Should King Dedede's infinite chaingrab be banned?

[Blad01]

In case you haven't noticed, Brawl sucks in the balance department.

And if we have a chance to balance it a bit, shouldn't we take it ?

The real question is :

Do you want to make this game a bit less unbalanced (by banning what is very probably a glitch...), and thus more competitive; and give up your "Playing to win" rhetoric ?
Or do you want to categorically obey to this way of thinking, what leads to accept a glitch that seriously damage the metagame of 5 characters (or 2 if you have godly hands) ?

 

[cutter]

And if we have a chance to balance it a bit, shouldn't we take it ?

The real question is :

Do you want to make this game a bit less unbalanced (by banning what is very probably a glitch...), and thus more competitive; and give up your "Playing to win" rhetoric ?
Or do you want to categorically obey to this way of thinking, what leads to accept a glitch that seriously damage the metagame of 5 characters (or 2 if you have godly hands) ?

If this is the case... why didn't we do this with Melee? Why are people complaining about this in Brawl all of a sudden?

The infinites do not "seriously damage" the metagame of the infinite victims. As for the godly hands part, you just need to learn efficient button mashing. Simple as that.

 

[Blad01]

If this is the case... why didn't we do this with Melee? Why are people complaining about this in Brawl all of a sudden?

I wasn't here, so i can't tell you. I believe Wobbling was banned, and that there was no such standing infinites in Melee, on a Top Tier character.
And i don't think that an argument based on very recent history (> Melee rules) is a good one. Afterall, we can still act on it.

The infinites do not "seriously damage" the metagame of the infinite victims. As for the godly hands part, you just need to learn efficient button mashing. Simple as that.

Well yes it does. When you main, say, DK, you can't deal with DDD... You know, he's top tier (that could change), and pretty popular. So yes, having an impossible match-up against a Top Tier is a serious damage to the character's metagame.

 

[XxBlackxX]

I wasn't here, so i can't tell you. I believe Wobbling was banned, and that there was no such standing infinites in Melee, on a Top Tier character.
And i don't think that an argument based on very recent history (> Melee rules) is a good one. Afterall, we can still act on it.

again, if it WORKED in the past, (and let me remind you, this is NOT only for melee, the ban criteria we speak if was used in just about ALL competitive fighting games), why SHOULD we change it? yes, we CAN, but why do we need to change what worked in the past?

Well yes it does. When you main, say, DK, you can't deal with DDD... You know, he's top tier (that could change), and pretty popular. So yes, having an impossible match-up against a Top Tier is a serious damage to the character's metagame.

okay. so DK will suck because of the infinite. that's....too bad. we don't care. "unviable" characters happen in competitive fighting games. deal with it.

 

[Blad01]

again, if it WORKED in the past, (and let me remind you, this is NOT only for melee, the ban criteria we speak if was used in just about ALL competitive fighting games), why SHOULD we change it? yes, we CAN, but why do we need to change what worked in the past?

How banning the standing infinite won't "work" ?
This argument isn't good at all : What you say is "It worked in the past. Yeah, it could work if we changed it. But it worked before. But it could work".
I fail to see how conservatism is a good argument.

And anyways what doesn't "work" to me is to accept a glitch that permit a character to get 300% from a grab. It's not competitive at all.

okay. so DK will suck because of the infinite. that's....too bad. we don't care. "unviable" characters happen in competitive fighting games. deal with it.

DK is totally viable without this infinite. The ban of this glitch would make him viable, and make the best player win in a DK vs DDD battle : Isn't the goal of competition ? (DDD: DK would be 60:40 though).

How the ban of this standing infinite would have a negative effect on the competition ? Please explain me, because besides your rhetoric (i want to say sophism), i don't see any reason NOT to ban it.

 

[Titanium Dragon]

If you were a competitive player, you'd understand the criteria for banning. Guess what?

If you are saying "ban DeDeDe's infinites", you're actually saying "I want to ban DeDeDe". Why? Because a ban on his infinites are unenforcable, because it'd involve throw counting, which is unrealistic, unreliable, and there simply is insufficient staffing to do it.

DeDeDe does not need to be banned. Period, end of report. He doesn't dominate the game overly, and he adds to it, not subtracts from it.

 

[adumbrodeus]

Thanks for the back up but these kids are 06-08 members....they dont know much. And then you have the liberal dem yuna......where can i start with him?

