in the first place instead of replying to it with "QFT"?

the part where he said "we're playing a fighting game. there are tiers. and some characters are just gonna suck and are unviable" or something to that extent. i agree with fully. also the part where he said you can't ban arbitrarily.

 

[M15t3R E]

The "---" was supposed to designate that I was not replaying to your post, but simply commenting in general. Sigh.

Was your point that banning Diddy's bananas is as fair as banning D3's infinite? If so, I cannot agree on that.

 

[adumbrodeus]

The "---" was supposed to designate that I was not replaying to your post, but simply commenting in general. Sigh.

Fair enough. Unfortunately, ot many people know that symbolism, what community/type of community does it come from anyway?



Regardless, why was my assertion false?

 

[-Wolfy-]

It just signifies that the two comments are unrelated, no?

 

[Tornadith]

The infinite is the reason why Donkey Kong has a red (Big Disadvantage) against DeDeDe. Are you saying that for every single red on here, we should do something to make it "fair"?

Spoiler

Sorry if I stretched the page

 

[XxBlackxX]

The infinite is the reason why Donkey Kong has a red (Big Disadvantage) against DeDeDe. Are you saying that for every single red on here, we should do something to make it "fair"?

Spoiler

Sorry if I stretched the page

uh i thought you were pro-ban lol?
anyways, of course not, i don't think any pro-ban person would suggest anything like that.

 

[RDK]

So, hindering competition doesn't matter. Only stopping competition as a whole matters, eh?

This is the problem. We'll never see eye to eye on this.

Any hitstun ever hinders competition by taking control away from your opponent for a given amount of time. Is that not what the infinite does?

I think we're done here.

 

[da K.I.D.]

mr. e. they are never going to get it. just take your free wins and leave it alone

 

[Xona]

The Dedede infinite leads to stage-bans too...

this......is like the worst argument...or maybe not, now that i think about it.

guess what kids? it doesn't matter about stages and whatnot, at the highest levels on play, DK vs. D3 is UNWINNABLE. so what? DEAL WITH IT. banning it on only certain stages is stupid.
we either ban it totally because it over-centralizes or breaks the game as a whole, or we don't ban it at all. there's no "middle ground" such as limiting # of grabs, banning it on certain stages, etc.
in this case, we don't ban it at all because it doesn't fit the criteria.


in what way is the infinite induce RANDOMNESS?
in what way does the infinite freeze the game/removes the character in any way?
explain or stopping pulling **** out of your ***

Argument 2: This banned stages. Walls, Walk-offs. Those stages are deemed "degenerate" because of this tactic. This tactic creates multiple unwinnable match-ups AND destroys the game on several stages. Banning a stage because of this is the equivalent of "Akuma is broken! Abandon game!!" Dedede's infinite should be banned if even a single stage would be banned because of it, especially since it creates unwinnable match-ups anyway. Would you rather have a.) 50% of the stages banned and 5 unwinnable match-ups, or no unwinnable match-ups and 37 % of stages banned? (37's still far too large in my oppinion) to Since we seem to prefer stage-banning, this tactic creates unwinnable match-ups on fd, fd must be banned! (HAHA!..., seriously, no. The Dedede chain-grab should be banned, not my least-favorite stage.)

It seems everyone quotes Sirlin here. Watch his video about shields and grabs in SSBB on sirlin.net and read the annotations. I'm pretty sure that it should tell everyone his position on this tactic.

 

[M15t3R E]

Any hitstun ever hinders competition by taking control away from your opponent for a given amount of time. Is that not what the infinite does?

I think we're done here.

You're comparing a situation in which you still have the ability to DI and will regain control over your character shortly to a situation in which you can be rendered immobile for well over a full minute.
=/=

mr. e. they are never going to get it. just take your free wins and leave it alone

You're right. I think we're done here.

 

[brinboy789]

The infinite is the reason why Donkey Kong has a red (Big Disadvantage) against DeDeDe. Are you saying that for every single red on here, we should do something to make it "fair"?

Spoiler

Sorry if I stretched the page

im pretty sure even without the infinite DK would be red, D3 has the smallstep CG on him.

