Should King Dedede's infinite chaingrab be banned?

[Dark Sonic]

I hope everyone gets an infinite on Wario.

Or better yet everyone will have an infinite on everyone else. We need some MvC2 in this joint.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Fu2154mo9g
Infinites aren't always broken. If it's rediculously hard to set up (such as the opponent not having Chakra in this example) then it hardly matters.

To get some MvC2 ****, we'd need infinites that have reliable setups (some particular link in the infinite that's safe to spam, some other move that combos into the infinite and is safe to spam, ect.)

 

[Terios the Hedgehog]

It was a joke. You can't let me have anything can you? :/

 

[Dark Sonic]

It was a joke. You can't let me have anything can you? :/

Nevaaaaaaaaar!!!!

Spoiler

lol spelling

Nah, I just like posting that video. It's so ironic that every character in that game has some kind of infinite (multiple infinites), but nobody cares since like only....2 of them matter (I think) Neji and Kimimaro, because their infinites are safe on KnJ and they have really good Chakra denial games

 

[Yuna]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Fu2154mo9g
Infinites aren't always broken. If it's rediculously hard to set up (such as the opponent not having Chakra in this example) then it hardly matters.

And then we have GNT-infinites which requires (close to) absolutely nothing.

Itachi infinites you no matter who you are (i.e., no matter how much life you have) from anywhere on any stage that isn't huge as long as he d.Xes you (it's a counter, so there's that) in GNT4.

In GNT4 (and I can only assume GNT3), Hinata infinites Kankurou as long as he doesn't have 75% from the moment the infinite starts. All she has to do is BBBABBY and rinse and repeat while hitting both Kankurou and his puppet at the same time (since she'll be taking away chakra from him by hitting the puppet). The only set-up this requires is "Hit both Kankurou and Karasu" (which can be hard, I admit, but still).

In GNT:EX (and I can only assume EX2), Kankurou infinites everyone from a throw. The only downside is that the throw is slow. This was actually banned (well, Kankurou was banned, IIRC), but not with the reasoning "It's too friggin' good!" but with the reasoning "He lags the **** game" (his many puppets lag the Wii).

Let's not forget the Narutimate Hero games where you had combos that put you in infinite hitstun, thus slowly chipping away at your health.

What's my point? Naruto games, very broken. Also, they're practically MvC2 .

 

[da K.I.D.]

NO-HO-HO.

If you're referring to the wall infinite, sure. Team infinite, put a 250 cap on it. but just the chaingrab, you might as well go ahead and ban waveshining too. It's a key part of his metagame.

Every single pro-banner better start arguing that the following technique should be banned or fess up to being biased fanboys:
http://www.smashboards.com/showthread.php?p=6290213#post6290213

Yes, you read that right, Peach has an infinite on Wario, which is doable from a grab and on any part of any stage (unless she grabs him right next to the ledge) and which goes from 0-death (and unlike D3, she can combo into a KO move).

It's a single tactic/combo/thing that breaks the entire match-up. Wario is now unviable. Yay.

you do realise that theres like 3-5 other characters that can do this already.
Yoshi, CF(techable infinite) and ganon, can all infinite wario.

wario has a bad grab release, and the amount of times you can abuse it should be limited.

you did know that other characters could do this right?
cus as much as you bag on other peoples knowledge, if you didnt know this, that would be just a little sad...

 

[1048576]

So... you are or are not a biased fanboy?

Also note how Wario is still completely viable.

Edit: techable infinite...lolsmashboards

 

[ShadowLink84]

@Titanium Dragon: I already told you to shut up about "scrubs." It's not a defense. This is a debate on whether or not it IS TRULY FAIR.

Fair has nothing to do with the debate. you have failed.

EDIT: Also, details on how they break out of the infinite?

