Should King Dedede's infinite chaingrab be banned?

[Lord Knight]

If you're gonna use another game at least get your **** together. The stuff people are saying now are like when I used Megaman 2 as a reason to ban Meta Knight (can't beat the tornado in that game either).

 

[Ulevo]

Sweet Jesus.

Walk-off stages protect everyone, not just a select group.

And saying that my judgment is skewed in deciding that 26 is too much but 6 is okay is just as ridiculous when you consider the fact that you're using the same vague, undefined judgment I'm using when you say 6 is the same as 26.

The difference is he isn't arguing an arbitrary number like you are. He's arguing that the technique as a whole is ridiculous, and shouldn't be used on 1 character, or 39 characters.

You are the one drawing the line, not him. Therefor, he is not in the wrong on that logic.

 

[-Wolfy-]

Oh, so it's game breaking for 26 characters to lose a stock after a grab, but not 6? So where's the line? Do you even have a line? Where do we draw the line at which it becomes broken or not? Why is it you get to decide that stocking a character after a grab on 26 is broken, but 6 isn't?

The technique itself is broken, and that is what matters. It shouldn't exist, whether if it be on 1 character or the whole cast. You ban it, or you don't. You don't half *** the rules.



Tell Bum that Donkey Kong isn't viable.

Tell Xyro that Samus isn't viable.

Tell Boss that Mario and Luigi are not viable.

Tell Sliq that Bowser isn't viable.

Then come back to me with your straw man, sorry excuse for an argument. You're basically saying "oh, those characters are **** anyway, so who gives a ****?"

You just proved my point, moron.



Straw maning irrelevant points again.

I love playing Guilty Gear by the way. We're talking about Brawl. Now try and pay attention to what the actual conversation is, alright?

I'm not asking to balance Brawl. I am arguing to ban a technique that is obviously broken to whomever it is used on, that stalls the match and takes complete control away from the player who is victimized by it. That should never happen in a fighting game, regardless of how balance it is or isn't.

You've regressed to name-calling and ad-hominem attacks, maybe you should cool down and come back after a walk or something. you aren't contributing.

 

[pure_awesome]

Why? What if I wanted to play Falcon, but all the other characters are too good to play him. I think we should ban them all to make that possible. Why care about character weaknesses when we can just ban things instead of finding a way to beat it or maybe even picking up another character? Nah, every character should be viable.

How the he-
Look, I said that the infinite centralizes DK's game.
You said that it's the DK mains fault for taking him.

It's irrelevant because who's fault it is has no impact the fact that it centralizes DK's game.

 

[Ulevo]

MvC2 would like a word with you.

For the love of God stop straw maning. Didn't you read what Umbreon said?

You've regressed to name-calling and ad-hominem attacks, maybe you should cool down and come back after a walk or something. you aren't contributing.

I'm contributing in an aggressive manner.

 

[aeghrur]

Lol, don't ask Anti-Ban to set the line.
Pro-Ban has the burden of proof, so Anti-ban doesn't need to set the line. We simply need to reject your line.

 

[Remzi]

You've regressed to name-calling and ad-hominem attacks, maybe you should cool down and come back after a walk or something. you aren't contributing.

Its not an ad-hominem if he actually refutes the point with logic.

Just sayin....

 

[pure_awesome]

Sweet, we're on to the ICs and wobbling now?

Now all we need is someone to compare this to Magneto's infinite in MvC2, and we'll have come completely full circle to 18 hours ago or so.

MvC2 would like a word with you.

YES!

Come on... come on...

 

[aeghrur]

Its not an ad-hominem if he actually refutes the point with logic.

Just sayin....

That's still an ad-hominem. That's just a hidden ad-hominem.

 

[BentoBox]

Because it's not reasoning we acted on in the past.

And don't ever berate anyone ever again for drawing conclusions based on past games, especially after sneaking that one in.

I'm refering to the rules we've set for BRAWL (6 months ago = the past). What are you babbling about?

 

[Kitamerby]

D3's infinite doesn't do anything special. I daresay no one here really cared about sheik's downthrow chain on Bowser, but that was 0-death, literally, if you did it correctly. .

Melee infinites were cooler. Ice Climbers chaingrab is flashy.

Sitting on your opponent over and over again isn't as cool as Sheik "Guillotine"ing them over and over again.

I say we ban things based on coolness from now on.

 

[TheBuzzSaw]

Fox's shine in Melee was way more broken than D3's infinite. NO BAN.

 

[-Wolfy-]

I meant calling him a moron and whatnot. You instantly discredit yourself in a logical debate once you become emotional, because when you become emotional you surrender logic.

 

[aeghrur]

Melee infinites were cooler. Ice Climbers chaingrab is flashy.

Sitting on your opponent over and over again isn't as cool as Sheik "Guillotine"ing them over and over again.

