Should King Dedede's infinite chaingrab be banned?

[M15t3R E]

Yes, Edreese, both D3's infinite and Bridge of Eldin need to be banned.
No auto-wins. It does nothing positive for competitive brawl.

I hope they vote on this soon. I don't like long, drawn out debates like the MK debate.

 

[EdreesesPieces]

Uh, even Yoshi's Story has hazards and that stage is considered a nuetral (those jumping platforms are hazards. For example they can eat up Ness' pk thunder recovery and cause him to suicide). If you are claiming that Eldin's hazards are broken, then you are wrong. You can just shield the running guy and you can see the stage is gonna split from a mile away, and can just recover and grab the ledge. The hazards on Halberd and Frigate are much more deadly or equally deadly and those are widely considered viable tournament stages.

 

[KO M]

DDD would drop though, if his infinate grab goes away, and besides its not infinate the moves get stale, sure it could bring someone to 100% easily, but its not infinate.

 

[highandmightyjoe]

DeDeDe would not drop. He till does very well without the infinite, and most of the characters he can infinite he has an advantage on anyway.

 

[KO M]

have a piont there

 

[M15t3R E]

LOL at calling the jumping platforms on YI hazards...

They'll save your life far more often than they'll harm you.
It can aid in recovery for most characters.

 

[pure_awesome]

Yeah, I was for sure kidding. 's why I capitalized hazards. I meant it like "ooo... hazards..."

I know, I know, sarcasm and the internet don't work well together. My bad.

LOL at calling the jumping platforms on YI hazards...

They'll save your life far more often than they'll harm you.

Actually, I for sure consider them hazards. I've had it happen several times where I'll be charging Falco's UpB, aiming straight for the ledge, and at the last second the ghost shoots me way up. I keep the same angle, and end up completely helpless, just begging for my opponent to smash me back out.

 

[M15t3R E]

Actually, I for sure consider them hazards. I've had it happen several times where I'll be charging Falco's UpB, aiming straight for the ledge, and at the last second the ghost shoots me way up. I keep the same angle, and end up completely helpless, just begging for my opponent to smash me back out.

And how many times has it saved you?

You are finding infrequent, unique examples of how it can hinder you. 95% of the time for any given character it will either not affect your match at all or help you to recover.

 

[bobson]

I keep the same angle, and end up completely helpless, just begging for my opponent to smash me back out.

Or to kill you with a shoryuken. WHERE ARE YOUR LASERS NOW?

 

[pure_awesome]

And how many times has it saved you?

You are finding infrequent, unique examples of how it can hinder you. 95% of the time for any given character it will either not affect your match at all or help you to recover.

*shrug* That's true.

But it's still a hazard.

In doubles, your own teammate is a hazard. It doesn't matter that 99.99% of the time, these things are helpful. They still have the potential to hurt you, and are therefore hazards.

 

[M15t3R E]

Lol, that's a very loose definition of 'hazard'. With that definition, every stage has some sort of hazard.
If you think about it, every stage has *something* that has at least a minute possibility of messing you up.

 

[Master Raven]

Does DK even have that bad of a matchup against D3? At worst I could imagine it being 60/40 D3's advantage but looking at the tools they both have, it doesn't seem too bad of a matchup.

 

[BigLøu]

Id bet anything that this **** would be banned if it applied to falco,snake,metaknight,game and watch, and rob.

 

[HeroMystic]

Does DK even have that bad of a matchup against D3? At worst I could imagine it being 60/40 D3's advantage but looking at the tools they both have, it doesn't seem too bad of a matchup.

The D3 Match-up thread is pretty outdated, but they said it was 60:40 DDD without infinite, and 9:1 with it.

Pretty huge gap if you ask me.

 

[Matt07]

Id bet anything that this **** would be banned if it applied to falco,snake,metaknight,game and watch, and rob.

Lol, I bet you it would too.

@Hero
I think it would 60:40 in Dedede's favour too, right Hero? Or it'd be pretty freaking close, Mario can combo Dedede very well.

 

[HeroMystic]

Mario would be 60:40 DDD without infinite. Luigi would be anywhere from even to 60:40 Luigi. According to my good friend Hive, Samus still does pretty bad against DDD, but the infinite makes it a 'LOL!' match-up. I'm assuming it'd be 70:30 DDD according to her.