Mash buttons since DDD's pummel is slow.
Even if they were true infinites it still would not matter.

you do realise that theres like 3-5 other characters that can do this already.
Yoshi, CF(techable infinite) and ganon, can all infinite wario.

wario has a bad grab release, and the amount of times you can abuse it should be limited.

you did know that other characters could do this right?
cus as much as you bag on other peoples knowledge, if you didnt know this, that would be just a little sad...

ban the Wario infinite then?
how about the IC's infinite ban those as well?
What about jab locks and laser locks?
Sheik Ftilt locK?

Why do you remove something that factors into what makes it a bad matchup for those characters?

 

[Terios the Hedgehog]

What's my point? Naruto games, very broken. Also, they're practically MvC2 .

But without Spiderman so screw them. ^_^


Oh yeah. DDD.

The infinite is bull****. Deal and counterpick.

 

[ShadowLink84]

But without Spiderman so screw them. ^_^

Spider-man is top tier dude.
Yep.
**** storm, magneto, cable and sentinel. >_>

 

[Terios the Hedgehog]

Spider-man is top tier dude.
Yep.
**** storm, magneto, cable and sentinel. >_>

**** them. They can't do whatever a spider can. When's the last time you saw Storm spin a web. Much less one of ANY size.

 

[Dark Sonic]

What's my point? Naruto games, very broken. Also, they're practically MvC2 .

True, but it's not the infinites that made them broken (well, in the Narutimate Hero series anyway), which is all I was pointing out.

I really want to play NUNS, but I really don't want to shell out 400 bucks for a PS3 (especially when the ones currently in stock don't play PS2 games).

 

[ShadowLink84]

**** them. They can't do whatever a spider can. When's the last time you saw Storm spin a web. Much less one of ANY size.

When she spread her legs.
<_<

 

[Terios the Hedgehog]

When she spread her legs.
<_<

OMFG! You win.

 

[ShadowLink84]

OMFG! You win.

I felt so bad for saying it, and yet, so good XD

 

[da K.I.D.]

i heard the ps3 price is going down to 300 in march. get it then.

the wario infinite is hard to make a judgement on...

seeing as you are right, in the falcon and ganon cases, it factors into what makes the matches what they are.

but the difference between the CF/ganon on wario and the yoshi/peach on wario match is that in CF and ganons case, even with the infinite, the match is still in warios favor, whereas i would be inclined to say that the matchup is unwinnable against a yoshi or peach.

this is the point where you give it some time to manifest in tourneys and make a decision based on that, but if I was the TO i would probably limit it to 5 regrabs on wario.

 

[camzaman]

Every single pro-banner better start arguing that the following technique should be banned or fess up to being biased fanboys:
http://www.smashboards.com/showthread.php?p=6290213#post6290213

Yes, you read that right, Peach has an infinite on Wario, which is doable from a grab and on any part of any stage (unless she grabs him right next to the ledge) and which goes from 0-death (and unlike D3, she can combo into a KO move).

It's a single tactic/combo/thing that breaks the entire match-up. Wario is now unviable. Yay.

Fine. Ban it. Ban all 0-death infinites as they are discovered.

 

[ShadowLink84]

But that is inconsistent.
Saying that we shouldn't ban an infinite because it doesn't do much ut then say we should ban an infinite that does is inconsistent. They both do the same thing.

 

[1048576]

Fine. Ban it. Ban all 0-death infinites as they are discovered.

What about 0-100s? It doesn't seem right that a character that can be taken from 0-100 fares worse than a character that can be taken from 0-death. Wouldn't you agree?

 

[camzaman]

I assume you're not replying to mean since I am consistent.

And, BTW the anti-banners can't arbitrarily say that 'FAIR' is invalid. FAIR is valid, that's why lots of stages that lend to infinites are banned, and also why items are banned.

At any rate, the criteria for a ban is just as much up for debate as is the infinites themselves. You can't reject our ban criteria just because you don't agree or because other games used different criteria. Maybe the status quo isn't what it should be. That's where most of our disagreement lies anyway...

 

[camzaman]

What about 0-100s? It doesn't seem right that a character that can be taken from 0-100 fares worse than a character that can be taken from 0-death. Wouldn't you agree?