...

You call US ignorant and you don't know your main doesn't get infinited until percents when it doesn't effect the match-up at all?

I'm sorry, that's not cool, you're doing a massive and very stupid generalization. Through-out the thread many '06, '07, and '08 members showed enormous knowledge of the finer points of the game and about competitive gaming in general.



Sure, it's fine to present a person as not knowledgeable if they PROVE it, but calling a person not knowledgeable due to any other criteria is an argumentium ad hominem logical fallacy.

Don't do it, please.

They dont get that DDD still has a MASSIVE advantage(70-30 or even 80-20) on those 6 even without the ICG. They just want to make it a n00b proof matchup by allowing a tech that a 6 year old can do. In other words, they want to PREVENT the 6 from ever having a CHANCE(slight as it may be) of winning the match up.

2, at or before 127 at least mario, luigi, and samus can break out.

Look, we don't want to DO anything.

We just don't think it's ok to ban something just because it "noob proofs" a match-up.

They dont get that some people actually WANT to help the community and increase thier characters place on the tier list. People such as bum/neo/dire/gimpy/chu(yes ICs were once low tier) all got recognized by thier low tier and not there other characters. By allowing this broken trash in brawl, people LIKE them(bum/xyro/ mr.3000/deva) will never bring thier chars up the tier list in this game. But hey, you guys dont get that.

Really, that's a complaint that you have to take to the game designers, we didn't miss the fact that the character with the longest non-tether grab range has a grab with set knockback, and thus has several chaingrabs and an infinite.


The problem is, banning is a very extreme measure. It can't really take into account overall balance because the options are limited. In essence, it's like trying to dig a 2'x2' hole with a bulldozer. That's why, if the game is made one way, we try to leave it that way as much as possible.


In short, WE'RE NOT TRYING TO DO ANYTHING to any of the match-ups. The development team already noob-proofed bowser and Dk's match-ups. We just don't think the nuclear option is justified.

They dont get that placing top 4 is nearly impossible with top 6 (when tourneys have mass amounts of pro entrants) so they consider them unviable. This is not melee(sadly), so the standards should be a tad bit different(placing top 9 with low tier is still amazing) they dont get that.

*bolding added.

That's really the rub isn't it. This isn't melee, this game is designed far worse for competitive play. As much as we may want it to be melee, it will never be melee, and the only way to make it remotely like melee is to ban so much content that Marth's fair becomes bannable.

Or hack.

Over all, they just want you to "deal with it" and just CP more.....and sadly the game will grow at a MUCH more slow pace. That is why you must take it apon yourself and do the correct thing by getting rid of the BROKEN things(at your events and in your area) because the SBR is completly terrible when it comes to doing what is right.

Which is true, but unfortunately, that does not justify the nuclear option.

You are using criteria that works on other games. Smash(all 3 games) are different than ANY OTHER fighting game therfore it needs to have a different criteria. I for one recommend we use COMMON SENSE....but obviously this thread doesnt have it.

The criteria is built for competitive gaming in general. It's just as applicable for starcraft as Street Fighter.

Im not asking for the ban to be activated so samus can climb the ladder. Its still a MEGA MEGA hard match-up to win....however, it would be POSSIBLE for her to win if the tech is banned. if the tech is left legal....there is no hope of winning.......the only thing left would be a lucky trip on ddd so i could get a KO.

It seriously doesn't matter at all to Samus in the long run. As this break-out becomes more known it will be considered a fundamental tech skill for samus players, more so then even l-canceling was in melee.

you can still small step chain grab to increase percentage until that 130.

Not really, they slide too far for that to work, except DK (who this doesn't apply) and Bowser (who again, this doesn't apply).

I'm starting to think that the sliding has something to do with the move getting stale.

But Luigi can't even be chaingrabed period. Dthrow, pummel, drthrow, pummel,... is DDD's only option on him, and only at over 127.

and yes i understand that you COULD break out of it before 130% but be realistic, 9 out of 10 times it doesnt happen. In fact 9 out of 10 people cant do it on command no matter who grabs who. If it wernt true this thread wouldnt have been made.

its like saying foxs wave shine against walls(melee) shouldnt be banned be banned because once hu upsmashes you can tech...........honestly, 99% of people cant tech that.


be realistic

The reason people don't break out is that they don't know they can or how OR haven't practiced it enough.

Really, it's a good general skill to have for any character.

