Should King Dedede's infinite chaingrab be banned?

[BentoBox]

Because it is unnecessary.

That's your reason?

Are.you.serious?

 

[Fletch]

You don't actually read video descriptions, do you?

Don't get me wrong, it demonstaites a point, but that was one of the worst examples you could have scrounged up. The video description says outright that it was a joke match.

It was a joke match because Watty knew he couldn't beat Drephen. It still proves my point that there was nothing the Pichu could have done to escape the zero-death chaingrab of Sheik.

While we're at it, I'm pretty sure Pichu versus IC's is 100-0 as well. I think ICs can simply CC any approach Pichu has, grab, then say goodbye to Pichu's stock. Guess we should ban the ICs in Melee too.

 

[Anther]

Fine, since I don't know nearly as much about Brawl as I do Melee, I'll use a Melee example. Sheik can chainthrow many of the characters in Melee from just about zero to death, and it's relatively easy to do. This makes characters like Pichu completely useless then, as Sheik just has to grab Pichu once and his stock is gone.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WV4SjTp_U1A

This goes for other characters like Bowser too. Therefore, I think we should ban Sheik's downthrow as it completely negates a character, or at least would according to your logic.

I played Pika and found sheik's CG relatively avoidable, and it was escapable after like 50 - 70, I can't really remember anymore... But it was prtty broken anyway. But yeah, I'm famished.

 

[Yuna]

A 30% chaingrab (peach vs fox) doesn't not make him unviable. A 70% chaingrab (which isn't ASSURED and only works at certain percentages) does not make fox completely unviable. A 70% tilt-lock. does not make the match-up impossible. I feel like I'm repeating myself.

Zamus has a D-tilt lock. And why is a 70% to Usmash (which makes it 85 or so %) combo not render him unviable? It's not an impossible matchup but it's pretty **** unviable.

D3's infinite isn't assured against 3 of the characters he can do them on, either (or possibly just two of them). They also cannot start at 0% on these characters.

Why is 70% (85%) is much less "unwinnable" than 0-death or 50%-death? Both deal out huge amounts of damage and you'll be dead pretty soon, anyway. I'm not saying there isn't a difference.

But what makes the difference so huge one is "unwinnable" while the other isn't? You also use the world "impossible". Is D3 vs. DK "impossible" while Sheik vs. Fox isn't? Why, exactly?

And so, because you have yet to respond to my previous post...

Could that be because of the amount of spam in this thread? Maybe I just missed it. Give the link and I will. In the future, if I miss a post, give me the link, don't just say I missed it.

For anyone that wasn't following my argument with Yuna, my point is that stages such as Eldin (stages with walk-offs) have been banned because of D3s (and yoshi on some characters) being able to CG the majority (but not ALL) of the cast from one side to the other. So why couldn't we, again, apply such measures in this case? We banned stages because of a technique, and now the same technique presents itself, this time in a form that is totally stage independent and you guys refuse to do anything about it?

I thought I'd addressed this in more than 3 posts already, in response to you. If you chose to randomly forget about it, then I refuse to repeat myself.

That's what I don't get. A lot of people claim that we shouldn't ban the infinite because it doesn't affect the whole cast. Well guess what? D3 cannot CG the WHOLE cast either! So why was a ban on Eldin warranted in the first place? What if I should decide that those 13 characters that are safe from CGs should be the only chars viable for tournament play? This is as idiotic as what you are all claiming.

Jab locks work on all characters. D3 isn't the only one with a chaingrab. The metagame would be over-centralized on locks and chaingrabs. Everyone else would be unviable. The metagame would devolve.

With D3's standing infinite, you're only rendering 6 characters unviable. It's not over-centralizing the metagame. It's merely rendering 6 charactes unviable against a single character (6 characters who often still take it in the shorts from other characters, BTW). You're still free to play anyone else other than these 6 (which number in the 29's) and still stand a stand of winning.

With walk-offs legal, your options are severely limited.

"Tough luck! everybody has bad matchups!"? Why is it that because only 5 characters are affected, we shouldn't lift a finger but when its about 2/3rds of the cast, suddenly, an intervention on our part is needed?