I say we ban things based on coolness from now on.

Let's ban MK.
He's gay and not cool.
Let's also ban Lucario and Chocolate, cuz they're not cool.
xD Jk.

 

[Ulevo]

Lol, don't ask Anti-Ban to set the line.
Pro-Ban has the burden of proof, so Anti-ban doesn't need to set the line. We simply need to reject your line.

Pro ban isn't setting a line. Anti Ban is, however, which has continuously been pointed out as a flawed method of logic. There shouldn't be a line. It's completely arbitrary, and up to the discretion of each individual.

 

[pure_awesome]

That's still an ad-hominem. That's just a hidden ad-hominem.

No it's not. An ad hominem attack completely ignores the subject matter and instead entirely attacks the person making the claim. He refuted the point and made fun of him at the same time.

That's not ad hominem, it's just being a *******. Which he seems fine with.

 

[Remzi]

That's still an ad-hominem. That's just a hidden ad-hominem.

No, it's simply an insult. An ad-hominem is when you use your insult as backing, rather than actually proving a point.

i.e: He is a moron, therefore his proof can't make any sense.

 

[pure_awesome]

Fox's shine in Melee was way more broken than D3's infinite. NO BAN.

Fox's shine single-handedly nearly destroyed the viability of an otherwise perfectly competitive character as a main?

That's news to me.

 

[RDK]

The difference is he isn't arguing an arbitrary number like you are. He's arguing that the technique as a whole is ridiculous, and shouldn't be used on 1 character, or 39 characters.

You are the one drawing the line, not him. Therefor, he is not in the wrong on that logic.

I'm not even drawing a line though; I'm saying that banning walk-off stages and the like helps the entire cast, not some arbitrary number in between.

It effects every single character in the game.

And I say that the technique isn't ridiculous, unless it makes it so that every single character in the game can't be played without being infinited for 3 stocks. It's an Akuma situation.

OMG, I just compared games. Maybe you should ban me too.

 

[Ulevo]

I meant calling him a moron and whatnot. You instantly discredit yourself in a logical debate once you become emotional, because when you become emotional you surrender logic.

When one becomes emotional, their reason becomes clouded. I don't need to be emotional to call someone a moron. If someone makes me legitimately believe they pulled a stupid, I am in my own right to call them out on it in my own manner. I don't expect anything less from the person I am arguing with.

And calling someone names doesn't mean the logic presented becomes any less valid. Sure, my opinion may not look as appealing to believe because people are sensitive, but I don't really care about that. As long as the point is brought across in an properly communicated fashion.

 

[WastingPenguins]

RDK, time to man up.

You say:
26 broken matchups is too many and should be fixed.
6 isn't enough to warrant a fix.

WHERE IS THE LINE?

How many broken matchups is too many? Would 10 be enough? 15? Maybe 26 is the EXACT line, and if it had been 25 characters you would say it doesn't warrant a fix?

Again: at what EXACT number do you draw the line, since you seem so keen on drawing lines.

 

[CO18]

I'm not even drawing a line though; I'm saying that banning walk-off stages and the like helps the entire cast, not some arbitrary number in between.

It effects every single character in the game.

And I say that the technique isn't ridiculous, unless it makes it so that every single character in the game can't be played without being infinited for 3 stocks. It's an Akuma situation.

OMG, I just compared games. Maybe you should ban me too.

No it didnt effect every single character in the game. Only characters that could be chaingrabbed. So why should that be banned and this not according to your logic?

 

[BigLøu]

Once again, this would be banned if the 5 charcters that could be infinited werent randoms like luigi,DK,Bowser,Mario, and samus.
Imagine instead, if these 5 charcters that could be infinited were meta,snake,falco,game and watch, and rob. I guarentee that this **** would be banned if it applied to those top tiers,so why not look at it that way.

 

[ArcPoint]

LOL, I posted way too late and post has already been addressed. =S

In order to contribute to the thread... I think it should be banned for reasons aforementioned.

 

[bob-e]

OMG, I just compared games. Maybe you should ban me too.

Your argument is too good and easy to use.

It should be banned because I don't feel like countering it with another argument.

How do you chaingrab a person into oblivion on a walkoff stage if only 26 out of 36 (or 39 depending on how you count it) can be chaingrabbed?

Chain grabs weren't the only issue with walk off stages. There was also laser/tilt/jab locking and back throw camping.

 

[Remzi]

I meant calling him a moron and whatnot. You instantly discredit yourself in a logical debate once you become emotional, because when you become emotional you surrender logic.

Now that would be the ad-hominem.

You're basically saying: "You brought in emotion so your points aren't logical."

 

[BentoBox]

The entire cast cannot be chaingrabbed...

 

[Ulevo]

I'm not even drawing a line though

; And I say that the technique isn't ridiculous, unless it makes it so that every single character in the game.

Way to go. You're officially top tier.