But since this "infinite" is non-situational in the least and a deathgrab, and destroys their match-ups, this tech skill is fundamental to all players of the affected characters, this should probably be one of the first skills learned and practiced by mains of those characters.

Remember, a lot of people can already break out of a single pummel at 60% (which DRASTICALLY reduces the effectiveness of the move), just improving upon using a superior method (again, Magus' method comes to mind) should improve that, and ultimately render it mostly ineffectual.


Really, it's a matter of priorities, if you're dealing with something that destroys your character, and you find a counter, no matter how difficult it is, if it's humanly possible learning it should be your top priority.

Believe me, Ganondorf and Falcon mains and secondaries with give their right arms for something to even out the MK or Marth match-ups.


Banning something that it just takes tech skill to counter is fundamentally scrubbish.

People like you are unhealthy to the community. Your type of thinking helps tournament variety go down to what happened in melee(only 5 characters show up to tournaments).

All im for is giving ****ty characters a chance while not changing the match up. and banning the ICG does not make the matchup in favor of samus.

No true scotsman fallacy...

If the game has 5 viable characters, unfortunately that is that.

with a sig and a username like yours....im sure you can.

with a join date like yours, im sure you can.

with no vids to prove what you just said, im sure you can.

Then learn to pull it off.

I'm sorry Xyro, but one of the reasons why I prefer Melee is because I think the lack of tech skill has made the community lazy, and the fact that people include Samus in the "infinited" group is evidence of this.

Like I said earlier, the anti-ban side needs to be less concerned with the finer points of debate and rhetoric and the fundamentals of persuasive writing, and just ask themselves simple question:

Does banning the infinite make sense?

The answer is yes. Atlantic North banned it - they're top players weren't obsessed with stupid courtroom arguments, they just did what made sense. And OMG, look, Brawl is doing just fine in that region, it hasn't degenerated into a slippery slope of technicalities and bans.

IF the majority of the community places a high value on tourney character diversity, THEN we as a community should take appropriate steps to preserve that diversity. It's part of what makes competitive brawl fun.

BAN DDD's INFINITE. IT'S SIMPLE AND EASY. JUST DO IT.

Stupid courtroom arguments?!

Dude, we're dealing with RULES here, we have to think like lawyers because it's the SAME THING that they deal with.


Furthermore, many things about Atlantic North's rulesets have degraded to the point that I think my region is an example of WHY NOT to ban this.

All infinites are banned, this includes ICs, grab release, etc. This means that ICs become less viable, as people already noted. Here's the ironic thing, ICs counter DDD, the less viable they are, the more DDD dominates the tournament scene. Since he hard counters most of the infinited characters anyway, that makes them LESS viable overall.


But that's not even the worst issue, the bans are not discrete and enforcable. In other words, it just specifies in general that infinites are banned, it doesn't specify what actions are banned.

The obvious problem with this is, you don't know what is tournament legal. 1 drthow on DK then regrab? You might get kicked. IC's chaingrab? You might get kicked.

I particularly LOVE this ruleset:

http://www.smashboards.com/showthread.php?t=211456

* Any attempt at lame tactics will result in a warning. Any further attempt at lame tactics will result in forfeit.
These tactics include, but are not limited to:
-Stalling under a stage.
-Running away to run the time limit. (Excessively. If there's 30 seconds, and you bail, that's one thing. But if you waste 5 minutes, or be a jerk about it, we're stopping the match. It's at the judge's discretion.)

"Lame tactics"?

For God's sake man, this is COMPETITIVE GAMING? What's lame, spamming Falco's laser? Throwing? You could get tossed out of a match for ANYTHING and the judge would be totally justified in doing it.


Not to mention that running away is already limited by stages, we already ban a ton of stages to prevent just that for an infinite stall.



PS. If you're reading this, sorry to single you out Inui, but you have to admit that was very poor wording.

 

[XxBlackxX]

How banning the standing infinite won't "work" ?

huh?