Yes, basically.

16% <<<<<< 66%.

We ban things that overcentralize the metagame. Not just anything that limits it.

Who here is setting a threshold as to how many characters need to be affected for us to make a move?

At least 50% would be a good start. And must I repeat myself for the the 29th time: The D3 chaingrabs is not the only thing which will combo you off of walk-offs.

 

[cutter]

You don't actually read video descriptions, do you?

Don't get me wrong, it demonstaites a point, but that was one of the worst examples you could have scrounged up. The video description says outright that it was a joke match.

That doesn't change the fact that Sheik completely obliterates Pichu.

 

[DRaGZ]

The difference is I don't need to use DDD to be able to use this infinite. I don't need to main DDD, and the DK user probably won't expect me to use DDD.

And don't get me wrong, this situation isn't extremely common, but it's just something to think about.

You're forgetting that it's somewhat difficult for someone unfamiliar with DeDeDe to get the grab started to begin with. DeDeDe's a bit unwieldy as a character to begin with, so someone just using him right out of the gate would probably get owned by a competent DK. This happens all the time at SSFIIT tournaments at Japanese tournaments, where newbs use Akuma in an attempt to **** but get owned by the more experienced players.

On the other hand, if the player practiced using DeDeDe just for this purpose, then good for him.

That's your reason?

Are.you.serious?

Yes.

 

[CO18]

You're forgetting that it's somewhat difficult for someone unfamiliar with DeDeDe to get the grab started to begin with. DeDeDe's a bit unwieldy as a character to begin with, so someone just using him right out of the gate would probably get owned by a competent DK. This happens all the time at SSFIIT tournaments at Japanese tournaments, where newbs use Akuma in an attempt to **** but get owned by the more experienced players.

On the other hand, if the player practiced using DeDeDe just for this purpose, then good for him.

WTF are you talking about. ANYONE can get a grab with Dedede. Just run at your opponent holding shield and Press A blindly youll get a grab. Or in most circumstances camp your opponent wait until they approach you and just shield grab.

In a double blind situation with the opponent not expecting their opponent to use Dedede and infinite them they will lose and basically be down a match every single set if people choose to abuse this with it not being banned.

This really makes those 5 characters COMPLETELY unviable in tournaments where as they would be viable other wise.

BUM proves this with DK. Boss Proves this with Mario AND Luigi. Xyro proves this with Samus. Vex proves this with Bowser.

All do well with their characters in tournaments IN Areas where Dedede's infinite is BANNED.
Its not a mere coincidence

 

[Melomaniacal]

You're forgetting that it's somewhat difficult for someone unfamiliar with DeDeDe to get the grab started to begin with. DeDeDe's a bit unwieldy as a character to begin with, so someone just using him right out of the gate would probably get owned by a competent DK. This happens all the time at SSFIIT tournaments at Japanese tournaments, where newbs use Akuma in an attempt to **** but get owned by the more experienced players.

On the other hand, if the player practiced using DeDeDe just for this purpose, then good for him.

Well it's pretty easy to get a grab in as DDD, and it's not all that hard to do the infinite.
But you are right. I guess my main point is that you don't need to be nearly experienced with DDD to be successful against these 6 characters.

 

[Cactupuss]

By that same merit, you should be able to know who not to use DK against for the first round. Or, just don't play him the first round period. He is still a totally viable counter pick.

If you have to put your time and effort into learning a whole new character just so you can avoid ONE attack from a character, that attack should be banned.

yeah i agree you should have a backup anyways, but if your main has a 100-0 matchup because of one attack, that attack should be banned to even out the odds

 

[DRaGZ]

WTF are you talking about. ANYONE can get a grab with Dedede. Just run at your opponent holding shield and Press A blindly youll get a grab. Or in most circumstances camp your opponent wait until they approach you and just shield grab.

In a double blind situation with the opponent not expecting their opponent to use Dedede and infinite them they will lose and basically be down a match every single set if people choose to abuse this with it not being banned.

