Should King Dedede's infinite chaingrab be banned?

[Luigi player]

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.

CPs shouldn't win you a match 100 %, because if it was then only the first match of a set would say who'll win.

 

[SCOTU]

you can't beat ppl on their counterpicks? last i checked, that's why both people can switch characters, and why people aren't perfect at counterpicking. Also, say you win on their c/p because you found a matchup that works on your c/p?

 

[Titanium Dragon]

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

Designer intent is irrelevant.

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.

You can't. Its as simple as that. Its unenforcable. And what if I were to, say, take a tiny step forward every time? Or do something else?

The reality is that if I grab you twice, or three times, or four times, and you call for the TO, by the time he gets there, I can just pound on you otherwise.

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 aren't increasing the number of viable characters. DK is perfectly viable as-is, and anyone who argues to the contrary is simply wrong. I'm sorry, you can use DK in tournaments and can in fact win with him.

If you knew ANYTHING about the competitive scene, you'd know this. Any time there's a blind pick, you can choose DK if you want, and there's a good chance that unless you're known for maining DK you'll get away with it. If you lose, then you can pick DK as your opponent picks first, and unless they pick DeDeDe you're free to go with DK.

And the reality is that people do in fact do this.

And for the people who cite MTG - infinites don't matter at all, and the vast, vast majority of infinite combos aren't banned, and most of the strongest combos don't involve infinites anyway. Seriously folks. Cards get banned in MTG because they're rampantly overpowered and only one deck is viable. That's what gets cards banned in Magic (that, and games going too short; a card which allows you to win consistently on turn 2 or 3 is going to be banned from every format save Vintage).

 

[gantrain05]

you don't get it, if you take a tiny step, then itsnot infinite, therefor it is enforcable, in fact EASILY enforcable. if you regrab while standing, your DQ'd not that hard.

 

[Titanium Dragon]

Quit being a scrub, scrub.

Who DQs you? The TO? What are the odds that staff is watching your game?

I'm pretty sure we all know the answer to that question.

 

[gantrain05]

Quit being a scrub, scrub.

Who DQs you? The TO? What are the odds that staff is watching your game?

I'm pretty sure we all know the answer to that question.

lmao, yup im a scrub, and the tournies i go to are very well staffed, and rules are enforced. so the odds are pretty good, so, i guess you don't know the answer to that question do you. just because you go to tournaments run by people who don't know what they are doing doesn't mean everyone does.

 

[Titanium Dragon]

And how many people go to this tournament? How many sets do you have set up? How many judges per set?

If the answers are not "Several dozen", "Twelve", and "At least one", then STFU.

If they are those, I want to know what tournaments you go to

But, seriously, no.

 

[gantrain05]

And how many people go to this tournament? How many sets do you have set up? How many judges per set?

If the answers are not "Several dozen", "Twelve", and "At least one", then STFU.

If they are those, I want to know what tournaments you go to

But, seriously, no.

ok usually the smallest tourny around here is 25 entrants, usually upwards of 30-40, with usually 5-8 setups, and there are usually about 5 or 6 tournament officials that run the thing. its usually a collection of missouri, nebraska, iowa, and minnesota players here in des moines.

 

[Yuna]

well guess what, its bum's tourney, he runs it, his rules, and he gets a good turnout just about every time from what i see, it seems to be working fine for him.

What part of "he banned all of D3's chaingrabs just because he doesn't like them" was too Swedish för dig att förstå? D3's walking chaingrabs are so far from being warranted for a ban!

Bum just made an arbitrary decision to ban them all because he just didn't like it, despite there being absolutely nothing about the walking (finite) chaingrab which warrants a ban. The slippery slope is there!

Just because his tournament didn't tank doesn't mean it's not bad! He's unfairly punishing IC and D3 mains. How many of them aren't placing much less well due to this ridiculous ban, losing to characters D3 would've won against could he chaingrab (not necessarily infinite) them and IC's against characters they could've won against could they infinite them? And it is a slippery slope, the very thing we warned you about.

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) ?

Ban most chaingrabs, Sheik's F-tilt lock, Zamus' Dsmash lock, Diddy's Nana lock, Meta Knight (the character).

It would make the game more balanced, wouldn't it?