I would agree. Some kind of chain grab cap system would have to be implemented.
*cue slippery slope BS*

 

[ShadowLink84]

I assume you're not replying to mean since I am consistent.

you posted before I did XD

And, BTW the anti-banners can't arbitrarily say that 'FAIR' is invalid. FAIR is valid, that's why lots of stages that lend to infinites are banned, and also why items are banned.

Stages and items are not banned because of some ideology concerning what is fair and what is not fair.

At any rate, the criteria for a ban is just as much up for debate as is the infinites themselves. You can't reject our ban criteria just because you don't agree or because other games used different criteria. Maybe the status quo isn't what it should be. That's where most of our disagreement lies anyway...

Wrong. There is over a decade of gaming thatshows how the bans should work so in order for that precedent to be disregarded, you must prove it wrong before you bring forth your own criteria.
The criteria of a ban are up for debate on the grounds that you disprove the criteria we have currently, otherwise, there is no point in changing things.

 

[da K.I.D.]

But that is inconsistent.
Saying that we shouldn't ban an infinite because it doesn't do much ut then say we should ban an infinite that does is inconsistent. They both do the same thing.

if this is directed at me i suggest you go back and read the last sentance of my last post

What about 0-100s? It doesn't seem right that a character that can be taken from 0-100 fares worse than a character that can be taken from 0-death. Wouldn't you agree?

No.

This is why I like to deal with things on a case by case basis, because you have to know the intracacies and properties of something before you just go out and make a judgement on it.

you posted before I did XD

Stages and items are not banned because of some ideology concerning what is fair and what is not fair.
Yes they are. What game are you playing?

Wrong. There is over a decade of gaming thatshows how the bans should work so in order for that precedent to be disregarded, you must prove it wrong before you bring forth your own criteria.
The criteria of a ban are up for debate on the grounds that you disprove the criteria we have currently, otherwise, there is no point in changing things.

I think that each time a new game comes out, it is up to you to prove that the old criteria is still applicable for the new game. Seeing that every new game is slightly different.

 

[camzaman]

Well Shadowlink, you know way more than I do when it comes to competitive fighting games, but others like da K.I.D. have made valid points in that regard...

Pro-Ban says Tourney character diversity and fun are valid criteria. Anti-ban laughs at this. I don't see how we'll ever agree.

 

[IrArby]

your sorely mistaken if . . .

OK I refuse to count D3. Yes he gets infinited but both players can infinite each other in a D3 Ditto. Regardless, if he can infinite 6 or 5, only 5 matter. Thats important not cause I say so but because we aren't fussed about 50:50 matchups.

yes it would

If you read that whole post I linked and have nothing more to say than this than obviously you couldn't disprove/argue with it or can't read. You essentially said nothing. Your being just as bad as your accusing me of being. Saying "those are the facts cause I say so". Thats what you've just done. You didn't give any arguments just your word. I don't take you word to mean anything.

oh so u pull out numbers and say . . .

I didn't pull out numbers. The numbers are there and if you want to b*tch about my numbers lets fix them to reflect the impact more correctly. This infinite only really affects matchups with D3 for not 6, not 5, but 2 characters (DK, and Bowser). I'm actually giving you Bowser though as other people have said, this doesn't count as an infinite but I'll let it slide rather than doing the math for only one character. This techniuqe only severely adversely affects 1/18 characters. If the game had 18 characters and one had a bad matchup with one character I think we can get over that.

ok, to limiite the infinite is really simple, . . .