This really makes those 5 characters COMPLETELY unviable in tournaments where as they would be viable other wise.

BUM proves this with DK. Boss Proves this with Mario AND Luigi. Xyro proves this with Samus. Vex proves this with Bowser.

All do well with their characters in tournaments IN Areas where Dedede's infinite is BANNED.
Its not a mere coincidence

Not anyone can get a grab with DeDeDe.

 

[Fletch]

I played Pika and found sheik's CG relatively avoidable, and it was escapable after like 50 - 70, I can't really remember anymore... But it was prtty broken anyway. But yeah, I'm famished.

I'm not familiar with Pika's matchups, I'm just saying that Pichu has some 100:0 matchups, and those were never considered to be banned.

 

[Yuna]

WTF are you talking about. ANYONE can get a grab with Dedede. Just run at your opponent holding shield and Press A blindly youll get a grab. Or in most circumstances camp your opponent wait until they approach you and just shield grab.

In a double blind situation with the opponent not expecting their opponent to use Dedede and infinite them they will lose and basically be down a match every single set if people choose to abuse this with it not being banned.

This really makes those 5 characters COMPLETELY unviable in tournaments where as they would be viable other wise.

BUM proves this with DK. Boss Proves this with Mario AND Luigi. Xyro proves this with Samus. Vex proves this with Bowser.

All do well with their characters in tournaments IN Areas where Dedede's infinite is BANNED.
Its not a mere coincidence

Fox would be perfectly viable were it not for Sheik's F-tilt lock completely ****** him. Ban?

 

[CO18]

Not anyone can get a grab with DeDeDe.

Yes, any player that feels they are good enough to go to pay to enter in a tournament can get a grab with Dedede and is not hard AT ALL.

Edit: Fox is already viable and shiek's ftilt is not the only problem he has such as pikachus chaingrab and Zss's chaingrab.

These are not infinites however and not 100:0 matchups. Florida's best Fox 2 stocked Florida's Best ZSS twice on saturday. They are labeled as 90:10 but are still winnable and dont leave an opponent incapable of doing anything until YOU decide to kill them.

 

[DRaGZ]

Yes, any player that feels they are good enough to go to pay to enter in a tournament can get a grab with Dedede and is not hard AT ALL.

I dunno, I've seen some really dumb tourny-goers.

 

[The Halloween Captain]

It was a joke match because Watty knew he couldn't beat Drephen. It still proves my point that there was nothing the Pichu could have done to escape the zero-death chaingrab of Sheik.

While we're at it, I'm pretty sure Pichu versus IC's is 100-0 as well. I think ICs can simply CC any approach Pichu has, grab, then say goodbye to Pichu's stock. Guess we should ban the ICs in Melee too.

That doesn't change the fact that Sheik completely obliterates Pichu.

To be honest, I didn't play melee competitively. IMO, the decision to not ban a broken tactic before is little reason to choose not to ban a broken tactic now. However, the move DID have different qualities than D3's D-throw, and seems slightly more avoidable and excapable. That being said, I honestly can't compare Melee broken tactics to Brawl broken tactics, I don't have a high enough level of melee knowledge.

 

[Punishment Divine]

By that same merit, you should be able to know who not to use DK against for the first round. Or, just don't play him the first round period. He is still a totally viable counter pick.

Oh you mean, like, EVERYONE? It takes no skill to do this. Anyone can just use DDD for these matchups.

Also, the 64 thing, almost EVERYONE in 64 can do that lol. If every character in Brawl could just infinite each other off one grab, I probably wouldn't play it for one, and I certainly wouldn't call for one character's to be banned. We're talking about a character specific "AT", if you even want to call it that, that has no reason to be in competitive play.