We could also ban all of Top Tier + some of High Tier. We'd receive more characters that would now be viable in return = more Competitive = warranted, right?

I wasn't here, so i can't tell you. I believe Wobbling was banned

By some people.

, and that there was no such standing infinites in Melee, on a Top Tier character.

Where they stand on the Tier List is irrelevant.

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.

How about every single game in fighting game history? How about SSB64? That game has so many 0-death combos we need to ban the entire game.

Well yes it does. When you main, say, DK, you can't deal with DDD...

If you main Fox, you can't deal with Pikachu.

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.

And? Not all match-ups are viable. Deal with it.

No, that's saying that for over a decade, this is how it has been and how it has worked. Some people have actually argued that not banning this would ruin the game and stuff. Obviously, it won't, seeing as how that's never happened before due to not banning something not warranted according to the principles of Competitive play.

Us pulling up the prior history of Competitive gaming is to show you how "our" criteria have worked perfectly well in the past.

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

Superficial in depth =/= Scrubby
Scrubby =/= We must make it Scrubbier!

slavery worked in the past too, but thats not around anymore.

Slavery was proven not to work. This? This works perfectly well.

Competitive fighting games are not about all characters being viable and always being able to win as your favorite character. ****ty match-ups exist! So do unwinnable ones. Deal with it or stop playing fighting games Competitively.

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

The banned MTG cards break the game. They over-centralize the game around themselves. There are, however, cards which are not banned which merely renders certain other cards unviable. Sharpshooter renders the entire Elf deck unviable! Guess what, people just dn't play with the Elf deck anymore!

(This is me repeating info given to me by a source I trust, please correct me if I'm wrong. If I'm right, then your argument was just shattered and you were proven to know even less than me, who has never played a single game of MTG)

 

[Titanium Dragon]

If you don't like chaingrabbing, then you probably shouldn't play Melee or Brawl. If you consider them to be bad, noncompetitive games due to something which exists and is somewhat prevalent in both games, then the winning move is not to play. If you think the game is still competitive and worthwhile, then adding a bunch of imaginary rules is a bad idea.

 

[Luigi player]

you can't beat ppl on their counterpicks? last i checked, that's why both people can switch characters, and why people aren't perfect at counterpicking. Also, say you win on their c/p because you found a matchup that works on your c/p?

You have to tell your enemy your character first and he can then CP one against you.

CPing would be stupid and useless if it would always tell who the winner will be, but guess what, people are still getting beaten even if they CP a stage and a character.

 

[Brinzy]

Uh, duh? Since when was counterpicking an automatic victory? ... Well, barring a few exceptions, like counterpicking to give someone a horrendous fight.

 

[dark-war-cloud]

I think my game doesn't want me to see the infinite again for myself, because every time i pick dedede the game freezes up.
*sigh*

 

[Brinzy]

Looks like the pro-banners hacked your Brawl CD.

 

[Luigi player]

Uh, duh? Since when was counterpicking an automatic victory? ... Well, barring a few exceptions, like counterpicking to give someone a horrendous fight.

That's what Yuna says.

And CPing against the infinited characters is a sure win...

 

[AlphaZealot]

1) Frankly, I don't know why people always talk about D3's CG on walk offs. Diddy's banana lock on walk offs is just as deadly (and not super difficult to pull off), yet unlike D3, it works against every character in the cast except 1 (Luigi).

2) Banning something that works on 2 characters (not 6), is quite frankly dumb. Lets take away every characters Up-B when fighting Captain Falcon. Some cry foul when I say this and say things like "ITS NOT THE SAME!", but actually it is-it is the exact same concept. Captain Falcon versus Diddy Kong is as lopsided in Diddy's favor as D3 vs DK is in D3's favor, assuming, of course, both characters are being played at their peak. So lets ban D3's infinite and ban Diddy from pulling out bananas-viola, now we have 6-4/7-3 match ups instead of 10-0/9-1 (I hate match up ratios). This would be a great precedent: let's ban the strongest move a character has against just one character because all characters should at least have a chance against every other character!

3) There is no rule that every match up should be winnable by every character (frankly the opposite rule is likely true-in a game with this many characters there will simply be many unwinnable/heavily lopsided match ups).