So are we going to get rid Peach's new grab release infinite? Are we going to ban Snake's edge infinite on tall characters (he camps on the edge half of the match he's likely to get a grab on a recovering player). There are so many infinites and locks that you guys should really drop this one. Not cause I say so because the game has a lot of them and if people are going to find new things in this game it'll probably be more infinites like Peach's on Wario. She can do it 3 different ways. As to the DK/D3 matchup, how many competent D3s throw Waddle Dees at a character close enough to Ftilt them? Great solution there! They won't cause thats dumb. I can easily use your logic against you. All D3s got to do is perfect shield an Ftilt and he can run and grab DK. BAM! He lost that stock. After all D3 has one of the longest/fastest grabs out of the non-tether characters (like you said last time). Your forgetting that D3 has comparable range with DK which is probably one of his biggest assets against Falco, or Peach, or Wolf, or Link (whom he probably would space Bairs against to avoid getting grabbed).

except in those situations your basically comparing M2K with M2K . . .

What the hell are you talking about? I said M2K uses the best characters in order to give himself the best chance of winning before the matchup starts. Using different characters (that hopefully you are good at) is a fundamental way to give yourself an advantage. If your not willing to take every advantage you have and use it against your opponent to win (because he will to you) than your not a competitive gamer. If your not a competitive gamer you shouldn't be here. This ban only affects Brawl competitively.

i'm not debating this to make the matchup easier . . .

No in fact, this is one of the competitive elements that seperates scrubs, noobs, and people who don't play the game on a serious level, from competitive players who study the game, learn matchups, know counterpicks, try to avoid infinites, learn to apply infinites, etc. Why would you want to take out the few competitive elements in the game? I'm sorry if you think its gay but Competitive Gaming has certain criteria (not mine) and this move doesn't meet it. Stop bringing the fact that its skill less. If it was just a difficult to execute as IC's infinites it wouldn't matter (yes I know the two are different you've already redundantly brought this up). This does not destroy competition it does quite the oppossite by forcing you to find ways around it or avoid it.

Lastly, I never said whether you had "personally attacked anyone," I said your a smartass and a dumb smartass at that.

 

[Yuna]

Random stuff.

I'm sorry, I thought the fact that I've ben bringing up the fact that Wario can be infinited by several characters several times in this thread alone now would indicate I was perfectly well aware of the fact that Wario can be infinited by several people.

The question remains, why aren't people whining about those infinites? Also, techable infinite?!

And, BTW the anti-banners can't arbitrarily say that 'FAIR' is invalid. FAIR is valid, that's why lots of stages that lend to infinites are banned, and also why items are banned.

No, they are banned because of over-centralization. The infinites and 0-deaths on those stages are near universal (or works on 50%+ of the cast) most of the time, thus the game would be over-centralized around a small amount of characters.

This infinite merely renders DK unviable (the smallstep renders Bowser unviable and Wario's BS renders him kinda unviable).

Maybe the status quo isn't what it should be. That's where most of our disagreement lies anyway...

But the burden of proof lies on you to prove this.

 

[Fletch]

Yay indeed. lol

Can't D3 just kill with an Uthrow or Bthrow? So..... who CARES if he can't combo into a KO move. He can just throw when he feels like it.

Lol. Sucks to be Wario. XD

More broken **** in Brawl, awesome. I want to see how the pro-banners react to this... "But, but, this one is harder to do than the D3 CG!".

 

[Yuna]

Well Shadowlink, you know way more than I do when it comes to competitive fighting games, but others like da K.I.D. have made valid points in that regard...

Pro-Ban says Tourney character diversity and fun are valid criteria. Anti-ban laughs at this. I don't see how we'll ever agree.

Fine, ban half of the characters and strategies and techniques in the game to have more character diversity and fun... despite it being anti-Competitive to do so. Host your own tournaments.

Even da K.I.D. doesn't agree with those philosophies (IIRC).

 

[camzaman]

Why is it on us? This is a NEW game, with ALL NEW mechanics, why isn't the burden of proof on YOU to prove that OLD criteria from quite different games are still valid?

 

[Yuna]

Why is it on us? This is a NEW game, with ALL NEW mechanics, why isn't the burden of proof on YOU to prove that OLD criteria from quite different games are still valid?

No, not really. Ever ytime a new game is released, we do not retest every single thing that was tested before unless it has changed it such a significant way it requires retesting. Brawl is still very much like Melee, despite the new mechanics. It hasn't changed in such a way the old criteria no longer apply.