DK is totally viable without this infinite. The ban of this glitch would make him viable, and make the best player win in a DK vs DDD battle : Isn't the goal of competition ? (DDD: DK would be 60:40 though).

no...1st of all, who cares if it's a glitch or not, it's still not banworthy.
2nd of all, that logic is extremely flawed. do you think the "best player" will win in a fox vs. pika matchup if the better player is fox? do you think the "best player" will win in a CF vs. MK matchup?
the ONLY way to make it completely "fair" is to ban everyone except one char and every stage except 1 stage. that's just stupid.
also, it is still "fair" to the players. before a match, each player CHOSES their character. some characters will be good, some will suck. DK is a character that sucks, yes, just because of one extremely horrible matchup. deal with it. if a player CHOSES DK, then they suffer the counsequences if he faces a D3. simple as that.
we don't ban things to increase number of viable characters.

 

[cutter]

Ok... I'm probably just going to upload a video tomorrow at breaking grabs at high percents to support the fact you CAN break out of one pummel at over 100%.

 

[Blad01]

huh?

Hu what ? Answer to the rest of my post.

no...1st of all, who cares if it's a glitch or not, it's still not banworthy.

Well at least we can't say that developpers wanted it in the game.

2nd of all, that logic is extremely flawed. do you think the "best player" will win in a fox vs. pika matchup if the better player is fox? do you think the "best player" will win in a CF vs. MK matchup?

Unfortunately no. Can you make something to balance these match-ups ? Give a disadvantage to the pikachu player, ban chaingrabs ? No, theses solutions are dumb and difficult to apply.
But can we balance a bit more the DK vs DDD match-up by example ? At least not making it 0:100 ? Yes, very easily by banning this stupid standing infinite.

If you were a competitive player, you'd understand the criteria for banning. Guess what?

If you are saying "ban DeDeDe's infinites", you're actually saying "I want to ban DeDeDe". Why? Because a ban on his infinites are unenforcable, because it'd involve throw counting, which is unrealistic, unreliable, and there simply is insufficient staffing to do it.

DeDeDe does not need to be banned. Period, end of report. He doesn't dominate the game overly, and he adds to it, not subtracts from it.

What the hell are you talking about ? Banning DDD's standing infinite would only involve banning... guess what... Consecutives throws when he's standing still. He could still chaingrab.

the ONLY way to make it completely "fair" is to ban everyone except one char and every stage except 1 stage. that's just stupid.

Welll... When we think about it, it's not so dumb. But difficult to apply, and most of all boring.

also, it is still "fair" to the players. before a match, each player CHOSES their character. some characters will be good, some will suck. DK is a character that sucks, yes, just because of one extremely horrible matchup. deal with it. if a player CHOSES DK, then they suffer the counsequences if he faces a D3. simple as that.
we don't ban things to increase number of viable characters.

Lol "deal with it". the only thing the anti-ban can say in this debate apparently.

Why shouldn't we "ban things to increase number of viable caracters" ? If we can easily make a game more competitve (= more fair), why shouldn't we do it ?

 

[RDK]

And if we have a chance to balance it a bit, shouldn't we take it ?

The real question is :

Do you want to make this game a bit less unbalanced (by banning what is very probably a glitch...), and thus more competitive; and give up your "Playing to win" rhetoric ?
Or do you want to categorically obey to this way of thinking, what leads to accept a glitch that seriously damage the metagame of 5 characters (or 2 if you have godly hands) ?

Your understanding of the situation is juvenile at best--we've been over the glitch argument a million times, so I'm not even going to dignify this with a response.

In any case, the second one. That's how competitive fighters work.

DK is totally viable without this infinite. The ban of this glitch would make him viable, and make the best player win in a DK vs DDD battle : Isn't the goal of competition ? (DDD: DK would be 60:40 though).

How is DK not viable with the infinite unbanned? He's definetely viable--just not against D3. Pick someone else.

Seriously, you guys are just rehashing arguments. Give it up already; you lost.

How the ban of this standing infinite would have a negative effect on the competition ? Please explain me, because besides your rhetoric (i want to say sophism), i don't see any reason NOT to ban it.

We don't ban things because there's no downside, we ban things because they violate competitive principles. The infinite doesn't, so there's no reason to ban it.

Well at least we can't say that developpers wanted it in the game.

What? Why? Did you go over to Nintendo HQ and ask them yourself?

Stop using inane arguments.

Unfortunately no. Can you make something to balance these match-ups ? Give a disadvantage to the pikachu player, ban chaingrabs ? No, theses solutions are dumb and difficult to apply.
But can we balance a bit more the DK vs DDD match-up by example ? At least not making it 0:100 ? Yes, very easily by banning this stupid standing infinite.