 

[IrArby]

Skill is still the most diciding factor though. Any matchup will not determine the winner 100 %. The worst matchup is DK vs D3... because of the infinite. In every other matchup you need more mindgames etc. to win the match.
I don't think any of those other fighting games really show skill. You just memorize every possible combo and that's it. Of course you have to choose which one is the best to do at every point during the fight though.

Brawl shows much more skill than many other games. You don't have to really know the game that much, you mostly fight with your mind. In most other games you learn the game and then you're good at it. In Brawl it actually shows knowledge, wisdom and mindgaming, which is much more skill than some button combinations. <- imo
(and I'm not talking about Melee here)

I haven't been able to read all the comments since this on every page (my internet access is limited ATM) but, it seems that people are still operating under the same delusion. This is not a game that is heavily skill based. Whatever Luigi Player might say, other fighting games require skill (much more skill).
Noobish people have been saying since the Japan release that Brawl is heavy on mindgames. This is WRONG. Brawl is big on Spacing and Priority. If your character doesn't have these they are probably crap. Spacing is not a mindgame. Mindgames come with movement and conditioning your opponent (using movement in combination with mixxing attacks/grabs/crossups). Watch a matchup between Forte's MK and Azen's Lucario. Everytime Forte fudges the spacing Azen punishes. No mind games Azen just punishes well because he's Azen. He gets his one or two hits in and they're back to square one.

Ofcourse your fighting with your mind on any fighting game. What an ignorant thing to say. Knowing the game on top of that is where the SKILL part comes in. The fact is, in an 80:20 Melee matchup you will get the $hit comboed out of you. At any where near the highest levels of play you will lose badly. Why? Because the person your playing of near or even lesser skill can do this to your character. You will have your options systematically closed down and get edgeguarded.

Now put this matchup in Brawl. Take away alot of skill and mindgames. What makes matchups bad? Obviously you won't be getting comboed. The lack of mindgames+ skill means you'll have even less to work with against the heavily favored character. You'll going to lose equally badly to this player and he'll do it without skill.

That is the name of the game. As much as we want this to be a Meritocracy type fighter where the skilled will always beat the unskilled in certain matchups its not the case because this is not a skillfull game. Yet Pro ban people want these matchups, just these matchup to be skill based simply because their manner of losing looks "cheap". Remember when edgehogging was cheap. Timing Fsmashes to knock recovering people used to be cheap.

Brawl is cheap. At the competitive level, matchups matter big time, way more than tier lists in fact. I'm sorry that the D3 can't tear apart your DK in a more interesting skillful way but thats not this game. Its a bad matchup. This game is all about good/bad matchups. Its not about whose better. Ken lost to a freaking 14 year old. Stop complaining about skillless matchups. C.Falcon has as little chance of beating MK only Falcon can move while DKs getting D3's ICG cannot. To bad the Falcon can only move in one direction. The opposite direction of MK which eventually equalls offstage.

I'm not here to say stop playing Brawl cause that is ignorance. But if you lose to someone with less skill than you your probably not playing a skill based game. News Flash you aren't (not for the most part at least) The potentcy of skill decreases as the matchup gets worse. Everyone keeps saying this is the worst matchup in the game. Really, if this is the worst, than we can definitely live with this.

 

[XxBlackxX]

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.

oh wow....

first of all...maybe the anti-ban side says the same thing over and over because you guys have such dumb skulls that we need to repeat it so you guys can understand? it's not like the pro-baners have come up with a new argument since like...oh the first 50 pages or so....if you don't like hearing the same **** over and over, then come up with a new argument that actually makes sense. >_>
second, i capitalize the most important words in my post, kinda like bolding but i'm too lazy to press ctrl+b. got it a problem? deal with it.

anyways, you and dakid need to READ my whole posts. because if you did, you would see that i admitted it wasn't the WHOLE criteria, but it's one of the only PROVEN criteria.
if you're so resolute that we need a new criteria, ****ing prove it. PROVE that whatever the ****ed-up criteria you guys come up with is better than over-centralization. you guys have the burden of proof, because whether you want to admit it or not, our criteria DID work before.