We have precedent, we have past experiments and findings (and new ones for Brawl) supporting out position. You, as the one advocating a change, has to prove that your way is better than ours.

 

[IrArby]

Well Shadowlink, you know way more than I do when it comes to competitive fighting games, but others like da K.I.D. have made valid points in that regard...

Pro-Ban says Tourney character diversity and fun are valid criteria. Anti-ban laughs at this. I don't see how we'll ever agree.

Character diversity? You think that banning it makes DK more viable as he has no bad counters then. So, why have a secondary?
But if we keep it, DKs have to have a D3 counter character. And D3s have more characters to worry about countering them. And seeing as DKs initially only had one really bad matchup this has really escalated where neither character can keep one character and win all the time. Everyone starts playing different characters to avoid getting easily counterpicked. Sounds way more diverse to me. Personally, I find the alarming number of MKs (the best character out there) and Snakes (the second best character out there) to be a more alarming fact especially as the former has NO bad matchups at all.

Also, most people enjoy the fun of competition. No ProBan has proved that this makes the game uncompetitive (in fact I say quite opposite *read my post above*) Infinites are locks are part of the competitive game and it sounds like people have got a real problem with those elements that make the game competitive. If thats the case stop playing the game.

 

[1048576]

I would agree. Some kind of chain grab cap system would have to be implemented.
*cue slippery slope BS*

Well, at least you aren't psychotic like daKID, who earnestly believes that DK deserves a better matchup with D3 than Fox enjoys with Pika.

That being said, where would we implement it? How would we enforce it? And yes, here comes slippery slope BS.

Ban combos?

 

[da K.I.D.]

I'm sorry, I thought the fact that I've ben bringing up the fact that Wario can be infinited by several characters several times in this thread alone now would indicate I was perfectly well aware of the fact that Wario can be infinited by several people.

1. The question remains, why aren't people whining about those infinites? 2. Also, techable infinite?!

3. But the burden of proof lies on you to prove this.

1. because off the top of my head the regions with wario players are, FL, NYC, and TX. and i know that in TX and NYC, they have the (in your mind) scrubby rulesets that ban/limit the stuff you can do to wario.
so in short, why arent people whining about this?
because its already been taken care of.
2. yea yea, whatever its still a 0-80 combo on wario that ends with a justice knee.
3.

Why is it on us? This is a NEW game, with ALL NEW mechanics, why isn't the burden of proof on YOU to prove that OLD criteria from quite different games are still valid?

I whole heartedly agree with this statement.


p.s. @ above comment...
i understand you dont agree with my views, but does that really make me the type of person that would go crazy and kill random innocent people without rhyme or reason?
cus thats what i think of when I think of a psychotic person.

 

[ShadowLink84]

if this is directed at me i suggest you go back and read the last sentance of my last post

Probably my error, n which case how would you even be able to monitor the re-grabs?
how would you be able to dictate how many grabs are allowed.
Why should they be limited?

yes they are what game are you playing?

you cannot be serious.
items and stages are not banned because of them being unfair or fair. Ever.
I cannot believe you would even argue against me on that point.

I think that each time a new game comes out, it is up to you to prove that the old criteria is still applicable for the new game. Seeing that every new game is slightly different.

Why?
if we have something that has been proven to work across many, many different games and many, many different genres and has proven to work effectively, WHY SHOULD WE HAVE TO REPROVE WHAT IS ALREADY PROVEN!?

Thats like saying we have to prove that stars and planets are round everytime a planet and star is made.

oh and kid you are psychotic. That last time when someone took your twinky. I still have nightmares about it.

 

[camzaman]

Fine, ban half of the characters and strategies and techniques in the game to have more character diversity and fun... despite it being anti-Competitive to do so. Host your own tournaments.

Even da K.I.D. doesn't agree with those philosophies (IIRC).

I'm against any character banning, just infinites.