 

[RDK]

You're comparing a situation in which you still have the ability to DI and will regain control over your character shortly to a situation in which you can be rendered immobile for well over a full minute.
=/=.

So then where do we draw the line? One minute? Two minutes? Three minutes?

Seems fairly arbitrary, unless you can come up with something objective.

 

[Surri-Sama]

Ban Kirby in smash64..he is cheap!!

ill say this in this topic till someone gets it ...


not you KoRo

 

[ArcPoint]

Why call it an infinite if people are forced to end it at 300 or whatever percent used by TOs?

 

[brinboy789]

Why call it an infinite if people are forced to end it at 300 or whatever percent used by TOs?

because technically, it CAN go on forever, however going past 300% will be considered stalling

 

[adumbrodeus]

mr. e. they are never going to get it. just take your free wins and leave it alone

We'll never get it, or you'll never get it.

I perfectly understand your argument and the motivations behind it, I could do a wonderful devil's advocate if I wanted to. I just happen to know that it's not a good idea, both theoretical and practical evidence have shown that it's a bad mentality.


I'm sorry, but this is a "you'll never get it" not "we'll never get it".

Argument 2: This banned stages. Walls, Walk-offs. Those stages are deemed "degenerate" because of this tactic. This tactic creates multiple unwinnable match-ups AND destroys the game on several stages. Banning a stage because of this is the equivalent of "Akuma is broken! Abandon game!!" Dedede's infinite should be banned if even a single stage would be banned because of it, especially since it creates unwinnable match-ups anyway. Would you rather have a.) 50% of the stages banned and 5 unwinnable match-ups, or no unwinnable match-ups and 37 % of stages banned? (37's still far too large in my oppinion) to Since we seem to prefer stage-banning, this tactic creates unwinnable match-ups on fd, fd must be banned! (HAHA!..., seriously, no. The Dedede chain-grab should be banned, not my least-favorite stage.)

Dude, that's the chaingrab. The chaingrab is FAR less broken then the infinite. Also, DDD isn't the only character that can chaingrab to death, a number of release grabs work the same way, including Marth's on several characters, and Yoshi's on quite a few.

Also, it's not the only thing that works like that with Walk-offs, Falco's laser lock is a 0-death too.

It seems everyone quotes Sirlin here. Watch his video about shields and grabs in SSBB on sirlin.net and read the annotations. I'm pretty sure that it should tell everyone his position on this tactic.

ummm, all he does is call it a "deadly technique", which is true. He also isn't fully aware of what the technique actually does. He calls it a "true infinite" against Bowser, which it NEVER is, and he doesn't note that it doesn't do anything to Mario, Luigi, and Samus until stupidly high percents.

Again, this is Sirlin, just because he thinks something is "gay" doesn't mean he won't use it if it's tournament legal, and won't advocate for it being tournament legal. The "this is so gay" is commentary as a game designer, because it's bad design.


Regardless, it doesn't matter, Sirlin's opinions are not the word of God.


The majority of his general insights into competitive gaming are VERY well researched, and proven by expirimental data. That's what validates his points, not the fact that he's Sirlin.

We don't listen to him about items because his opinion on that has neither.


Bottom line: Sirlin's stuff that highly backed up is worthwhile, but his opiinons aren't all necessarily worthwhile.

 

[ArcPoint]

because technically, it CAN go on forever, however going past 300% will be considered stalling

So one way or another, it stops at one point.

 

[Wylde]

Ban IC's Infinites, THEY ARE CHEAP, THEY MAKE EVERY CHARACTER UNUSABLE, BROKENZZ!!!!

 

[Sosuke]

Ban Kirby in smash64..he is cheap!!

wut?

DK at Sector Z is all I can say. >_>

 

[Luigi player]

It is ridiculous what people compare Dededes infinite to.

Seriously? Diddys bananas?