 

[cutter]

Yes you are correct Yuna. Goblin Sharpshooter DOES give Goblin decks an autowin against Elves because he single handedly renders their army useless. I should point out Goblin Sharpshooter has been out for 5 years and it will never be warranted for a ban because it's amazing against a handful of decks and is complete crap against most other decks.

Cards are banned in Magic because they warp the game so bad that the metagame degenerates around those cards.
- Yawgmoth's Will
- Yawgmoth's Bargain
- Tinker
- Necropotence
- Skullclamp

Are perfect examples of broken cards that have been banned.

 

[da K.I.D.]

IrArby
I hate people like you, your view on this game is completely unwarrented.

just because you doont like the way brawl was made doesnt not make it a bad game nor does it make it a poor fighter.

Brawl is bigger on mindgames moreso than most games out there. funfact. every fighting game out there is based on spacign and priority. thats how they work, and your negative connotations of this game are completely unsubstantiated because of it.

also you are using a horribly flawed definition of combo for the context. if you are only getting 1-2 hits at a time, you suck and you arent playing the game right. because in order to continue the string of consequtive hits (i.e. the combo) you have to use mindgames to force your opponent to do what you want them to do so that you can continue hitting them.

Mindgames and skill are just as important in brawl, just because it doesnt fit your conventions of what a "good" fighting game "should" be, that doesnt make it bad.

And just so you know, the better skilled player in brawl STILL WINS. why do you think M2K, DSF and Azen are still the best players in the country? cus they are the most skilled and they have the mindgames to supplement it. If brawl wasnt a skill ful game, any random nub of the street could come in and beat Azen, but they dont...

and heres a newflash for you, you ARE telling people to stop playing brawl, because you (incorrectly) think thats its not a skill ful game. And if you are losing to somebody less skilled than you, you probably arent as skilled as you thought.


also@black
I do read your whole posts but i dont respond to your whole posts because id rather respond to the person who came up with the idea, as opposed to the guy who copy pasted it for his own benefit.

that, and i just find it funnier to point out the times when you contradict yourself...
and trying to prove new ban criteria is pointless, weve been there weve done that, and every time somebody come up with something good, all they get is "over centralisation is the best criteria, yours sucks" and seeing how you are the ones asking us to do it in the first place, its just a vicious circle that doesnt get anybody anywhere

also @ yuna
BUM did not ban the ICGs at his tourneys so as to benefit his character. he did it because ninjalink brought it up to him and told him it was bad for competition, you can ask him yourself, hes said itmultiple times

 

[XxBlackxX]

also@black
I do read your whole posts but i dont respond to your whole posts because id rather respond to the person who came up with the idea, as opposed to the guy who copy pasted it for his own benefit.

that, and i just find it funnier to point out the times when you contradict yourself...
and trying to prove new ban criteria is pointless, weve been there weve done that, and every time somebody come up with something good, all they get is "over centralisation is the best criteria, yours sucks" and seeing how you are the ones asking us to do it in the first place, its just a vicious circle that doesnt get anybody anywhere

you must not have good reading comprehension or just purposely hate me then. what im saying is, you either have something useful to say or don't say anything. picking out 2 random sentences in my post and saying i contradict myself does what for the pro-ban side?

no and i don't think any pro-ban person even attempted to prove why their criteria was better other than "infinites aren't fair, impossible matchups don't exist, blah, blah".

 

[gantrain05]

IrArby is a scrub who hates brawl cuz he was beaten by his 9 year old cousin, thats my guess, don't see why he'd be posting in a brawl topic if he hates brawl, doesn't make much sense to me.

 

[da K.I.D.]

you werent here for it.
earlier in this thread some made up some really good criteria but it got shot down because it wasnt the status quo.

and in the MK banning topic, OS made a really good list of things that should get a character banned but it was ignored because he was OBVIOUSLY making up criteria that only applied to metaknight just to get him banned.

if anything im helping you to argue your point better by getting you to look at what you read before you post so that your opinion is always congruent.

is that useful enough for you?

