Should King Dedede's infinite chaingrab be banned?

[Skyflyer]

No. It's fair and only works on 5 chars. If it worked on everyone, then it would be a problem.

 

[Remzi]

Lemme clear this statement. By "ease of use", I'm not saying how easy it is to get a grab or w/e, I'm saying how easy it is to be performed. Ease of use isn't really a factor because as long as something is there and it can help a player win, people will learn it, no matter how hard it is - and if they can't do it, they'll still try to execute it.

Not exactly, I don't see any ISJR in tourney play, for example.

 

[ShadowLink84]

Remember, don't get grabbed.

Must...space...properly....ARRRGH!

And he can't shieldgrab the rest of them? They all have shorter range. I understand Samus (to an extent) but Mario and Luigi don't have much range at all and can be snatched right of the air. At least DK and Bowser can KO him relatively easily.

You can shieldgrab the rest of them but unlike DK and bowser, the rest have some option to help them maintain themselves out of grab range.

They can kill DDD early but it means ltitle if he just grabs you out of everything.

 

[Lord Knight]

Not exactly, I don't see any ISJR in tourney play, for example.

Human restrictions apply.

I want to use another game as a precedent, but apparently that's not cool.

EDIT: If some dude used this technique to help him **** the **** out of other people, more people would probably learn it.

 

[Matador]

You can shieldgrab the rest of them but unlike DK and bowser, the rest have some option to help them maintain themselves out of grab range.

They can kill DDD early but it means ltitle if he just grabs you out of everything.

So...wouldn't these matchups be bad without the infinite? He would still CG the hell out of em since he can just shieldgrab everything. From what you're telling me, D3 doesn't even have to move, just shield when they're close.

It's like you vs a 2 year old in a fight. Then you vs a 2 year old while you're holding a machete. He still loses.

Spoiler

Wow...that's morbid.

 

[Cirno]

I still dont get how you're saying that one is over-centralizing on Dedede and the other isn't whereas you can counter pick for both.

Thinking it over, I'm beginning to lean towards the pro-ban side.( And not out of bias for player love)

I tried to create a process for the three comparisons and noticed it was more or less coming to DeDeDe focus/ centralization, which means if the process is flawed, we need to unban walk-offs and walls or ban this as well like you stated.


Using this chart I went through the processes assuming those with bad matchups(besides being chain grabbed off stage) auto-lose like we are with the infinite.

It ended up like this:

Eldin
Player a chooses DeDeDe> Only 14 characters can escape 1 grab = stock loss> Out of those 14, player B can only counterpick with 4> player b's 4 can be counter picked, but these counters are either in the cp 4 or he cannot win set due to 1 grab = 1 stock> Brawl essentially becomes focused on DeDeDe and his counterpicks>Stage picking, banning, and counter picking revolve around DeDeDe and his counterpicks



Infinite
Player a chooses DeDeDe> player b cannot win with infinitable character> player B chooses secondary Diddy instead




Infinite-B
Player a wins with DeDeDe through infinite> player B cannot win with infinited characters> Player B counter picks ICs

Is this processed flawed anywhere?

 

[da K.I.D.]

i would never let him live it down if I somehow managed to do it.

Wait a second I changed the challenge didn't I
my Dk (3 stock) vs his DDD (1stock)

Cookies are on the line.

i got 5 bucks on inui

No. It's fair and only works on 5 chars. If it worked on everyone, then it would be a problem.

is it a problem if it works on 6 characters?
is it a problem if it works on 7 characters?
is it a problem if it works on 8 characters?
is it a problem if it works on 9 characters?
is it a problem if it works on 10 characters?
is it a problem if it works on 11 characters?
is it a problem if it works on 12 characters?
is it a problem if it works on 13 characters?
is it a problem if it works on 14 characters?
is it a problem if it works on 15 characters?
is it a problem if it works on 16 characters?
is it a problem if it works on 17 characters?
is it a problem if it works on 18 characters?
is it a problem if it works on 19 characters?
is it a problem if it works on 20 characters?
is it a problem if it works on 21 characters?
is it a problem if it works on 22 characters?
is it a problem if it works on 23 characters?
is it a problem if it works on 24 characters?
is it a problem if it works on 25 characters?
is it a problem if it works on 26 characters?
is it a problem if it works on 27 characters?
is it a problem if it works on 28 characters?
is it a problem if it works on 29 characters?
is it a problem if it works on 30 characters?
is it a problem if it works on 31 characters?
is it a problem if it works on 32 characters?
is it a problem if it works on 33 characters?