For the millionth time, this is not why we ban things. If it was the SBR's job to fix every single matchup to make it more fair, then this is the least of their problems.

What the hell are you talking about ? Banning DDD's standing infinite would only involve banning... guess what... Consecutives throws when he's standing still. He could still chaingrab.

Not only is this a waste of the TO's time and effort, but it's arbitrary and subjective.

Lol "deal with it". the only thing the anti-ban can say in this debate apparently.

Once you start realizing the validity of the statement maybe we'll stop saying it.

You pro-bies have really thick heads.

 

[XxBlackxX]

Well at least we can't say that developpers wanted it in the game.

so? who knows/cares what the developers WANTED us to play like.
for all we know, sakurai wanted us to play with all items on high, should we do that just because that's what the developers' wanted?

Unfortunately no. Can you make something to balance these match-ups ? Give a disadvantage to the pikachu player, ban chaingrabs ? No, theses solutions are dumb and difficult to apply.
But can we balance a bit more the DK vs DDD match-up by example ? At least not making it 0:100 ? Yes, very easily by banning this stupid standing infinite.

but the infinite, you see, doesn't fit the criteria for a ban. it doesn't over-centralize or break the game as a whole, nor does it prevent competition altogether. this criteria was used in almost all competitive fighting games, producing healthy metagames, despite "unviable" characters and ****ty matchups. why should brawl be any different. why should brawl be any scrubbier?

Lol "deal with it". the only thing the anti-ban can say in this debate apparently.

yes, in ALL COMPETITIVE FIGHTING GAMES, this kinda stuff happens. but none of them banned anything like this. if a character sucks, too bad, don't use them!

Why shouldn't we "ban things to increase number of viable caracters" ? If we can easily make a game more competitve (= more fair), why shouldn't we do it ?

you know what ELSE could make the game more competitive? banning every character except 1 and every stage except 1. then, the game would be as competitive as it gets. skill decides everything.
a lot of things aren't fair in competitive games, but as long as they don't over-centralize or break the game as a whole, they don't need to be banned.

 

[Surri-Sama]

fools still saying 100:0 for DDD


LOL

 

[da K.I.D.]

And if we have a chance to balance it a bit, shouldn't we take it ?

The real question is :

Do you want to make this game a bit less unbalanced (by banning what is very probably a glitch...), and thus more competitive; and give up your "Playing to win" rhetoric ?
Or do you want to categorically obey to this way of thinking, what leads to accept a glitch that seriously damage the metagame of 5 characters (or 2 if you have godly hands) ?

this is very important, reposted because it is the entire debate.

@black
yesterday you said you were quittin this argument, it sounds like you are contradicting yourself again, roflmao. but maybe you only said you were quitting for the night, either way, you cant walk away, arguing this is like crack to you isnt it?

 

[RDK]

this is very important, reposted because it is the entire debate.

That's already been answered a million times. Why are you reposting it?

It's not even a neutral assessment of the situation. If anything, it's a loaded question in the pro-bies favor.

You all need to learn how competitive fighting games work.

 

[XxBlackxX]

this is very important, reposted because it is the entire debate.

@black
yesterday you said you were quittin this argument, it sounds like you are contradicting yourself again, roflmao. but maybe you only said you were quitting for the night, either way, you cant walk away, arguing this is like crack to you isnt it?

first of all, all those we've answered more than a hundred times, second, i didn't contradict myself anytime, last night i said i was done for the night, also, you misunderstanding my use of the word "broken"in completely different contexts =/= i was contradicting myself.

coming in this thread and pointing out random, unrelated, useless stuff is like crack to you isn't it?

 

[da K.I.D.]

i reposted it because the answer if different for different people.


and what makes you think i dont know how fighters work? because i disagree with you?
you should learn to stop generalising.

and just because its supposedly how ALL fighters work, that doesnt make it right, that sounds like an appeal to authority. instead of leaning on other games like a crutch why dont you look at THIS game

@black
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tPkZafRakOI
the black dude is me and the pipe is you and this thread...

 

[XxBlackxX]

and just because its supposedly how ALL fighters work, that doesnt make it right, that sounds like an appeal to authority. instead of leaning on other games like a crutch why dont you look at THIS game

no. it's not even close to appeal to authority.
it's sticking with what worked in the past. there's no reason to make THIS game any scrubbier than other games.