You can say "Well DK can just CP or play really, really well!" but I feel as though both those things are useless due to the simplicity of this. Let's look at it this way:

Player A is a DK main. Player B mains Captain Falcon. He spent 10 minutes figuring out how to do the Infinite, however. In tournament, player B blind picks, because he's seen the player A play, and he knows his CF can't beat him. Player A picks DK, because that's his main and he's most comfortable with DK. Player B picks DDD, because he wants to win easily. Player A spaces almost perfectly, but because no one is perfect he gets grabbed by B's Shieldcamping D3. There goes one stock. This happens two more times. Player B can only laugh, because all he has to do is wait for A to do SOMETHING wrong, which is bound to happen even at high levels of play, and use DDD's grab range, the longest non-tether in the game, and then input a never-ending set of simple button presses.

Player A just lost a game he probably wouldn't have otherwise. You can say "Oh well he can just counterpick." But does that make up for the fact that every time Player A enters a tournament round with someone he has to fear playing his main? In my opinion, no.

The evil in this doesn't just lie in how stupid this tactic is, it's how simple it is to go from a winnable matchup to an nigh unwinnable matchup due to some sort of glitch which shouldn't have been in the game the first place.

We do this to everything. We ban items from competitive play, ban certain stages, take away tripping, and ban stupid **** like Planking all for the sake of making this game as skillbased as possible. Saying you prefer a game without those and not this infinite is a classic case of shi.tting where you sleep, It's clearcut hypocrisy.

 

[The Halloween Captain]

Fox would be perfectly viable were it not for Sheik's F-tilt lock completely ****** him. Ban?

If we're talking melee, then the question is "does basic technical knowledge by both players make the matchup completely unwinnable for the Fox user?"

If we're talking Brawl, the question stays the same.

EDIT: But Punishment Divine raises a good point as well with the 64 reference.

 

[DRaGZ]

Oh you mean, like, EVERYONE? It takes no skill to do this. Anyone can just use DDD for these matchups.

Also, the 64 thing, almost EVERYONE in 64 can do that lol. If every character in Brawl could just infinite each other off one grab, I probably wouldn't play it for one, and I certainly wouldn't call for one character's to be banned. We're talking about a character specific "AT", if you even want to call it that, that has no reason to be in competitive play.

You can say "Well DK can just CP or play really, really well!" but I feel as though both those things are useless due to the simplicity of this. Let's look at it this way:

Player A is a DK main. Player B mains Captain Falcon. He spent 10 minutes figuring out how to do the Infinite, however. In tournament, player B blind picks, because he's seen the player A play, and he knows his CF can't beat him. Player A picks DK, because that's his main and he's most comfortable with DK. Player B picks DDD, because he wants to win easily. Player A spaces almost perfectly, but because no one is perfect he gets grabbed by B's Shieldcamping D3. There goes one stock. This happens two more times. Player B can only laugh, because all he has to do is wait for A to do SOMETHING wrong, which is bound to happen even at high levels of play, and use DDD's grab range, the longest non-tether in the game, and then input a never-ending set of simple button presses.

Player A just lost a game he probably wouldn't have otherwise. You can say "Oh well he can just counterpick." But does that make up for the fact that every time Player A enters a tournament round with someone he has to fear playing his main? In my opinion, no.

The evil in this doesn't just lie in how stupid this tactic is, it's how simple it is to go from a winnable matchup to an nigh unwinnable matchup due to some sort of glitch which shouldn't have been in the game the first place.

We do this to everything. We ban items from competitive play, ban certain stages, take away tripping, and ban stupid **** like Planking all for the sake of making this game as skillbased as possible. Saying you prefer a game without those and not this infinite is a classic case of shi.tting where you sleep, It's clearcut hypocrisy.

I don't mind planking at all.

 

[Mr.Victory07]

Fox would be perfectly viable were it not for Sheik's F-tilt lock completely ****** him. Ban?

-F-tilt lock (according to you) does 85%, afterwards if the Fox is better, he should be able to make it up,albeit difficultly, with Sheik's poor KOing options under 100%ish. the CG can keep you going up to 300% where a KO is guarunteed. Also the tilt lock up to that point is harder to pull off than the CG and someone not trained well with Sheik would be unable to do it to that extent and then win the stock; while someone with alot less time using DDD can learn the timing of the CG and win easier. And CG is doable form any %, while tilt lock stops at 80% And Sheik is much more underplayed than D3, the third best character with the third best tourney results

 

[Anther]

It was a joke match because Watty knew he couldn't beat Drephen. It still proves my point that there was nothing the Pichu could have done to escape the zero-death chaingrab of Sheik.