 

[-Wolfy-]

When one becomes emotional, their reason becomes clouded. I don't need to be emotional to call someone a moron. If someone makes me legitimately believe they pulled a stupid, I am in my own right to call them out on it in my own manner. I don't expect anything less from the person I am arguing with.

And calling someone names doesn't mean the logic presented becomes any less valid. Sure, my opinion may not look as appealing to believe because people are sensitive, but I don't really care about that. As long as the point is brought across in an properly communicated fashion.

I'm simply pointing out that if you need to call someone a moron to get your point across, you aren't persuasive enough to do so with logic.

Now that would be the ad-hominem.

You're basically saying: "You brought in emotion so your points aren't logical."

But that is simply contesting the content of his argument. It's not quite personal yet. I haven't made any efforts to insult him.

 

[Fatmanonice]

Go bug HeroMystic if you want specifics; my point was that, with the possible exception of Samus, they aren't heavily disadvantaged. It's not unwinnable by any means, unlike it is with the infinite allowed.



Removing Metaknight means you lose a playable character. Removing Dedede's infinite means you gain five playable characters.

Just because the match up becomes something like 70-30 instead of 80-20 doesn't mean that the character is no longer disadvantaged. Also, why aren't the infinites that Marth/Charizard has against Ness/Lucas being brought up? Why aren't the infinites that Yoshi/ZSS/Ike/Peach/Zelda/Captain Falcon/Ganondorf/Bowser has against Wario being brought up? How about the infinite ZSS has on Squirtle? What about the edge dthrow infinite that Snake still has on a good percentage of the cast? What about the Ice Climber's infinites? What about the 0-70% chain grab that Pikachu has against Fox and Wolf. What about the dthrow chaingrab that can go as high as 120% if timed right that Wario has on Wolf, Fox, Snake, Bowser, Donkey Kong, and King Dedede? Do you see where I'm going with this? Narrowing down the discussion this much is pointless and you might as well talk about them all if your goal is to "make everyone more viable overall."

Regarding Metaknight, more than half of the cast has 70-30 or worse matchups against him. Banning a character is much easier than banning a technique especially when it will be debated how long King Dedede's dthrow should last. Okay, you can no longer do 0-death but would 0-50 be okay? 0-80? 0-20? You basically have to deal with conflicting opinions on the matter which would lead to problems in bigger tournaments.

Also, you don't gain anyone because it's just one match up for those characters and it's only 5 characters. Donkey Kong gains a little bit while Samus, Luigi, Mario, and Bowser still get knocked around by most of the high/top tier characters and, once again, they all get ***** by Metaknight so it's kind of a moot point.

 

[CO18]

Just because the match up becomes something like 70-30 instead of 80-20 doesn't mean that the character is no longer disadvantaged. Also, why aren't the infinites that Marth/Charizard has against Ness/Lucas being brought up? Why aren't the infinites that Yoshi/ZSS/Ike/Peach/Zelda/Captain Falcon/Ganondorf/Bowser has against Wario being brought up? How about the infinite ZSS has on Squirtle? What about the edge dthrow infinite that Snake still has on a good percentage of the cast? What about the Ice Climber's infinites? What about the 0-70% chain grab that Pikachu has against Fox and Wolf. What about the dthrow chaingrab that can go as high as 120% if timed right that Wario has on Wolf, Fox, Snake, Bowser, Donkey Kong, and King Dedede? Do you see where I'm going with this? Narrowing down the discussion this much is pointless and you might as well talk about them all if your goal is to "make everyone more viable overall."

Regarding Metaknight, more than half of the cast has 70-30 or worse matchups against him. Banning a character is much easier than banning a technique especially when it will be debated how long King Dedede's dthrow should last. Okay, you can no longer do 0-death but would 0-50 be okay? 0-80? 0-20? You basically have to deal with conflicting opinions on the matter which would lead to problems in bigger tournaments.

Also, you don't gain anyone because it's just one match up for those characters and it's only 5 characters. Donkey Kong gains a little bit while Samus, Luigi, Mario, and Bowser still get knocked around by most of the high/top tier characters and, once again, they all get ***** by Metaknight so it's kind of a moot point.

Marth and Charizard do not have infinites on them anymore and we're talking about DEDEDE's INFINITE that makes 100:0 matchups as of now. That is for later talk.

Who says thosematchups are 70:30? Random people such as you??? Im just wondering. You go find 2 people of exact equal skill and when the Metaknight player wins 7/10 of the matches you let me know.

It is also not one match, anyone can pick Dedede and do this once again wtf.

Whether or not they lose to most high/top tier characters is irrelevant and they for the most part dont. We're talking about removing impossible matchups..

 

[RDK]

Way to go. You're officially top tier.

RDK, time to man up.

You say:
26 broken matchups is too many and should be fixed.
6 isn't enough to warrant a fix.