1. Every character can use them against Diddy (DK can't use an infinite against D3)
2. It doesn't create 100:0 matcups (not even 90:10) (DK vs D3 is 100:0)
3. They are no infinite that work at every % and guarantee a kill (D3s grab -> -1 stock)

I hate it when people then come up with: 1 revers aerial punch from Ganondorf is also -1 stock.
It is not only because of 0-death that always works. It is everything together.
-> 100:0 matchup, really easy to do, programmer oversight that should've never been in the game, a grab is probably the easiest thing Dedede can "hit" you with, it works all the time, it is a guaranteed KO (if you don't mess up)

It looks so stupid if people compare it to Ganons blabla. Who get's hit by that? That's a thing that happens much less than GaWs 9. It only happens if you aren't concentrating enough. You can shield it so ****ing easily. How often does it happen? And how often does Dedede get a grab? (I'd say the could happen once every 1000 matches, at best. And D3 grabs every character at least 5 times per stock)

IC don't match all those things. It is really hard to grab someone, and that makes a big difference (like everyone always says). I hope everyone agrees that if IC would have better grabrange (and also no Nana to rely on) it should be banned.

Well that's the case with D3. Just because it doesn't work on all characters... this is so stupid.

You can also not compare it to Fox vs Pikachu.
It is considered 90:10, which is really bad, but not that bad, it is NOT an infinite, it doesn't work at all percents, it doesn't guarantee a KO, it is harder to land.

Now if D3s grab would work up to 80 % it would still be bad for DK, but it would actually still be possible to win. If D3 wouldn't have that good grab range (like Pikachu or ICs) it would be easy to avoid since DK has really good range. DK can't do anything that can't get punished with a grab because the grabrange is so good.

A small step chaingrab would still be bad, but MUCH better than this, because DK could try to stay at the edge. Or near it. Or he could go on platforms.


-> this post does not necessary say "I want it banned". This post just says that all comparisons to it are stupid.

 

[IrArby]

ICs aren't ****** tournaments. D3s aren't either.

My Ike (that beat a few compotent Falcos) is completely unviable against a decent R.O.B. or MK. Ban edgeguarding? This is what pro-banners sound like. Its a fairly legit comparrisson. All D3 has to do is get a grab. Well all MK/R.O.B. has to do is get me off-stage which isn't difficult since I have no approach against either character.

Move on please.

Seriously, mastering new characters is not hard in this game. Pick up some one other than DK and stop *****ing about stupid crap like the ICs who are only viable because they can Infinite. The options are there for you to beat anyone and their character if you're willing to learn and yes the reality is that you may have to learn more than one character to do this. Deal . . .

 

[Luigi player]

ICs aren't ****** tournaments. D3s aren't either.

My Ike (that beat a few compotent Falcos) is completely unviable against a decent R.O.B. or MK. Ban edgeguarding? This is what pro-banners sound like.

Seriously, mastering new characters is not hard in this game. Pick up some one other than DK and stop *****ing about stupid crap like the ICs who are only viable because they can Infinite. The options are there for you to beat anyone and their character if you're willing to learn and yes the reality is that you may have to learn more than one character to do this. Deal . . .

Your comparisons suck too...

 

[IrArby]

Your comparisons suck too...

Just edited it. Please tell me how that sucks.

 

[TheUmbreonMonarchy]

It is ridiculous what people compare Dededes infinite to.

3. They are no infinite that work at every % and guarantee a kill (D3s grab -> -1 stock)

ICs. Problem is that it's so easy to CP the ICs; both in stages and in characters.

D3, you can counterpick stages and characters too, there's just not as many.

Rainbow Cruise, Norfair, Pokemon Stadium Melee, and a few others could be debated as decent D3 CPs if you use a character that can be both CG'd and infinted.

You can also not compare it to Fox vs Pikachu.
It is considered 90:10, which is really bad, but not that bad, it is NOT an infinite, it doesn't work at all percents, it doesn't guarantee a KO, it is harder to land.

In competitive aspects, though, it's -1 stock.

 

[adumbrodeus]

It is ridiculous what people compare Dededes infinite to.

Seriously? Diddys bananas?