Not sure about Bowser though since I never check up on him.

 

[ShadowLink84]

Therefore invalidating your claims that camping played such a major aspect in the ban of stages... Thx.

Really? Do enlighten me as to how it is invalidated. Considering nothing in my statement contradicts what i said earlier.
Camping did promote toe the banning of walk off stages as did CG's. it wasn't just one factor it was the result of several.

Yeah camping can be dealt with but it became stronger an led to the issues such as back camping.
So the game fell to camp,camp ,camp back throw, win.

It is already been brought up that it is impossible to avoid being grabbed by D3. And being grabbed by D3 ANYWHERE ensures an infinite. In the case of Eldin, it only works at a SET distance, and you CAN knock him away from said position to lower the risks of getting gimped.

impossible? not true, characters like Samus have the ability to space against DDD with her Zair. Far from impossible. Otherwise, its impossible to avoid the IC's grab and lose a stock each time.

in the case of Eldin, you are again force to approach DDD (except for a few characters) primarily because of the fact that he can force you to get in range.

In none of the decisions taken in the past was the ratio of affected characters ever a factor. Why should it be now? I would love for you to quote an instance where that was the case. "We've calculated that for a game to remain viable competitively, X% of the roster should remain viable and therefore we frown upon the usage of x, y, z to ensure that this quota is met."

Must be a bad joe because on of the primary reasons that stages with walls was banned was because of how much of the cast coul perform an infinite. Only a select few could not which forced the game into being centralized on that one strategy or tactic.
Falling to "do this or lose."
Each decision on banning a stage was primarily on the majority of characters not the result of one or two.

No, not really.

Ya really. It was one of the points for walled stages being banned in melee and in brawl.

Did we actually see it happen? Did we witness the de-evolution of the metagame caused by said wall-infinites and whatnot at a competitive level? No. Hence, it is nothing but theorycrafting. Ravager decks, Akuma, Yu-gi-oh and Super Digimon Extreme: the card game, all were tested and decisions weren't made from theories...

Wrong.
Akuma was out for only 9 months within the U.S. before he was banned. The tournament results at that time did not show the same dominance. We did NOT have to witness the results in order to ban it.
In yu-gi-oh the cards were NEVER tested. You don't need to test REDMD to know it is a broken card.
With your logic, we should allow things that are obviously going to have an effect on the metagame to hav some time an wreck things before being banned.
Really, go an tell the yu-gi -oh players that because a car has not shown itself to be a broken card that it should not be banned. They'll laugh at you.

I thought of a ****ty analogy btw: Discrimination against women because they're not a majority. tough ****? No. If you are to apply standards, they should apply for everyone. :D

So you're claiming that there is discrimination against those 5 characters? >_>
Get a better analogy.
The standards dictate that it must have a real effect on the metagame as a whole.
Last I saw 5 characters are not equal to 30+ characters.

It sucks to be those characters when it happens, but it would be the same thing if 5 other characters were affected.
Its confine to a very small group, s we should ban it?
but we shouldn't ban the IC's infinites which work on EVERYONE?
Seems like people are upset only because of how easy it is to do rather than focusing on the fact that its effect is very small on the metagame.

 

[~ Gheb ~]

I voted, now I can't view the results. I wanna know, who voted what. How do I do that?

I think the reasons for banning it are obvious.

 

[HeroMystic]

impossible? not true, characters like Samus have the ability to space against DDD with her Zair. Far from impossible. Otherwise, its impossible to avoid the IC's grab and lose a stock each time.

Samus' Z-air is not like Link's (where Link can actually keep DDD away from him the entire match). Samus' Z-air is long, yes, but her horribly low fall speed does not allow her to keep DDD away from her as long as he shields, drives Samus to the edge, and go for the grab.

Projectile spamming does not work due to the waddle dees, so Samus' main way of safely racking up damage is hindered by a significant amount. And lets not get into how she's gonna kill him.

It's not impossible, but it is severely unrealistic to avoid getting grabbed for three stocks.