 

[HeroMystic]

Running through these arguements in my head and ESPECIALLY tournament results and matchups ive experienced, i'm beginning to realize how unbroken MK is compared to these infinite chain grabs.

You got the same epiphany too?

And I understand Matador's point (while I have some disagreements), which is why I don't believe this'll be universally banned in the first place. But I'd like to have this banned if I happen to go to another region and I don't have to worry about it.

 

[•Col•]

Err.... I'm surprised how many people are upset over this.

Whenever Marth's infinite grab release was found on Ness and Lucas, no one seemed to give a crap. Yeah, people found a way to get out of it now, but still, people really didn't care then... xD

And why not ban other grabs like this like Pikachu vs. Fox? Yes, it's not an infinite, but it's 0-death... >_>

 

[TheMann]

So...wouldn't these matchups be bad without the infinite? He would still CG the hell out of em since he can just shieldgrab everything. From what you're telling me, D3 doesn't even have to move, just shield when they're close.

It's like you vs a 2 year old in a fight. Then you vs a 2 year old while you're holding a machete. He still loses.

Spoiler

Wow...that's morbid.

LMAO!!! I just had to comment on this because it made me laugh. Just the thought of a toddler with a machete is just silly.

But yea on topic BAN IT!!!

Edit: Ha I read it wrong. Still funny either way. Morbid but still funny lol

 

[da K.I.D.]

Err.... I'm surprised how many people are upset over this.

Whenever Marth's infinite grab release was found on Ness and Lucas, no one seemed to give a crap. Yeah, people found a way to get out of it now, but still, people really didn't care then... xD

And why not ban other grabs like this like Pikachu vs. Fox? Yes, it's not an infinite, but it's 0-death... >_>

actually its not
try lurking more, it doesnt kill, if you had read the thread you would know that

 

[•Col•]

LMAO!!! I just had to comment on this because it made me laugh. Just the thought of a toddler with a machete is just silly.

But yea on topic BAN IT!!!

I think he meant that YOU have the machete, not the toddler... You don't even need the machete to win the fight.

He's saying that DDD would rheype even without the infinite anyway... Unless I am misunderstanding... o-o;;

EDIT: And da K.I.D., yeah, you're right. I should totally read the past 90 pages. /sarcasm

I've been lurking the past couple days, and reading some of the posts every once in a while. Perhaps you could explain to me how it's not a 0-death? Or at least link to the page it was discussed on, since you obviously know this entire thread inside and out.

EDIT2: Ah, I thought Pikachu could usmash after the chaingrab, but after discussing it with my friend who mains Fox, apparently he can't. So it just is a 0 to kill range. That's better, I suppose.

But yeah, no one seemed to care about Marth's grab release on Ness and Lucas. The only ones who were trying to get it banned were their mains.

 

[Overswarm]

i got 5 bucks on inui


is it a problem if it works on 6 characters?
is it a problem if it works on 7 characters?
is it a problem if it works on 8 characters?
is it a problem if it works on 9 characters?
is it a problem if it works on 10 characters?
is it a problem if it works on 11 characters?
is it a problem if it works on 12 characters?
is it a problem if it works on 13 characters?
is it a problem if it works on 14 characters?
is it a problem if it works on 15 characters?
is it a problem if it works on 16 characters?
is it a problem if it works on 17 characters?
is it a problem if it works on 18 characters?
is it a problem if it works on 19 characters?
is it a problem if it works on 20 characters?
is it a problem if it works on 21 characters?
is it a problem if it works on 22 characters?
is it a problem if it works on 23 characters?
is it a problem if it works on 24 characters?
is it a problem if it works on 25 characters?
is it a problem if it works on 26 characters?
is it a problem if it works on 27 characters?
is it a problem if it works on 28 characters?
is it a problem if it works on 29 characters?
is it a problem if it works on 30 characters?
is it a problem if it works on 31 characters?
is it a problem if it works on 32 characters?
is it a problem if it works on 33 characters?

It isn't a slippery slope.