 

[da K.I.D.]

i thought it already was?

everyone smack talks brawl like its the scrubbiest fight ever...

also, check my edit

 

[RDK]

i reposted it because the answer if different for different people.


and what makes you think i dont know how fighters work? because i disagree with you?
you should learn to stop generalising.

and just because its supposedly how ALL fighters work, that doesnt make it right, that sounds like an appeal to authority. instead of leaning on other games like a crutch why dont you look at THIS game

I'm not appealing to authority at all; I'm appealing to logical principles used for all competitive fighting games. It's universal.

You want so badly for Brawl to be a serious fighting game, and yet you don't want it to act like one. How is that consistent?

i thought it already was?

everyone smack talks brawl like its the scrubbiest fight ever...

also, check my edit

Brawl is only scrubby because people like you advocate for scrubby ban criteria.

It doesn't have to be scrubby, but you guys are doing a hell of a job making it so.

 

[XxBlackxX]

@black
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tPkZafRakOI
the black dude is me and the pipe is you and this thread...

lol

first thing anyone posted in this thread that was remotely funny.

seriously though, RDK is right, the pro-baners want to make brawl a more "competitive" game, but at the same time ignore the principles of competitive gaming.

 

[Surri-Sama]

grats on 250+ pages of people saying

DDD chain r too good

vs.

NO it r not!


to put it simply, the right answer has already come up, people just ignore it and move on with the argument...D:

 

[Brinzy]

If we can easily make a game more competitve (= more fair)

adding fairness =/= adding competitiveness and vice-versa.

Can we get more pro-ban arguments that don't boil their reasons down to some love & justice bull****?

to put it simply, the right answer has already come up, people just ignore it and move on with the argument...D:

Post the right answer again to refresh/enlighten the minds of those who don't know it.

 

[HeroMystic]

DDD chain r too good

vs.

NO it r not!

Reminds you of a certain Metaknight topic, eh?

 

[Luigi player]

second, walk-offs and walls could be abused by more than just D3's CG's, for example falco's laserlock. also, those were universal. one-grab, one-stock applied to EVERYONE. therefore, it over-centralized around characters who could abuse those stages better, is that so hard to understand?
and third, ive already stated this, we don't ban things to make more viable characters.

You can smash DI any "lock" to go to the other side of your enemy. Everyone has some locks so it isn't character specific and gives certain ones huge advantages against others.

One grab from D3 doesn't mean death to everyone.

The chaingrab doesn't work on MK, Marth, Falco and I think Jigglypuff (not sure about others).



And also, I'm sorry that I made a typo o_O ... because noone else ever does them am I right?

 

[Surri-Sama]

adding fairness =/= adding competitiveness and vice-versa.

Can we get more pro-ban arguments that don't boil their reasons down to some love & justice bull****?



Post the right answer again to refresh/enlighten the minds of those who don't know it.

Even though DDDs chain grab inf w.e you wanna call it....DOES give HOW MANY EVER chars bad match-ups....it affects the game very little competitively (DDD is beatable even WITH those chars he has the combo against) so there is simply no NEED to ban.

DDD happens to have a powerful tool...some people cant accept that :\

If ever there is a justification for banning such a strategy many many many games now suck competitively including every smash D:

 

[Brinzy]

Hurrah, that's the correct answer!

 

[SCOTU]

why can no pro-banners give a good reason why the other player could not simply play a different character and **** the DDD?

...oh, right. There is no good reason.

 

[CRASHiC]

The tournament is a test of the player's skill, and diversity is one of those test, other wise we would only play neutral stages. So if a player can't counterpick, if they can't show diversity, they should lose the match.

 

[gantrain05]

XxBlackxX doesn't argue, all he does is say EXACTLY what other anti-ban members said verbatim and capitalize words in his post to make him sound important, but im willing to bet he doesn't know anything, i can't remember how many times i saw "for all we know sakurai intended for us to play with items on high" and "it doesn't meet the ban criteria of overcentralizing the game" first of all thats not the only criteria, and if it was, thats just plain ignorant. second of all, WE NEED SOME NEW ****ING CRITERIA, because seriously the anti-ban side is just repeating things that don't even make sense anymore, "deal with it" and "so DK sucks anyways we don't need to ban this" and "we can just be conservative and say it worked in the past so it will work now" yup, and guess what, slavery worked in the past too, but thats not around anymore.