 

[Narukari]

I don't know why people are thinking they can survive the tournament scene with only 1 character. Every character (excluding metaknight) has other characters that are a counterpick. The minute you choose what your main character is going to be, take a look at what his counters are, and chose a secondary that you can use against those characters. If your first 2 have a similar counter, chose a 3rd.

If DeDeDe is one of your mains counters, pick up a DeDeDe counter as a secondary. Easy solution for an easy problem.

 

[Fino]

The characters DDD can infinite are completely un-playable. After playing affinity's DDD I realized that the only way DDD can rack up damage is with chain-grabs... you make them infinites, and it's instant win. If you just ban infinites in general I'll be happy, with the exception to infinite's like IC's CG, which actually take some skill to learn :-/
I dunno, the fact that all of this is in the game is pretty ********.


~Fino

 

[Luigi player]

I voted, now I can't view the results. I wanna know, who voted what. How do I do that?

I think the reasons for banning it are obvious.

Oh, that's why I could always see who voted what at the "ban MK" poll, lol.

It sucks that you can't look at it if you already voted =/

 

[Crow!]

While counterpicking is an important, and a valid, part of the game, DDD's infinite grab introduces too much importance on proper Rock-Scissors-Paper play. Selecting any of the 5 victimized characters when your opponent is counterpicking is just suicide; even a player who has only played DDD for, like 10 (non-competitive) matches total like myself can just waltz in and slaughter any of those characters.

Essentially, the problem is that when the specific matchups happen, the game is broken, and skill becomes of zero importance; the DDD player WILL win. Thus, once you win a match, you are effectively banned from selecting 5 characters (or else your opponent counterpicks DDD), and when you select any of the afflicted characters for the first game of a match, you effectively first play Rock-Scissors-Paper with your opponent to find out if you automatically lose.

With the arguable exception of DK, none of the hurt characters really need the help to be doomed to obscurity, which is why the problem gets swept under the carpet so often. Were MK susceptible, you'd see how stupid the game becomes instantly:
If they choose MK, you choose DDD and win.
If they choose DDD, you choose a DDD counter and win.
If they choose a DDD counter, you choose MK and win.

Unless there was a huge disparity of skill, nobody would ever win a game where their opponent counterpicked against them (and even then, not in the top case). I argue that just because the losing characters aren't played much doesn't mean that we can overlook the stupidity of the situation. Eliminate one exploit, and the game picks up 5 characters it didn't have before. And what does the game lose? DDD STILL counters all the infiniteable characters even without the infinite.


Another argument (that I've voiced before) is that allowing counterpicks to characters to lead to auto-wins is not really any different from letting counterpicked stages lead to auto-wins. Any argument that leads to the banning of Eldin also leads to the ban of this particular action.

 

[~AceR~]

I think anything infinite should be banned. It's simply impractical.
Think about some blatantly unskilled player scoring prize money simply because he felt the need to practice his grabbing last weekend. (joke but still...)

 

[viparagon]

I know this is offtopic, but

in melee, stages like venom were banned because different positions in the stage gave players "an unfair tactical advantage". how is planking any different?

 

[The Halloween Captain]

I don't know why people are thinking they can survive the tournament scene with only 1 character. Every character (excluding metaknight) has other characters that are a counterpick. The minute you choose what your main character is going to be, take a look at what his counters are, and chose a secondary that you can use against those characters. If your first 2 have a similar counter, chose a 3rd.

If DeDeDe is one of your mains counters, pick up a DeDeDe counter as a secondary. Easy solution for an easy problem.

Do you use any of the characters involved?

EDIT: post #666

 

[kr3wman]

I know this is offtopic, but

in melee, stages like venom were banned because different positions in the stage gave players "an unfair tactical advantage". how is planking any different?

You can plank on any stages? I don't know.

 

[TheNix]

As a DK main, I feel that it should be banned. Regular chain-grabbing is fine (which, honestly, is enough that DDD will keep an advantage on DK even if the infinite is banned), but the infinite is so broken that it makes the matchup close to unwinnable for DK. Imagine the first round of a tournament where on the double blind, you pick DK and your opponent (possibly because he saw you playing a match earlier) picks DDD. Even if this person barely plays DDD, they've just won the battle.