The general consensus is that 2/3rds, or near it, is a good number to look for. If it works on a good majority of the cast, it will inevitably over-centralize the metagame in a negative way.

There's a reason why 5 characters doesn't warrant a ban, and it's because it doesn't affect the game that much.

That siad, the ICs infinites haven't been banned and they work on everyone. There are reasons for that too.

 

[Matador]

I think he meant that YOU have the machete, not the toddler... You don't even need the machete to win the fight.

He's saying that DDD would rheype even without the infinite anyway... Unless I am misunderstanding... o-o;;

Yeah, that's about right

 

[adumbrodeus]

i got 5 bucks on inui

So do I.

is it a problem if it works on 6 characters?
is it a problem if it works on 7 characters?
is it a problem if it works on 8 characters?
is it a problem if it works on 9 characters?
is it a problem if it works on 10 characters?
is it a problem if it works on 11 characters?
is it a problem if it works on 12 characters?
is it a problem if it works on 13 characters?
is it a problem if it works on 14 characters?
is it a problem if it works on 15 characters?
is it a problem if it works on 16 characters?
is it a problem if it works on 17 characters?
is it a problem if it works on 18 characters?
is it a problem if it works on 19 characters?
is it a problem if it works on 20 characters?
is it a problem if it works on 21 characters?
is it a problem if it works on 22 characters?
is it a problem if it works on 23 characters?
is it a problem if it works on 24 characters?
is it a problem if it works on 25 characters?
is it a problem if it works on 26 characters?
is it a problem if it works on 27 characters?
is it a problem if it works on 28 characters?
is it a problem if it works on 29 characters?
is it a problem if it works on 30 characters?
is it a problem if it works on 31 characters?
is it a problem if it works on 32 characters?
is it a problem if it works on 33 characters?

Well, firstly you're asking the wrong question.

If it's 60% of the cast, and that 60% is also hard-countered by the other 40%, it doesn't matter.

Also, if it doesn't make the match-up not a hard-counter when it's banned, it's pointless to ban.


So the question here is:

is it a problem if it makes 5 characters nonviable?
is it a problem if it makes 6 characters nonviable?
is it a problem if it makes 7 characters nonviable?
is it a problem if it makes 8 characters nonviable?
is it a problem if it makes 9 characters nonviable?
is it a problem if it makes 10 characters nonviable?
is it a problem if it makes 11 characters nonviable?
is it a problem if it makes 12 characters nonviable?
is it a problem if it makes 13 characters nonviable?
is it a problem if it makes 14 characters nonviable?
is it a problem if it makes 15 characters nonviable?
is it a problem if it makes 16 characters nonviable?
is it a problem if it makes 17 characters nonviable?
is it a problem if it makes 18 characters nonviable?
is it a problem if it makes 19 characters nonviable?
is it a problem if it makes 20 characters nonviable?
is it a problem if it makes 21 characters nonviable?
is it a problem if it makes 22 characters nonviable?
is it a problem if it makes 23 characters nonviable?
is it a problem if it makes 24 characters nonviable?
is it a problem if it makes 25 characters nonviable?
is it a problem if it makes 26 characters nonviable?
is it a problem if it makes 28 characters nonviable?
is it a problem if it makes 29 characters nonviable?
is it a problem if it makes 30 characters nonviable?
is it a problem if it makes 31 characters nonviable?
is it a problem if it makes 32 characters nonviable?
is it a problem if it makes 33 characters nonviable?




The answer is unfortunately, we as a community don't know where to draw that line yet, because we haven't discussed that question properly yet. It's been implicit in 2 major ban discussions, but never truly discussed.

Really, I don't know where I'd draw the line yet, albeit, greater then 6.

We need a number, a line.





Off-topic: How long until we go onto random tangents that somehow are relevant?

I'm favoring US Constitutional law right now.

 

[Xyro77]

I have banned the infinite(houston,tx). Even though im samus there are some things i do to get around it.

 

[BentoBox]

And I think solving the issue at large for 32 characters is better than solving it for 26. My ratio is bigger. I win.

I wish you could hear yourselves talk.