1. Every character can use them against Diddy (DK can't use an infinite against D3)
2. It doesn't create 100:0 matcups (not even 90:10) (DK vs D3 is 100:0)
3. They are no infinite that work at every % and guarantee a kill (D3s grab -> -1 stock)

I hate it when people then come up with: 1 revers aerial punch from Ganondorf is also -1 stock.
It is not only because of 0-death that always works. It is everything together.
-> 100:0 matchup, really easy to do, programmer oversight that should've never been in the game, a grab is probably the easiest thing Dedede can "hit" you with, it works all the time, it is a guaranteed KO (if you don't mess up)

It looks so stupid if people compare it to Ganons blabla. Who get's hit by that? That's a thing that happens much less than GaWs 9. It only happens if you aren't concentrating enough. You can shield it so ****ing easily. How often does it happen? And how often does Dedede get a grab? (I'd say the could happen once every 1000 matches, at best. And D3 grabs every character at least 5 times per stock)

IC don't match all those things. It is really hard to grab someone, and that makes a big difference (like everyone always says). I hope everyone agrees that if IC would have better grabrange (and also no Nana to rely on) it should be banned.

Well that's the case with D3. Just because it doesn't work on all characters... this is so stupid.

You can also not compare it to Fox vs Pikachu.
It is considered 90:10, which is really bad, but not that bad, it is NOT an infinite, it doesn't work at all percents, it doesn't guarantee a KO, it is harder to land.

Now if D3s grab would work up to 80 % it would still be bad for DK, but it would actually still be possible to win. If D3 wouldn't have that good grab range (like Pikachu or ICs) it would be easy to avoid since DK has really good range. DK can't do anything that can't get punished with a grab because the grabrange is so good.

A small step chaingrab would still be bad, but MUCH better than this, because DK could try to stay at the edge. Or near it. Or he could go on platforms.


-> this post does not necessary say "I want it banned". This post just says that all comparisons to it are stupid.

Ok, what does 100:0 match-up mean?

Does it mean totally unwinnable, or a little more difficult then 95:5?

Also, would you classify your case against the infinite as a practical case or a theoretical one?

 

[Luigi player]

ICs aren't ****** tournaments. D3s aren't either.

My Ike (that beat a few compotent Falcos) is completely unviable against a decent R.O.B. or MK. Ban edgeguarding? This is what pro-banners sound like. Its a fairly legit comparrisson. All D3 has to do is get a grab. Well all MK/R.O.B. has to do is get me off-stage which isn't difficult since I have no approach against either character.

Move on please.

Seriously, mastering new characters is not hard in this game. Pick up some one other than DK and stop *****ing about stupid crap like the ICs who are only viable because they can Infinite. The options are there for you to beat anyone and their character if you're willing to learn and yes the reality is that you may have to learn more than one character to do this. Deal . . .

Your Ike will not be dead from one hit of them.

Edgeguarding? That is part of the games intended things. If it wasn't every stage would not have any holes. Also, your enemy has to get you offstage first. It is something compleeeeeeetely different. Do you know how easy it is to edgeguard Olimar? Now getting him offstage is the tricky part. D3 can do it everywhere, all the time, and it is a 100 % KO loss.

I don't main DK. And? I play him because he is part of "more characters". DK would be one of the best characters if it wasn't for D3s thing. No character in the game has such a bad matchup as DK vs Dedede. And that is only because of such a stupid oversight, that we could ban to have more character diversity (no matchups are thaaat bad normally).

ICs are not only viable because of their chaingrab. I don't know why everyone thinks that. Also, I have nothing against ICs chaingrab (infinite), since I can avoid it easily and they are beatable. If you would've played good ICs you'd know that everyone of them tries to grab you which happen really rarely. If they'd do something else (since getting the grab will happen not often) they would actually be good characters. The ICs have bad range, but high priority in their attacks. Since you have Nana the ICs have some of the most damaging attacks because they are 2. The infinite will not happen often and that is why they have to do something else most of the time. The ICs are also "grab-immune", since the other IC can get a free hit on your enemy, thus making them very special opponents for everyone.