 

[XxBlackxX]

you werent here for it.
earlier in this thread some made up some really good criteria but it got shot down because it wasnt the status quo.

and in the MK banning topic, OS made a really good list of things that should get a character banned but it was ignored because he was OBVIOUSLY making up criteria that only applied to metaknight just to get him banned.

if anything im helping you to argue your point better by getting you to look at what you read before you post so that your opinion is always congruent.

is that useful enough for you?

stating a criteria means nothing. backing it up with why it's better than the status quo means something. i can state "ban everything that makes matchups 80:20 or worse" and it doesn't mean **** unless i can prove it is correct or at least back up my statement with facts.
also, of course the anti-ban people will try to find faults within a pro-ban criteria...it's just how debates work. however, if their logic is perfectly sound and they have facts to backup their opinions, then of course the other side will have to concede.

 

[gantrain05]

stating a criteria means nothing. backing it up with why it's better than the status quo means something. i can state "ban everything that makes matchups 80:20 or worse" and it doesn't mean **** unless i can prove or at least back up my statement with facts.
also, of course the anti-ban people will try to find faults within a pro-ban criteria...it's just how debates work. however, if their logic is perfectly sound and they have facts to backup their opinions, then of course the other side will have to concede.

everything WAS backed up, you just conveniently decided to ignore it and pick a random 2 sentences from the post and say, "IT DOESN'T OVERCENTRALIZE" or some more bs repetetive ****. im not going to repost it, it has already been stated, if you want to know our reasons your going to have to look through the 100 pages of crap and find it yourself.

 

[Luigi player]

1) Frankly, I don't know why people always talk about D3's CG on walk offs. Diddy's banana lock on walk offs is just as deadly (and not super difficult to pull off), yet unlike D3, it works against every character in the cast except 1 (Luigi).

2) Banning something that works on 2 characters (not 6), is quite frankly dumb. Lets take away every characters Up-B when fighting Captain Falcon. Some cry foul when I say this and say things like "ITS NOT THE SAME!", but actually it is-it is the exact same concept. Captain Falcon versus Diddy Kong is as lopsided in Diddy's favor as D3 vs DK is in D3's favor, assuming, of course, both characters are being played at their peak. So lets ban D3's infinite and ban Diddy from pulling out bananas-viola, now we have 6-4/7-3 match ups instead of 10-0/9-1 (I hate match up ratios). This would be a great precedent: let's ban the strongest move a character has against just one character because all characters should at least have a chance against every other character!

3) There is no rule that every match up should be winnable by every character (frankly the opposite rule is likely true-in a game with this many characters there will simply be many unwinnable/heavily lopsided match ups).

2) But it would make the characters viable so we have more character diversity.
And it isn't the same, because it is not a move. It is an oversight that should obviously never exist. The programmers didn't see that you could do it so it is still in the game, but we can just ban it to fix it.
You can't really say it's a whole move. And don't come up with Craptain Falcon stuff. He can't win against anyone and we can't change that.
Personally, I wouldn't mind fighting against CF without bananas lol, he is really really bad and it would still be really easy for Diddy to beat him.

3) Every matchup should have at least a chance to win for both characters.
Even Captain Falcon has a chance against everyone. It is not a big one, but it is there. Every Brawl player in existance could easily beat the best/great DK/Bowser/etc. players if they just know how to infinite.
Of course some matchups are really bad, and I have nothing against it. But you still have a chance and aren't infinited the whole fight while you can't do ****.

If you play DK and face a D3 you could just SD yourself 3 times to safe some time. Doesn't matter who the D3 player is. Everyone that knows the infinite will easily win the fight.

 

[XxBlackxX]

everything WAS backed up, you just conveniently decided to ignore it and pick a random 2 sentences from the post and say, "IT DOESN'T OVERCENTRALIZE" or some more bs repetetive ****. im not going to repost it, it has already been stated, if you want to know our reasons your going to have to look through the 100 pages of crap and find it yourself.

you seem to think that everything the pro-ban side came up with in the last 200 pages or so is all COMPLETELY NEW and COMPLETELY CORRECT.

lern2read

seriously, the pro-ban side hasn't come up with new stuff, they're just repeating the same **** over and over, which is why we repeat the same **** over and over. if you don't like it, come up with new ****.

anyways, i do know your "reasons" but none of them make sense. so unless you can prove why your criteria is better than ours, shut up and stop attcking me because your arguments are just the same insane ones over and over again while you expect us to come up with new **** to say.