While we're at it, I'm pretty sure Pichu versus IC's is 100-0 as well. I think ICs can simply CC any approach Pichu has, grab, then say goodbye to Pichu's stock. Guess we should ban the ICs in Melee too.

Umm, pichu lost to ICs because he shouldn't be in the game XD. Then just had to swing their mallots and his light weight got him killed in like 3 hits, no CC involved, that game wasn't for him >_>.

Pichu can escape it by DIing towards the edge and only doing grab riskworth attacks near the end of the stage, and I'm almost confident that if watty's DI wasn't horizontal he may have lived.. XD.. Pichu's potential was too dumb to matter though, I hate him.

These are a bunch of good chars we're arguing for, with some talented players behind them, but if you guys want to keep spouting a bunch of BS towards making less chars tourney viable, watev.

 

[Fletch]

Player A just lost a game he probably wouldn't have otherwise. You can say "Oh well he can just counterpick." But does that make up for the fact that every time Player A enters a tournament round with someone he has to fear playing his main?

Yes. Play to win. Player A chose a character with a known weakness, and Player B was smart and exploited it. Good for Player B, he proved himself to be the more knowledgeable player.

 

[DRaGZ]

These are a bunch of good chars we're arguing for, with some talented players behind them, but if you guys want to keep spouting a bunch of BS towards making less chars tourney viable, watev.

Then why didn't we ban Meta Knight?!?!

 

[Anther]

I think some of you just have a malicious disposition towards brawl in general >.>. Just putting that out there..

And Metaknight's not that good and barely ***** a bunch of tourney chars, with an ever increasing list of "Even matchups," because people are learning the game >_>.

 

[Fletch]

Umm, pichu lost to ICs because he shouldn't be in the game XD. Then just had to swing their mallots and his light weight got him killed in like 3 hits, no CC involved, that game wasn't for him >_>.

Pichu can escape it by DIing towards the edge and only doing grab riskworth attacks near the end of the stage, and I'm almost confident that if watty's DI wasn't horizontal he may have lived.. XD.. Pichu's potential was too dumb to matter though, I hate him.

These are a bunch of good chars we're arguing for, with some talented players behind them, but if you guys want to keep spouting a bunch of BS towards making less chars tourney viable, watev.

Unless Sheik grabs him fairly near the ledge, he isn't going to survive by DI'ing toward it. Not to mention, once Pichu is off the ledge against Sheik, he eats a fair, which more than likely he's not recovering from, and if he does, Sheik just hangs ledge, comes up and repeats. Any competent player can do this.

I guess you could argue for Pichu being awful and no one caring about it, but I think that's a pretty weak argument, and would have to go for characters like Bowser in Melee as well.

 

[DRaGZ]

I think some of you just have a malicious disposition towards brawl in general >.>. Just putting that out there..

And Metaknight's not that good and barely ***** a bunch of tourney chars, with an ever increasing list of "Even matchups".

I love Brawl.

Also, "barely *****" still puts it up for debate in respect to the arguments which have been brought up here.

 

[Arturito_Burrito]

This also means we should ban SSB64 as a whole.

I can't believe 2 smash debaters where able to agree on this its just so stupid. If everyone can infinite everyone then it's perfectly fine the answer would be well you could have done the same thing to him.

 

[DRaGZ]

I can't believe 2 smash debaters where able to agree on this its just so stupid. If everyone can infinite everyone then it's perfectly fine the answer would be well you could have done the same thing to him.

It was a joke.

Also, not everyone in SSB64 can infinite, if I remember correctly...I don't think Link can. But I think he can still **** well enough that it's not a large issue.

 

[Arturito_Burrito]

hmm... didn't seem like a joke but nvm then.

 

[DRaGZ]

hmm... didn't seem like a joke but nvm then.