I play very many characters relatively good, but DK becomes unviable because of the oversight that nobody needs. Good players don't need it anyway since everyone agrees that DK < D3 even without infinite. Worse players can now also beat you and that is my problem. Don't compare this to Falcon since he sucks against everyone and wouldn't be viable unless we ban everyone else. And also don't say "ban MKs dair plz ololololol", because if we ban the infinite, we don't ban an intended move. D3 will still be able to do everything he should be able to (grab and throw DK). With DK vs D3 we would only have to ban a stupid oversight. We wouldn't ban a whole character or a move. We would also not even ban his normal chaingrab which he should still be able to do. Dedede wouldn't get worse if we ban it, but DK would get better. Dedede only gets worse for players who aren't good (with him) and many people only use him against DK because it's a 100 % win.

That means you are helping worse players to defeat good players thus making DK unviable for everyone that wants to be good. Good players don't need the infinite anyway (at least that's what Yuna says).

 

[Xyro77]

yeah because whatever you think is the right thing right?

/sarcasm

nope. Yuna and the people like him are going about this subject totaly wrong.

Why do you continue to post in this thread then? >_>

cause i like to see wha HIVE posts.

 

[XxBlackxX]

Edgeguarding? That is part of the games intended things. If it wasn't every stage would not have any holes. Also, your enemy has to get you offstage first. It is something compleeeeeeetely different. Do you know how easy it is to edgeguard Olimar? Now getting him offstage is the tricky part. D3 can do it everywhere, all the time, and it is a 100 % KO loss.

remember, ease of use and how the game was intended to be played are not good arguments >_>
sakurai may have wanted us to play with all items on high, who knows, that doesn't mean our rules should reflect how the game was intended to be played.

I don't main DK. And? I play him because he is part of "more characters". DK would be one of the best characters if it wasn't for D3s thing. No character in the game has such a bad matchup as DK vs Dedede. And that is only because of such a stupid oversight, that we could ban to have more character diversity (no matchups are thaaat bad normally).

no one cares if without it, DK would be good or not. a lot of characters in brawl are partially unviable and suffer from horrible matchups, what makes DK so special that we need to give him handicaps? and it doesn't matter if it's an oversight or not, it's IN THE GAME so DEAL WITH IT.

ICs are not only viable because of their chaingrab. I don't know why everyone thinks that. Also, I have nothing against ICs chaingrab (infinite), since I can avoid it easily and they are beatable. If you would've played good ICs you'd know that everyone of them tries to grab you which happen really rarely. If they'd do something else (since getting the grab will happen not often) they would actually be good characters. The ICs have bad range, but high priority in their attacks. Since you have Nana the ICs have some of the most damaging attacks because they are 2. The infinite will not happen often and that is why they have to do something else most of the time. The ICs are also "grab-immune", since the other IC can get a free hit on your enemy, thus making them very special opponents for everyone.

yes, the IC's infinites are very hard to set-up, blah ,blah. this has to do with what? just because D3's are easier doesn't make them more banworthy.

I play very many characters relatively good, but DK becomes unviable because of the oversight that nobody needs.

DK is unviable. **** like that happens in competitive games.DEAL WITH IT. we don't ban arbitrarily to make more characteres viable.

Good players don't need it anyway since everyone agrees that DK < D3 even without infinite. Worse players can now also beat you and that is my problem. Don't compare this to Falcon since he sucks against everyone and wouldn't be viable unless we ban everyone else. And also don't say "ban MKs dair plz ololololol", because if we ban the infinite, we don't ban an intended move. D3 will still be able to do everything he should be able to (grab and throw DK). With DK vs D3 we would only have to ban a stupid oversight. We wouldn't ban a whole character or a move. We would also not even ban his normal chaingrab which he should still be able to do. Dedede wouldn't get worse if we ban it, but DK would get better. Dedede only gets worse for players who aren't good (with him) and many people only use him against DK because it's a 100 % win.

what? in what way is the infinite an "unintended" move? also, yes, at the highest level of play, this is gonna be unwinnable for DK. deal with it.

That means you are helping worse players to defeat good players thus making DK unviable for everyone that wants to be good. Good players don't need the infinite anyway (at least that's what Yuna says).

guess, what? a "good" DK will NEVER play this matchup in the first place. he should know that he has to CP or pick a different main. CP is PART of competitive gaming. DEAL WITH IT. so what if "good" players don't need the infinite? that's not why we ban things either. you really need to understand more about competitive gaming before posting random stuff like this.