WHERE IS THE LINE?

How many broken matchups is too many? Would 10 be enough? 15? Maybe 26 is the EXACT line, and if it had been 25 characters you would say it doesn't warrant a fix?

Again: at what EXACT number do you draw the line, since you seem so keen on drawing lines.

26 is the whole cast. That's where concern should start to enter people's decisions.

6? Not so much.

Way to go. You're officially top tier.

I respect you too much from the Debate Hall to resort to my usual tirade against illogical arguments, so I'll just skip that part and jump to not repeating my arguments.

 

[aeghrur]

Pro ban isn't setting a line. Anti Ban is, however, which has continuously been pointed out as a flawed method of logic. There shouldn't be a line. It's completely arbitrary, and up to the discretion of each individual.

So then tell me, what are the criteria for banning a tech?
Do tell, considering that we REALLY shouldn't be doing this dirty work for you, lol.

Also, meh, insults, ad-hominems, w/e.

RDK, time to man up.

You say:
26 broken matchups is too many and should be fixed.
6 isn't enough to warrant a fix.

WHERE IS THE LINE?

How many broken matchups is too many? Would 10 be enough? 15? Maybe 26 is the EXACT line, and if it had been 25 characters you would say it doesn't warrant a fix?

Again: at what EXACT number do you draw the line, since you seem so keen on drawing lines.

He's saying 6 isn't the line. You make a line, you set the criteria for a ban. If you don't have one, no ban. If yours become rejected, no ban. Burden of proof there.
6 doesn't work as it's too miniscule to matter considering it is 6/35, and the chance for this match up to happen is 6/1000 or so.

 

[CO18]

26 is the whole cast. That's where concern should start to enter people's decisions.

6? Not so much.



I respect you too much from the Debate Hall to resort to my usual tirade against illogical arguments, so I'll just skip that part and jump to not repeating my arguments.

26 is the whole cast?

When the hell did this happen? I could've sworn there were 39 characters in this game.

What version are you playing? This aint melee son.

 

[Remzi]

Marth and Charizard do not have infinites on them anymore and we're talking about DEDEDE's INFINITE that makes 100:0 matchups as of now. That is for later talk.

Who says thosematchups are 70:30? Random people such as you??? Im just wondering. You go find 2 people of exact equal skill and when the Metaknight player wins 7/10 of the matches you let me know.

It is also not one match, anyone can pick Dedede and do this once again wtf.

Whether or not they lose to most high/top tier characters is irrelevant and they for the most part dont. We're talking about removing impossible matchups..

I agree with your points, but I just wanna note that a matchup ratio is not necessarily the expected win/loss ratio or percentage.

 

[pure_awesome]

26 is the whole cast.

Der?

I must have a copy of Brawl Premium, or something. Did you guys get Sonic in yours?

 

[RDK]

26 is the whole cast?

When the hell did this happen? I could've sworn there were 39 characters in this game.

What version are you playing? This aint melee son.

WTF? I wasn't even addressing you.

The nobody I was posting magically produced 26 in his post, so I assumed he was referring to Melee. In case you didn't know, 26 in Melee pretty much encompasses the whole roster.

Der?

I must have a copy of Brawl Premium, or something. Did you guys get Sonic in yours?

What? Oh, I'm sorry. I didn't think Sonic was considered tournament viable.

 

[aeghrur]

4*9=36.
3 is next to 2.
forget random is not a character.
Make a typo.
Boom, 26. Jeez, SO HARD TO FIGURE OUT.

What? Oh, I'm sorry. I didn't think Sonic was considered tournament viable.

lol, fuck you.
<3

 

[CO18]

So then tell me, what are the criteria for banning a tech?
Do tell, considering that we REALLY shouldn't be doing this dirty work for you, lol.

Also, meh, insults, ad-hominems, w/e.


He's saying 6 isn't the line. You make a line, you set the criteria for a ban. If you don't have one, no ban. If yours become rejected, no ban. Burden of proof there.
6 doesn't work as it's too miniscule to matter considering it is 6/35, and the chance for this match up to happen is 6/1000 or so.

Our line is 0 wtf. How ******** at you. It shouldnt effect ANYONE is our point.

And no it is not too miniscule to matter and the chance of the matchup happening is not 6/1000. Besides the fact that 1/35th is not 6/1000.

ANYONE AND THEIR MOMMA can pick Dedede, you are not restricted to using your main.

 

[Remzi]

WTF? I wasn't even addressing you.

The nobody I was posting magically produced 26 in his post, so I assumed he was referring to Melee. In case you didn't know, 26 in Melee pretty much encompasses the whole roster.

26 is referring to the number of characters D3 can chain grab. Not sure if thats accurate or not.

What? Oh, I'm sorry. I didn't think Sonic was considered tournament viable.

Sonic is actually semi-tourney viable.