All this said, I don't expect the infinite (or any other infinites) to be banned. I'm just hoping I can convince the local tournament organizers to ban it.

 

[Master Raven]

Gheb, you can view the results by clicking on the number of votes displayed on either choice in the poll.

 

[Arturito_Burrito]

I voted, now I can't view the results. I wanna know, who voted what. How do I do that?

I think the reasons for banning it are obvious.

you click on the numbers of yes or no.

 

[HeroMystic]

I don't know why people are thinking they can survive the tournament scene with only 1 character. Every character (excluding metaknight) has other characters that are a counterpick. The minute you choose what your main character is going to be, take a look at what his counters are, and chose a secondary that you can use against those characters. If your first 2 have a similar counter, chose a 3rd.

If DeDeDe is one of your mains counters, pick up a DeDeDe counter as a secondary. Easy solution for an easy problem.

You're theorycrafting.

No one believes they can survives tournaments with just one character. I have secondaries to help out my Mario and many others do the same. You're assuming the mains that want this banned are only playing with one character, you're wrong.

We want this banned because it provides an easy button to the rest of the cast!

Look at that badass Mario and Luigi (Boss) that's on fire! Looks like we better pull out DDD and infinite him to oblivion each round!
Look at that super-skilled Samus (Tudor/Rohins/Xyro) that's kicking so much rear! Oh, DDD, that's solved since all he has to do is beat em up a bit then wham, grab!
Wut? Bowser is winning (Sliq)? Can't let that happen! *uses DDD that has only been played for 3 minutes and 3-stocks due to infinite*
There's only one awesome DK main (BUM)... oh! That's because he's in a region that has it banned.

This isn't like all the other bad match-ups where the character's movesets outright dominate the other. These are only hard counters because of an infinite, an easy to execute infinite that can be done on the unfortunate five. This outright makes them nonviable for a tournament scene because anyone can magically pull out DDD each round, putting several layers of brick walls to break through. That means you have to use your secondary at the start of each round to avoid the easy button. When you do that, you are no longer a main of the unfortunate five.

Oh, and you do know DDD can infinite DDD too right? Irony?

 

[The Slayer]

Oh, that's why I could always see who voted what at the "ban MK" poll, lol.

It sucks that you can't look at it if you already voted =/

You can still see the results by clicking on the number of votes for either Yes or No.

 

[BentoBox]

Lol Edrees, I've been arguing that same exact point (eldin etc) since a few pages back. You're too slow!

 

[BentoBox]

Really? Do enlighten me as to how it is invalidated. Considering nothing in my statement contradicts what i said earlier.
Camping did promote toe the banning of walk off stages as did CG's. it wasn't just one factor it was the result of several.

http://www.smashboards.com/showpost.php?p=5987776&postcount=516
I asked you to name said factors. You came up with the fact that a lot of characters could CAMP on the side for an easy b-throw. I told you that alone couldn't have been enough to make the map go from counterpick to being banned, as you can still camp on a lot of maps being played right now in tourneys. You conceded. Edrees just came up with the exact same point as mine, and he's part of the SBR, as in he most likely took part in those decisions or should be most informed about them. @_@

Yeah camping can be dealt with but it became stronger an led to the issues such as back camping.
So the game fell to camp,camp ,camp back throw, win.

Please, take a look at the current stage set: http://www.smashboards.com/showthread.php?t=153706
There are a lot of maps where certain strats predominate, so what about them? Distant Planet can be banned for the same exact reasons. Corneria too. But it wasn't, and Eldin was.

impossible? not true, characters like Samus have the ability to space against DDD with her Zair. Far from impossible. Otherwise, its impossible to avoid the IC's grab and lose a stock each time.

Are you really going to argue that it is possible to avoid getting grabbed once a stock against a D3? So many people already went over this. Seibrik even issued a challenge to whoever claimed it was feasible. Show me your magic?

in the case of Eldin, you are again force to approach DDD (except for a few characters) primarily because of the fact that he can force you to get in range.

What side are you on again?

Must be a bad joe because on of the primary reasons that stages with walls was banned was because of how much of the cast coul perform an infinite. Only a select few could not which forced the game into being centralized on that one strategy or tactic.
Falling to "do this or lose."
Each decision on banning a stage was primarily on the majority of characters not the result of one or two.
Ya really. It was one of the points for walled stages being banned in melee and in brawl.