@xyro

no, it is abosolutely the correct approach. brawl is a competitive game, people, this kinda of stuff hapens. deal with it.

 

[gantrain05]

Any hitstun ever hinders competition by taking control away from your opponent for a given amount of time. Is that not what the infinite does?

I think we're done here.

this statement here means that RDK believes that Brawl > Melee as far as competetiveness, melee has too much hitstun, so that hinders competition waaay too much lolz.

 

[da K.I.D.]

adum.

dont patronise me, I could argue your side just as good or even better than you can.. and the fact that I am fully aware of both sides means that my opinion is just as valid as yours, it sounds like you are saying you are right because you are smarter than me...

get that mess outta here.

having all the information doesnt mean jack if you still cant come up to the proper conclusion.

also, rofl @ gantrain. Too true!!!

 

[Xyro77]

@xyro

no, it is abosolutely the correct approach. brawl is a competitive game, people, this kinda of stuff hapens. deal with it.

you havnt been around smash as long as i have(and you dont know much) so i wont get angry with you.


You people throw out this stupid notion that these 6 characters have to placed top 4 to be considered viable. Thats stupid and rather shallow. Nothing can be argued further untill you people drop that notion

 

[da K.I.D.]

lol black just got xyropwned...

 

[XxBlackxX]

you havnt been around smash as long as i have(and you dont know much) so i wont get angry with you.


You people throw out this stupid notion that these 6 characters have to placed top 4 to be considered viable. Thats stupid and rather shallow.

when did any CREDIBLE anti-ban person EVER say that in this debate.....?

it was NEVER one of the anti-ban's arguments.

EDIT: in fact, we didn't even bring up the notion of unviability.
the pro-ban people who the ones who brought up how this should be banned because DK and bowser are unviable. i only use it because i didn't want to argue that, which is beside the point. unviable or not, this still doesn't over-centralize or break the game as a whole, nor does it induce randomness/luck, nor does it prevents competition entirely. it doesn't fit the criteria, therefore no ban was the MAIN anti-ban argument.

@gantrain look ^
the pro-ban people were who brought up unviablility. we didn't.
also, even with infinites, i believe DK and Bowser are NOT completely unviable.

 

[gantrain05]

you havnt been around smash as long as i have so i wont get angry with you.


You people throw out this stupid notion that these 6 characters have to placed top 4 to be considered viable. Thats stupid and rather shallow.

i agree with xyro, why does it have to be only high ranked chars that are considered viable? you don't have to have good matchups against the entire cast, or at least the majority of the cast to be considered viable, i main peach, and no more than 3 months ago, nobody believed peach was a viable character, she was considered one of the low mid tier characters, she's viable now. to be honest, i believe the majority of the cast are considered viable. with the exception of ganon/falcon, even link has tools to deal with just about anything. i forgot where i was going with this, but some peoples definition of viable just astounds me.

 

[da K.I.D.]

same goes for sonic.

he has like 5 matches in his favor in the entire game, but he gets results

 

[bobson]

You people throw out this stupid notion that these 6 characters have to placed top 4 to be considered viable. Thats stupid and rather shallow. Nothing can be argued further untill you people drop that notion

No one on anti-ban's brought that up, actually, aside from the random clods who show up with one post and then leave.

 

[Boxob.]

RDK's a scrub, don't mind him.

There's a major difference between DDD's and IC's infinites.

Let's, for this time being, forget about counterpicking, both stage and characters.

Which is more fair? DK VS DDD? Or DK VS IC's?

The obvious answer is VS IC's, this is also the correct answer. But, let's forget about the difficulty of the techniques. Let's just say they can infinite you.

But wait, here's a flaw in this logic, you can DI OUT OF ONE OF THE CHARACTERS INFINITES.

Guess who's?

You don't have to answer that.

What I'm saying is that an infinite shouldn't be banned permitted it is escapable under some condition. IC's shouldn't be banned not because of the difficulty, but because you can get out of it. DDD's on the otherhand, is broken, you cannot escape it once inside it, and that is anti competitive in nature.