 

[Magik0722]

Well yes granted samus has better options to not get grabbed but i cant think of any for DK. You cant space it and not get grabbed because a powershield grab can grab any attack DK throws at D3. I didnt think that DKs hands and feet are disjointed hitboxes so it would be impossible for DK to attack if the opponent would powershield it. I voted for the ban, and i dont see how anyone could not. This is making maining these characters impossible and there is no reason this should stay. Making characters only counterpick/unviable characters should be avoided if there is something we can do about it.

 

[bobson]

Why can't they beat it? Can't they mash out of it as well? I figured they'd be able to deal with it pretty well since they can get kills on D3 much quicker than the other 3 and close whatever gaps there may be from the grabs. They also generally have more range and can avoid the shield grab pretty well with spacing.

And then there's the chance that they screw up the timing since they don't even play D3.

Bowser and DK don't require pummels inbetween throws, so they have all of the amount of time between them being grabbed and Dedede initiating the down throw to mash out of it. If it was feasible to break out of that, throws in general would be worthless. They can also be shieldgrabbed out of pretty much anything they have, whereas the other three can spam projectiles to at least attempt surviving.

As for the timing... set c-stick to grab and go infinite someone. No, seriously, try it. I did it on the first try.

 

[•Col•]

I voted for the ban, and i dont see how anyone could not. This is making maining these characters impossible and there is no reason this should stay. Making characters only counterpick/unviable characters should be avoided if there is something we can do about it.

It doesn't make maining the characters impossible... It just means there is one matchup that is going to be really freaking hard for them. That's what secondaries are for. xD

 

[The Halloween Captain]

It isn't a slippery slope.

The general consensus is that 2/3rds, or near it, is a good number to look for. If it works on a good majority of the cast, it will inevitably over-centralize the metagame in a negative way.

There's a reason why 5 characters doesn't warrant a ban, and it's because it doesn't affect the game that much.

That siad, the ICs infinites haven't been banned and they work on everyone. There are reasons for that too.

After advocating the MK ban, I'm very surprised to see you arguing this.

So, here's my question: Does the fact that picking D3 against any of these characters guarentees the victory of D3 completely reguardless of the skill of the users of these characters?

Hypothetical:
M2K pick Mario (I don't know why, just go with it). Tourney noob picks D3. tourney noob manages to grab M2K's Mario and D-throws him until he kills with F-throw. The matches are close, but M2K manages to be grabbed at least once per stock, because D3's grab range is greater than the distance away Mario can land after an approach, and D3's waddle-dees beat Mario's fireballs. M2K loses by one stock.

Next match, M2K switches to Meta Knight, tourney noob manages to grab his MK four or five times, but M2K annihilates tourney noob and only takes 54% the entire match.

Should any single tactic/attack which destroys a matchup that easily be allowed?

 

[Xiivi]

*checks who voted yes and no for this and who voted yes and no for the other poll*

Man you people confuse me sometimes.

 

[The Halloween Captain]

*checks who voted yes and no for this and who voted yes and no for the other poll*

Man you people confuse me sometimes.

Think of an "all or nothing" personality. The people who wanted MK banned were often people who believe that either a character is broken, or it isn't. D3 as a character, isn't broken. The people who didn't want MK banned were often people who don't believe in banning characters. They would rather remove the most broken aspects of a character, but leave banning as a last resort, which they may not go to even when necesary.

It's "ban characters that are broken" v. "ban tactics that are broken"

 

[BentoBox]

*checks who voted yes and no for this and who voted yes and no for the other poll*

Man you people confuse me sometimes.

A lot of people vote before arguing. And it is after they try to do so that you realize they have no valid points to stand on. Polls are really meaningless. Buncha brinboys I tell ya'!

:D

 

[Xyro77]

Well yes granted samus has better options to not get grabbed but i cant think of any for DK. You cant space it and not get grabbed because a powershield grab can grab any attack DK throws at D3. I didnt think that DKs hands and feet are disjointed hitboxes so it would be impossible for DK to attack if the opponent would powershield it. I voted for the ban, and i dont see how anyone could not. This is making maining these characters impossible and there is no reason this should stay. Making characters only counterpick/unviable characters should be avoided if there is something we can do about it.

im here with ya. it needs to be banned. but plz dont rely on the SBR for it to be banned. They REFUSE to do whats right MOST of the time.