It should've seemed like one. I mean, it's silly to ban an entire game, right?

 

[ShadowLink84]

WTF are you talking about. ANYONE can get a grab with Dedede. Just run at your opponent holding shield and Press A blindly youll get a grab. Or in most circumstances camp your opponent wait until they approach you and just shield grab.

In a double blind situation with the opponent not expecting their opponent to use Dedede and infinite them they will lose and basically be down a match every single set if people choose to abuse this with it not being banned.

This really makes those 5 characters COMPLETELY unviable in tournaments where as they would be viable other wise.

BUM proves this with DK. Boss Proves this with Mario AND Luigi. Xyro proves this with Samus. Vex proves this with Bowser.

All do well with their characters in tournaments IN Areas where Dedede's infinite is BANNED.
Its not a mere coincidence

Under yourlogic we should ban anything that makes a character completely unviable.
Ban anyone that has a massive advantage on Ganondorf.
Ban the infinites on Wario.
Ban the IC's infinite.
Ban Falco's laser and CG.
ban anything that puts a character at a major advantage.

Again this point of yours is o****ered by the fact we have a CP system.
You run into a **** matchup, you switch, and you're good.

Again if we go along with such logic, we would be banning alot more things.
Its as simple as that.

Oh you mean, like, EVERYONE? It takes no skill to do this. Anyone can just use DDD for these matchups.

Skill required to eprform an infinite doesn't matter.
The ends a re the same.
0-death=infinite=banned under your logic.
Which means we should ban a **** load of things in melee.

Also, the 64 thing, almost EVERYONE in 64 can do that lol. If every character in Brawl could just infinite each other off one grab, I probably wouldn't play it for one, and I certainly wouldn't call for one character's to be banned. We're talking about a character specific "AT", if you even want to call it that, that has no reason to be in competitive play.

The difference being that ecach character had different oppurtunities to be infinited let alone thef act that infinites did not define smash 64.
learn 2 player and the infinites are not as big a deal as it is made out to be,

You can say "Well DK can just CP or play really, really well!" but I feel as though both those things are useless due to the simplicity of this. Let's look at it this way:

Player A is a DK main. Player B mains Captain Falcon. He spent 10 minutes figuring out how to do the Infinite, however. In tournament, player B blind picks, because he's seen the player A play, and he knows his CF can't beat him. Player A picks DK, because that's his main and he's most comfortable with DK. Player B picks DDD, because he wants to win easily. Player A spaces almost perfectly, but because no one is perfect he gets grabbed by B's Shieldcamping D3. There goes one stock. This happens two more times. Player B can only laugh, because all he has to do is wait for A to do SOMETHING wrong, which is bound to happen even at high levels of play, and use DDD's grab range, the longest non-tether in the game, and then input a never-ending set of simple button presses.

Player A just lost a game he probably wouldn't have otherwise. You can say "Oh well he can just counterpick." But does that make up for the fact that every time Player A enters a tournament round with someone he has to fear playing his main? In my opinion, no.

I have to fear playing Luigi, Wario and MK when I choose Sonic.
I have to fear playing Pikachu, Sheik and ZSS when I choose Fox.
When I choose Diddy I have to worry about Falco.
Guess what? Its par tof the gmame, you will always have a matchup where you are disadvantaged. Don't like it? Thats a pity.
Unless it breaks the game like Akuma or even Old Sagat, it shouldn't be banned period.

Lets ban fireball users because E honda gets ***** by them

That is how all games work.
Very few games are well balanced.

The evil in this doesn't just lie in how stupid this tactic is, it's how simple it is to go from a winnable matchup to an nigh unwinnable matchup due to some sort of glitch which shouldn't have been in the game the first place.

Its not a glitch.

We do this to everything. We ban items from competitive play, ban certain stages, take away tripping, and ban stupid **** like Planking all for the sake of making this game as skillbased as possible. Saying you prefer a game without those and not this infinite is a classic case of shi.tting where you sleep, It's clearcut hypocrisy

because they DOMINATE the ENTIRE metagame. They BREAK the game.
DDD's infinites, don't.