EDIT: see? did luigi player post ANYTHING new for pro-ban that hasn't been said like 50 times? no. im not even gonna respond to it because "if he wants a answer he should look through 100 pages of **** to find our counter-argument"

 

[Surri-Sama]

2) But it would make the characters viable so we have more character diversity.
And it isn't the same, because it is not a move. It is an oversight that should obviously never exist. The programmers didn't see that you could do it so it is still in the game, but we can just ban it to fix it.
You can't really say it's a whole move. And don't come up with Craptain Falcon stuff. He can't win against anyone and we can't change that.
Personally, I wouldn't mind fighting against CF without bananas lol, he is really really bad and it would still be really easy for Diddy to beat him.

3) Every matchup should have at least a chance to win for both characters.
Even Captain Falcon has a chance against everyone. It is not a big one, but it is there. Every Brawl player in existance could easily beat the best/great DK/Bowser/etc. players if they just know how to infinite.
Of course some matchups are really bad, and I have nothing against it. But you still have a chance and aren't infinited the whole fight while you can't do ****.

If you play DK and face a D3 you could just SD yourself 3 times to safe some time. Doesn't matter who the D3 player is. Everyone that knows the infinite will easily win the fight.

Everything you say, ignores the fact that DDDs chain grab does not unplug the foes controller

And what you say about Diddy's bananas not really affecting the match-up is blind

Unfair match-ups are a part of competitive gaming

~~~~~~~~~~~

Diddy (without bananas ) vs CF - leaves Diddy on the winning side

DDD (without Chain grabs) vs DK - leaves DDD on the winning side

Both help put the match-up in their favor, you're only saying they are not the same because your nit picking at the irrelevant technicalities

 

[CRASHiC]

Brawl is cheap. At the competitive level, matchups matter big time, way more than tier lists in fact. I'm sorry that the D3 can't tear apart your DK in a more interesting skillful way but thats not this game. Its a bad matchup. This game is all about good/bad matchups. Its not about whose better. Ken lost to a freaking 14 year old. Stop complaining about skillless matchups. C.Falcon has as little chance of beating MK only Falcon can move while DKs getting D3's ICG cannot. To bad the Falcon can only move in one direction. The opposite direction of MK which eventually equalls offstage.

O RLY? haha hoho

 

[Sosuke]

O RLY? haha hoho

That MK sucked, ok? Don't bring up stupid stuff like that.
The Falcon stared the match with a falcon punch and THE MK didn't even punish it or anything.

Ken lost to a freaking 14 year old.

It wouldn't be the first time.

 

[CRASHiC]

But if his argument was correct, M2K should have won regardless.

 

[Brinzy]

Oh no, a 14-year old! I better not play anyone who's younger than me, or I could be next.

Spoiler

Might as well not play anyone here then, amirite. loljk.

 

[xDD-Master]

ALL INFINITES SHOULD BE BANNED !!! They suck...

What an epic fight where one fighter can drink tea in the battle ? Yeah, that's the correct way to play a fighting game... [/ironic]

 

[Brinzy]

That's not irony. That's sarcasm.

 

[Luigi player]

Everything you say, ignores the fact that DDDs chain grab does not unplug the foes controller

And what you say about Diddy's bananas not really affecting the match-up is blind

Unfair match-ups are a part of competitive gaming

~~~~~~~~~~~

Diddy (without bananas ) vs CF - leaves Diddy on the winning side

DDD (without Chain grabs) vs DK - leaves DDD on the winning side

Both help put the match-up in their favor, you're only saying they are not the same because your nit picking at the irrelevant technicalities

Yes it does. It is not a chaingrab, it is an infinite (that is really really easy to do) so if you get grabbed just once you can do some different stuff in the meantime.

I never said that Diddys bananas don't affect the matchup. I said that it wouldn't really matter that much to me since I can play Diddy really well without bananas and since CF is soooo bad it would still be easy to win.

Stop saying chaingrab, it is an infinite that you can't escape. If it is banned D3 will still have an advantage, that's true, but it would still be possible for DK to win the match.

I'm saying they're not the same, because one of them completely takes out the control of their character and he can't do anything about it. It is something totally different.