 

[cutter]

This is like banning Goblin Sharpshooter from MTG. You guys would be laughed out of the community to hell and back for trying to ban the exact same thing that D3's infinites do in MTG.

 

[gantrain05]

This is like banning Goblin Sharpshooter from MTG. You guys would be laughed out of the community to hell and back.

there are so many banned MTG cards its not even funny. its more like banning mirari.

 

[cutter]

there are so many banned MTG cards its not even funny. its more like banning mirari.

Do you even know what Sharpshooter does and what it did to limit decks?

...and cards are banned in MTG they're banned because they actually BREAK the game like Yawgmoth's Will. When Yawg's Will resolves you win the game. Simple as that.

 

[gantrain05]

Do you even know what Sharpshooter does and what it did to limit decks?

...and cards are banned in MTG they're banned because they actually BREAK the game like Yawgmoth's Will. When Yawg's Will resolves you win the game. Simple as that.

yes i know this, i play ALOT of MTG, i just think this is more comparable to mirari, a card to create a copy of any spell to be recast over and over, its so much like a chaingrab lol.

 

[cutter]

yes i know this, i play ALOT of MTG, i just think this is more comparable to mirari, a card to create a copy of any spell to be recast over and over, its so much like a chaingrab lol.

No, you still don't understand.

Sharpshooter limits what decks have good matchups against Goblins much like D3's infinites or Melee Sheik limits character selection. Weenie decks pretty much autolose to Sharpshooter... because Sharpshooter machine guns the army of Elves/other random weenie creatures over and over for easy wins.

Mirari also requires mana to copy spells, which is FINITE unlike an infinite.

 

[gantrain05]

No, you still don't understand.

Sharpshooter limits what decks have good matchups against Goblins much like D3's infinites or Melee Sheik limits character selection. Weenie decks pretty much autolose to Sharpshooter... because Sharpshooter machine guns the army of Elves/other random weenie creatures over and over for easy wins.

Mirari also requires mana to copy spells, which is FINITE unlike an infinite.

i guess your right lol, i just love my mirari lol. and if things get too dicey, i can always pull out a final smash(decree of annihilation) lol.

 

[Surri-Sama]

XxBlackxX doesn't argue, all he does is say EXACTLY what other anti-ban members said verbatim and capitalize words in his post to make him sound important, but im willing to bet he doesn't know anything, i can't remember how many times i saw "for all we know sakurai intended for us to play with items on high" and "it doesn't meet the ban criteria of overcentralizing the game" first of all thats not the only criteria, and if it was, thats just plain ignorant. second of all, WE NEED SOME NEW ****ING CRITERIA, because seriously the anti-ban side is just repeating things that don't even make sense anymore, "deal with it" and "so DK sucks anyways we don't need to ban this" and "we can just be conservative and say it worked in the past so it will work now" yup, and guess what, slavery worked in the past too, but thats not around anymore.

lol for some one who is saying our argument is old and repeated...all you're doing is the same thing as well...

Why not demonstrate your point in stead of trying to falsely bash ours?

and comparing slavery to smash just goes to show MY own ignorance >_> (my mistake)

You are ignoring the fact that one affective means of turning a fight to your favor, doesn't mean you should ban it.

PLUS "Deal with it" is just a good a argument as "ban it"

 

[gantrain05]

lol for some one who is saying our argument is old and repeated...all you're doing is the same thing as well...

Why not demonstrate your point in stead of trying to falsely bash ours?

and comparing slavery to smash just goes to show your own ignorance >_>

i didn't compare slavery to smash i compared your old "it worked in the past" to something else that also worked in the past, but that doesn't mean its foolproof, sometimes things need to be looked at more than once, because what was good in the past isn't going to be what will always work.

 

[Surri-Sama]

i didn't compare slavery to smash i compared your old "it worked in the past" to something else that also worked in the past, but that doesn't mean its foolproof, sometimes things need to be looked at more than once, because what was good in the past isn't going to be what will always work.

ok my mistake...now for the rest of my post?

 

[1048576]

1048576, don't be a douche. You act really pissed off that somebody could possibly care about the infinite this much, make a whole separate thread to pi** in, and act unreasonably condescending about the stuff, but you're not affected at all. Some people actually care about their characters more than other people who (justifiably) use them as tools to compete, make some kind of effort to understand that much.

(relevant: infinite won't realistically be BR-banned, being real)

+1

Which one of us was the pissed off douche again?