And you have yet to provide me an example. Even if it had only worked on 49% of the cast, it would've been banned. Ratios never mattered, and never should.

Wrong.
Akuma was out for only 9 months within the U.S. before he was banned. The tournament results at that time did not show the same dominance. We did NOT have to witness the results in order to ban it.
In yu-gi-oh the cards were NEVER tested. You don't need to test REDMD to know it is a broken card.
With your logic, we should allow things that are obviously going to have an effect on the metagame to hav some time an wreck things before being banned.
Really, go an tell the yu-gi -oh players that because a car has not shown itself to be a broken card that it should not be banned. They'll laugh at you.

I think it is a fact that nothing so far in smash has been banned/frowned upon based on pure theorycraft.

So you're claiming that there is discrimination against those 5 characters? >_>
Get a better analogy.
The standards dictate that it must have a real effect on the metagame as a whole.
Last I saw 5 characters are not equal to 30+ characters.

It sucks to be those characters when it happens, but it would be the same thing if 5 other characters were affected.
Its confine to a very small group, s we should ban it?
but we shouldn't ban the IC's infinites which work on EVERYONE?
Seems like people are upset only because of how easy it is to do rather than focusing on the fact that its effect is very small on the metagame.

No, my analogy is perfect because that is exactly what you're doing. 27 characters were prone to forms of infinites. We got rid of the issue for 22 of them, and did not take similar measures for the remaining 5.

And again, ICs have been gone over. I don't feel like repeating everyone. NOW, it really feels like you're just arguing for the lulz -.-

 

[Deleted member]

don't double post.

why isn't this resolved yet?

bent-*** box, lol.

 

[Scipion]

going to post in this spam-celebration
first, I think saying that ICs infinite should NOT be banned, because its hard to do. this is imo oviously rubbish. It should be banned regardless of how hard it is to do. BUT, it doesn´t mean it should be banned: for example, if ICs grab range would be as small as jigglypuffs rest, it would be fair: you are going SO close? your going to be punished for this! That would be fair. like home-run bat, but instead of strat-up lag it would have tiny range.

This isn´t case for ICs (AFAIK) and definately NOT for K. DDD!

His range for grab is HUGE, for bowser (as he is my main.. dunno others but I bet its same) its completely impossible to avoid it: yes, completely impossible. Well, unless its super-noob. There aren´t any safe options, EVERY SINGLE ATTACK (except fire of course) can be shield grabed. Nearly no need to predict. Really. Even if he would fire breath you to 999% he will never land ending blow, unless king dedede do a mistake. Thanks to grab. That applies to EVERY SINGLE unfavorable matchup though!! This is what makes it tough. Because of that, we need to move to high level of play, not perfect play and this is where the problem lies: now, its about opinion. Now, we must recognise if it makes matchup impossible. I say it is. It is impossible to defeat king DDD with these. Well, nearly, if king DDD do ALOT of mistakes, he CAN lose, but thats only theory, really. At normal level of play he will not lose. Thats why it should be banned! It makes matchup impossible. Now, we have to deal with "counterpick.. lulululul you fail ****rpik lululul u fail dont get grabbed!!!!!!!!iiiiiiIII1111oneoneone111!!eleven"
They want to make overcentralised metagame, make 5 characters unplayeble at higher levels (higher than "n00000b")? Why? They think that its better to make 5 characters unplayable to gain nothing? They think that there must not be any bans, because it would make people think "and ban this, and this, and this!!!!"? There should be more ban hammers, there should be MANY things banned, but it isnt going to happen because of THIS. And thats wrong, people are scared of spams. but thats all I can say. I thing BAN is needed!!!

 

[ShadowLink84]

I asked you to name said factors. You came up with the fact that a lot of characters could CAMP on the side for an easy b-throw. I told you that alone couldn't have been enough to make the map go from counterpick to being banned, as you can still camp on a lot of maps being played right now in tourneys. You conceded. Edrees just came up with the exact same point as mine, and he's part of the SBR, as in he most likely took part in those decisions or should be most informed about them. @_@

I mentioned that camping was part of a factor yes and I also mentioned that while you can camp on other maps, camping on a walk off is more powerful primarily because of the fact you can easily just throw them behind you and kill them.
In either case I lost this point .