 

[Surri-Sama]

Yes it does. It is not a chaingrab, it is an infinite (that is really really easy to do) so if you get grabbed just once you can do some different stuff in the meantime.

I never said that Diddys bananas don't affect the matchup. I said that it wouldn't really matter that much to me since I can play Diddy really well without bananas and since CF is soooo bad it would still be easy to win.

Stop saying chaingrab, it is an infinite that you can't escape. If it is banned D3 will still have an advantage, that's true, but it would still be possible for DK to win the match.

I'm saying they're not the same, because one of them completely takes out the control of their character and he can't do anything about it. It is something totally different.

i forgot that the grab connects from the GO at the start, sorry D:

I was under the impression that there was a period of time where you where not grabbed...i was wrong :o

 

[RDK]

IrArby
I hate people like you, your view on this game is completely unwarrented.

just because you doont like the way brawl was made doesnt not make it a bad game nor does it make it a poor fighter.

Brawl is bigger on mindgames moreso than most games out there. funfact. every fighting game out there is based on spacign and priority. thats how they work, and your negative connotations of this game are completely unsubstantiated because of it.

also you are using a horribly flawed definition of combo for the context. if you are only getting 1-2 hits at a time, you suck and you arent playing the game right. because in order to continue the string of consequtive hits (i.e. the combo) you have to use mindgames to force your opponent to do what you want them to do so that you can continue hitting them.

Mindgames and skill are just as important in brawl, just because it doesnt fit your conventions of what a "good" fighting game "should" be, that doesnt make it bad.

Oh God, where do I start? This post is absolutely, 100% wrong.

Brawl does not require more mindgames at all; not by any stretch of the imagination. The real problem is that beecause the game is so vapidly shallow and lacks the kind of competitive spark that Melee had, more focus is put onto mindgames instead of a healthy combination of tech skill and mindgames.

The only difference is the game takes less tech skill because, let's be honest, the amount of tech skill required in Brawl is approximately the same as the amount required to shoot fish in a barrel.

And I can't express how wrong you are about Brawl being more mindgame-oriented than other fighters. Have you even played any given Street Fighter at a competitive level? How about Marvel? KoF? GG?

Any one of those requires more mindgames than Brawl, simply because there's so much more you and your opponent can do.

Edit:

Also, to stop the pro-bies from pissing and moaning about overcentralizing somehow being the only ban criteria (even though we've stated a million times that it's not), I'm going to list them again just in case people's reading comperehension problems are flaring up again.

* Over-centralization
* Anti-Competitive (randomness, lag)
* Prevents competition (freeze glitches, invisible characters, removes characters from the field, etc.)

 

[Surri-Sama]

The only difference is the game takes less tech skill because, let's be honest, the amount of tech skill required in Brawl is approximately the same as the amount required to shoot fish in a barrel.

You've obviously never tried to shoot fish in a barrel

 

[fissionprime]

I am pretty neutral on the subject as to whether or not the infinate could be banned, but I have to say (whether or not this has been brought up before) that the infinite, when not used as a stall, is basically the same as a 0 to death combo, and those were never banned, were they?

 

[Fletch]

IrArby
I hate people like you, your view on this game is completely unwarrented.

just because you doont like the way brawl was made doesnt not make it a bad game nor does it make it a poor fighter.

Brawl is bigger on mindgames moreso than most games out there. funfact. every fighting game out there is based on spacign and priority. thats how they work, and your negative connotations of this game are completely unsubstantiated because of it.

also you are using a horribly flawed definition of combo for the context. if you are only getting 1-2 hits at a time, you suck and you arent playing the game right. because in order to continue the string of consequtive hits (i.e. the combo) you have to use mindgames to force your opponent to do what you want them to do so that you can continue hitting them.

Mindgames and skill are just as important in brawl, just because it doesnt fit your conventions of what a "good" fighting game "should" be, that doesnt make it bad.

While I don't agree with everything Iarby said, this is just a very ignorant statement. Try playing another competitive fighter and coming back and saying the same thing. Just because actual combos exist in other games doesn't mean that Brawl just requires way more "mindgames".

EDIT: RDK beat me to it again, ****.