 

[Fatmanonice]

Whatever happened to "play to win?" This was being screamed from the roof tops during the Metaknight debates and how the mantra was basically play to win even if it means playing outlandishly gay in the process (which is pretty much the only way to play as Metaknight). Honestly, I look at this and think about the nitpicking that will occur if this is banned. Would Brawl simply be a better game if ALL the infinites, grab releases, and high damaging chain grabs were illegal? It's a legitimate question and I still think that we should look at this in a broader scope instead of focusing on 5 characters where only one of them would actually benefit from this being banned (Donkey Kong).

 

[Xyro77]

do what i do for my events. simply REDUCE the number of grabs you can do on the release grabs/infinites. its fair

 

[The Halloween Captain]

Whatever happened to "play to win?" This was being screamed from the roof tops during the Metaknight debates and how the mantra was basically play to win even if it means playing outlandishly gay in the process (which is pretty much the only way to play as Metaknight). Honestly, I look at this and think about the nitpicking that will occur if this is banned. Would Brawl simply be a better game if ALL the infinites, grab releases, and high damaging chain grabs were illegal? It's a legitimate question and I still think that we should look at this in a broader scope instead of focusing on 5 characters where only one of them would actually benefit from this being banned (Donkey Kong).

Is it bad I think that brawl would be better without these?

In melee characters died faster and comboed better - it was a lot easier to handle an infinity, because you probably had a similarly power attack/tactic. In Brawl, not so much.

"Play to win" means do anything to win, within the bounds of the rules. Generally, things are not banned because everyone has "play to win." If DK turns out to be able to do something as dangerous as D3's infinity, there's no problem.

As of now, it looks unlikely that all, or even many of the characters will have tactics of this nature. If there was hope that D3's chaingrab could be counters by a few hits of "the Luigi combo," there would be no grounds for a ban.

Of course, you could always increase the knockback so everyone dies sooner

The biggest problem with infinities in Brawl is that stocks last longer, so that one infinity is a lot more valuable than it was in melee.

 

[WastingPenguins]

That siad, the ICs infinites haven't been banned and they work on everyone. There are reasons for that too.

IC's have an infinite... but does it grant them five utterly broken 100:0 matchups? Does it even give them ONE matchup even remotely comparable to DK vs. D3?

 

[1048576]

It's like we can't even have counterpicks anymore. Oh noez, a character has an advantage against another character. We must ban something so that the matchup is neutral.

You main DK, fine. If the opponent mains D3, pick somebody else or go to a moving stage. It's the same as if you main Sonic and your opponent mains MK.

 

[ADHD]

Most of the characters that get infinite'd suck, if you used them to compete (besides dk) you already are at a disadvantage. This is a competitive community right? Why are we helping people who choose on purpose to play worser characters when they can just as easily pick up a high/top tier? It's a competitive game after all.

Falco's chaingrab, BAN IT. It kills some characters with bad recoveries! Shuts down the matchup, O NOEZ IT MUS B BANND!!11!!!! SHIFT KEY!1!!111!

 

[PKNintendo]

On a side note: Why are people still calling Marth's release on Ness an infinite? It's a chain grab and it can also lead to a followup dsmash. Nothing more, nothing less.

Not a chaingrab with EIDI.

Marth mains just don't listen to Ness mains...
Ask Ref, the MAKER of EIDI.

 

[Julz]

I prefer ALL infinites to end at 100% instead of 300%. And you have to let them free after you meet that threshold. No need for banning then.

 

[Woozle]

Most of the characters that get infinite'd suck, if you used them to compete (besides dk) you already are at a disadvantage.

Is the argument posed here "Let's make what is already difficult impossible."?

This is a competitive community right?

That's what I'm told: I'll believe it when I see it.

Why are we helping people who choose on purpose to play worser characters when they can just as easily pick up a high/top tier?

Worser characters? And the tier list is easily open for interpretation. Many people tend to see the tier list as a learning curve... one that is broken by such things as DDDs infinite (not his chain). You can learn Mario for hundreds of hours and still be unable to avoid an infinite if grabbed.

Falco's chaingrab, BAN IT. It kills some characters with bad recoveries! Shuts down the matchup, O NOEZ IT MUS B BANND!!11!!!! SHIFT KEY!1!!111!