Please, take a look at the current stage set: http://www.smashboards.com/showthread.php?t=153706
There are a lot of maps where certain strats predominate, so what about them? Distant Planet can be banned for the same exact reasons. Corneria too. But it wasn't, and Eldin was.

Because even though those strategies dominate, it isn't a "do this or lose" situation. I mentioned how it was a combination of those two wher eit destroys the game.

Can it be said that is the situation with those stages? That the great majority of charcaters are forced to do the same strategy or lose?

Are you really going to argue that it is possible to avoid getting grabbed once a stock against a D3? So many people already went over this. Seibrik even issued a challenge to whoever claimed it was feasible. Show me your magic?

Really? So under that logic the IC's infinite should be banned because its impossible to not get grabbed by them once a stock?

What is so very special about DDD's infinite that those characters lose every single ability to space themselves against the opponent?
Dk and bowser suffer most but Luigi, Samus and Mario all have the means of spacing themselves and staying out of grab range.

So tell me how DDD's infinite grab just completely destroys all their tools for spacing the opponent.

What side are you on again?

Depends on my mood.

And you have yet to provide me an example. Even if it had only worked on 49% of the cast, it would've been banned. Ratios never mattered, and never should.

That completely ignores what I said earlier. Ratios do matter because the extent to which it affects the game is always taken into account.
Hence why Akuma was banned. Do you honestly believe it was just because of his air fireball?
it was becuse he overcentralized the game and caused it to be "do this or lose."
DDD's infinite only affects 5 characters. So you have many other characters so not only does it not dominate, but it doesn't cause the game to be "use this infinite or lose", which is what happens with wall infinites.

I think it is a fact that nothing so far in smash has been banned/frowned upon based on pure theorycraft.

Infinite dimension cape.
Wall infinites (you said so yourself how they were never tested)
Stage bannings.

its more along the lines of provable theory rather than simple theorycrafting.

No, my analogy is perfect because that is exactly what you're doing. 27 characters were prone to forms of infinites. We got rid of the issue for 22 of them, and did not take similar measures for the remaining 5.

Did you even think of what you were saying when you came up with this analogy?
I am very surprised you would have the gall to even insinuate that the reasoning i use is even comparable to that of sexual discimination.

Syou are so intent on ignoring the nasty flaw in your analogy I'll address it.
Sexual discrimination was based on NOTHING. It was an ASSUMPTION of superiority just like racial discrimination.

Totally the same reasoning.
Get a better analogy.

And again, ICs have been gone over. I don't feel like repeating everyone.

You are stating that the infinites are unfair to those 5 characters yes?
Is the IC's infinite not unfair to everyoe else when it is performed on them? Could it not also be done as a form of stalling just like DDD's infinite? Or a guaranteed death just like the infinite?

What is so very special about DDD's infinite that completely and utterlystops the character from doing anything before and after the grab?

I ahve yet to see you or anyone else provide justification as to why DDD's infinite is so very different from the IC's other than ease of use which is not a factor.

 

[Deleted member]

What is so very special about DDD's infinite that completely and utterlystops the character from doing anything before and after the grab?

Before isn't the problem, but after most definitely is. It's an infinite that there is no defensive aspect to. Period. You get grabbed and you can press whatever you want and there is no result in any way. You lose full and complete control of your character.

I don't even see how this is debatable at this point. Next time you play this match, every time you grab DK/Bowser, just let them go and tell them to SD. It will actually be LESS ******** because at least when they come back, they will have more time to fight you than the infinite would give them with the same result.

edit: you can DI IC's throws in an effort to make them screw up.

 

[viparagon]

I'm curious to know what luigi can do to space himself, shadowlink.

 

[Dark Sonic]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pF6Gfa63TaA

And the Ice Climber's infinite is different how? No amount of DI will get you out of the regrab.

I understand the point that DDD has much larger grab range and thus it's much harder to avoid grabs from him, but there is no real difference once the grab is landed (other than difficulty of performance).

@Viparagon-I don't know, maybe he can bair or something.