 

[ShadowLink84]

We should ban ROB since he isn't even a character.
ban MK because he is a boob. The mask is a nipple protector.
We should ban DDD cause Sakurai voices him.


No one can argue that logic.

Spoiler

Or I hope they won't

 

[cot(θ)]

What about 0-100s? It doesn't seem right that a character that can be taken from 0-100 fares worse than a character that can be taken from 0-death. Wouldn't you agree?

I would say that allowing 0-100% chaingrabs/locks/whatevers encourages development of the metagame of the character that is affected so that they can find a way around it, or fight effectively at that % or whatever. 0-death doesn't encourage any development of the metagame. People will just counterpick. That's not good for the development of the metagame as a whole.

Edit: Of course many people will stil CP from Fox when up against Pikachu, but it's not an auto-win, so people will still have hope of turning that matchup at least a little bit in Fox's favour by dveloping his metagame.

 

[Yuna]

I would say that allowing 0-100% chaingrabs/locks/whatevers encourages development of the metagame of the character that is affected so that they can find a way around it, or fight effectively at that % or whatever. 0-death doesn't encourage any development of the metagame. People will just counterpick. That's not good for the development of the metagame as a whole.

Inane logic. How will 0-death not encourage any development at all while 0-100% (which in many cases are near death) will? So what if there are ways "around it"? If the match-up is nonetheless 80-20 or somesuch, people will counterpick.

Edit: Of course many people will stil CP from Fox when up against Pikachu, but it's not an auto-win, so people will still have hope of turning that matchup at least a little bit in Fox's favour by dveloping his metagame.

Pray tell, how many high level Foxes have you seen stick with Fox when going up against high level Pikachus? And how is Pikachu vs. Fox not an auto-win?

 

[cot(θ)]

Inane logic. How will 0-death not encourage any development at all while 0-100% (which in many cases are near death) will? So what if there are ways "around it"? If the match-up is nonetheless 80-20 or somesuch, people will counterpick.


Pray tell, how many high level Foxes have you seen stick with Fox when going up against high level Pikachus? And how is Pikachu vs. Fox not an auto-win?

Please try to refrain from flinging insults before countering my arguments, and realise that I do not preclude the possibility of myself being wrong. This is simply what I believe, for now.

80-20 is not an auto win. DDD vs. DK is an auto win. Can you deny that people are going to be trying to enhance Fox's metagame by trying to improve the Pikachu matchup? I believe they will be, because trying to improve a characters matchups, even very bad matchups, is part of what drives the progression of the metagame.

I believe, however, that there will be nobody who will try to improve the DDD vs. DK matchup from either side if the infinite is allowed, DDD players because it's an autowin and DK players because its a forced CP. This does not lead to the advancement of either characters' metagame.

Don't think of a matchup as a situation in a tourney, but as a tool leading to the progression of both characters' metagames. In the case of DDD and DK, the infinite effectively removes this tool.

 

[1048576]

Psychosis: In the general sense, a mental illness that markedly interferes with a person's capacity to meet life's everyday demands. In a specific sense, it refers to a thought disorder in which reality testing is grossly impaired.

http://www.medterms.com/script/main/art.asp?articlekey=5110

Psychotic means experiencing psychosis.

I consider everyone who believes something given no evidence to support their beliefs to be psychotic. This applys to Christians as well as pro-bans who think DK/D3 should be better for DK than Fox/Pika is for Fox

 

[da K.I.D.]

Probably my error, n which case how would you even be able to monitor the re-grabs?
how would you be able to dictate how many grabs are allowed.
Why should they be limited?

I would do it the exact same way Xyro and Inui do it in their tourneys, ask them...

you cannot be serious.
items and stages are not banned because of them being unfair or fair. Ever.
I cannot believe you would even argue against me on that point.

I could have sworn that items were banned because random powerups werent fair, and i could have sworn shadow moses island was banned because getting wall infinited by D3 whenever you got grabbed wasnt fair...