Right: it kills some characters with bad recoveries. Those are inherent character flaws. DDD's infinite is a physics flaw. In one, Falco is taking advantage of the fact that character X won't be able to recover from his spike by executing a timed chaingrab and succeeding to hit a Dair. In the other, DDD is taking advantage of the fact that developers failed to include enough knockback to make DDD's a chaingrab, and instead could just stand there and keep grabbing (or even just inching foreward).

 

[Ulevo]

Not a chaingrab with EIDI.

Marth mains just don't listen to Ness mains...
Ask Ref, the MAKER of EIDI.

Please direct me to a video proving that EIDI actually works, where the Marth isn't completely messing up the Grab.

Please.

Then Marth mains will actually have a reason to listen to Ness mains.

You don't just post on the boards saying "oh hey guys this doesn't work anymore" without properly proving so, and expect people to believe you.

 

[Ulevo]

Most of the characters that get infinite'd suck, if you used them to compete (besides dk) you already are at a disadvantage. This is a competitive community right? Why are we helping people who choose on purpose to play worser characters when they can just as easily pick up a high/top tier? It's a competitive game after all.

Falco's chaingrab, BAN IT. It kills some characters with bad recoveries! Shuts down the matchup, O NOEZ IT MUS B BANND!!11!!!! SHIFT KEY!1!!111!

You're an idiot.

There is a difference between a one sided match up, and making a character unplayable by relinquishing complete control over the other player.

You can't compare the two. This has been refuted already. Stop posting it.

 

[SamuraiPanda]

I have yet to see a decent anti-ban post anywhere in this thread.

 

[adumbrodeus]

I have yet to see a decent anti-ban post anywhere in this thread.

Have you been reading?

So do I.




Well, firstly you're asking the wrong question.

If it's 60% of the cast, and that 60% is also hard-countered by the other 40%, it doesn't matter.

Also, if it doesn't make the match-up not a hard-counter when it's banned, it's pointless to ban.


So the question here is:

is it a problem if it makes 5 characters nonviable?
is it a problem if it makes 6 characters nonviable?
is it a problem if it makes 7 characters nonviable?
is it a problem if it makes 8 characters nonviable?
is it a problem if it makes 9 characters nonviable?
is it a problem if it makes 10 characters nonviable?
is it a problem if it makes 11 characters nonviable?
is it a problem if it makes 12 characters nonviable?
is it a problem if it makes 13 characters nonviable?
is it a problem if it makes 14 characters nonviable?
is it a problem if it makes 15 characters nonviable?
is it a problem if it makes 16 characters nonviable?
is it a problem if it makes 17 characters nonviable?
is it a problem if it makes 18 characters nonviable?
is it a problem if it makes 19 characters nonviable?
is it a problem if it makes 20 characters nonviable?
is it a problem if it makes 21 characters nonviable?
is it a problem if it makes 22 characters nonviable?
is it a problem if it makes 23 characters nonviable?
is it a problem if it makes 24 characters nonviable?
is it a problem if it makes 25 characters nonviable?
is it a problem if it makes 26 characters nonviable?
is it a problem if it makes 28 characters nonviable?
is it a problem if it makes 29 characters nonviable?
is it a problem if it makes 30 characters nonviable?
is it a problem if it makes 31 characters nonviable?
is it a problem if it makes 32 characters nonviable?
is it a problem if it makes 33 characters nonviable?




The answer is unfortunately, we as a community don't know where to draw that line yet, because we haven't discussed that question properly yet. It's been implicit in 2 major ban discussions, but never truly discussed.

Really, I don't know where I'd draw the line yet, albeit, greater then 6.

We need a number, a line.

This post points to the core of the issue, we haven't established what our tolerance is for rendering characters nonviable as a community, nor have we actually established how many characters this tech makes nonviable independently.

Prior to banning being a possibility, those points of fact must be establish, and nobody has been willing to establish them.



Which interestingly enough was the weakness of the pro-ban side in the MK debate.





I was far from the only person to make this point.

 

[Surri-Sama]

I have yet to see a decent anti-ban post anywhere in this thread.

Thats because people here dont know how to debate anything... its all


OMG THIS! vs NAO WAI THAT!

:|

To much Bias and foolery to really form a good arguement for either side IMO

 

[Ulevo]

Stuff.

I have yet to see a decent anti-ban post anywhere in this thread.

This.