 

[The Halloween Captain]

Umm, pichu lost to ICs because he shouldn't be in the game XD. Then just had to swing their mallots and his light weight got him killed in like 3 hits, no CC involved, that game wasn't for him >_>.

Pichu can escape it by DIing towards the edge and only doing grab riskworth attacks near the end of the stage, and I'm almost confident that if watty's DI wasn't horizontal he may have lived.. XD.. Pichu's potential was too dumb to matter though, I hate him.

These are a bunch of good chars we're arguing for, with some talented players behind them, but if you guys want to keep spouting a bunch of BS towards making less chars tourney viable, watev.

They're not as bad as Pichu, and DK is pretty good, but the characters D3 infinities aren't exactly thought of as "viable." Personally, the fact that the infinity works on some good characters should probably be a reason to not allow it, but then someone argues about "precident," "slippery slopes," etc. Actually, there is no reason why TO's can't decide for themselves to ban the tactic, without the universal agreement of smashboards. Of course, my idea sets a precident for TO's ignoring standardized rules, but I like a little variety.

 

[BentoBox]

Zamus has a D-tilt lock. And why is a 70% to Usmash (which makes it 85 or so %) combo not render him unviable? It's not an impossible matchup but it's pretty **** unviable.

D3's infinite isn't assured against 3 of the characters he can do them on, either (or possibly just two of them). They also cannot start at 0% on these characters.

Why is 70% (85%) is much less "unwinnable" than 0-death or 50%-death? Both deal out huge amounts of damage and you'll be dead pretty soon, anyway. I'm not saying there isn't a difference.

But what makes the difference so huge one is "unwinnable" while the other isn't? You also use the world "impossible". Is D3 vs. DK "impossible" while Sheik vs. Fox isn't? Why, exactly?

Because in the latter case, there is still room for options. A 70% advantage could be translated to an immediate handicap right when starting the match. The Fox player can still outplay the Sheik player even though he is at an advantage. Anther already covered that:

Someone brought up Fox vs Sheik ftilt lock. That's highly avoidable for fox, especially if you SDI the first hit. Fox vs Pikachu, as fox if you're above a certain percent he can't even perform it, and Pika's grab range makes it way relatively possible to avoid. It is simply not possible to avoid DDD's grab >_>.

And because quoting people is awsm funz:

Wall infinited do not work on everyone. Characters that are too light to be CG will not be wall infinited. FURTHERMORE, you need a wall to be infinited against, whereas D3 can infinite the others WHENEVER HE FEELS LIKE IT. That means you have to be in between D3 and a wall, whereas with DK and Bowser, simply EXISTING ON SCREEN gives him all the oppurtunities he requires.

The flatland throw infinite is considerably more broken then the wall infinites, but stages with walls are banned.

Why not force everyone that plays a character capable of being CG to switch characters on walled stages? I mean, you're forcing DK and Bowser players to switch on ANY stage. You can't have double standards like this and call yourself the elite. It makes the community look like a bunch of *******.

Either walled stages aren't banned and the infinite is allowed, or walled stages are banned and the infinite is banned.

CO18 also brought up an example of top foxes beating sheiks. You don't ever hear of DKs winning against D3s after having their 3 stocks infinited.

Could that be because of the amount of spam in this thread? Maybe I just missed it. Give the link and I will. In the future, if I miss a post, give me the link, don't just say I missed it.

It was a direct reply to your post, and I then asked to you reply in a later post. But w/e.

I thought I'd addressed this in more than 3 posts already, in response to you. If you chose to randomly forget about it, then I refuse to repeat myself.

I was presenting my case for everyone

Jab locks work on all characters. D3 isn't the only one with a chaingrab. The metagame would be over-centralized on locks and chaingrabs. Everyone else would be unviable. The metagame would devolve.

With D3's standing infinite, you're only rendering 6 characters unviable. It's not over-centralizing the metagame. It's merely rendering 6 charactes unviable against a single character (6 characters who often still take it in the shorts from other characters, BTW). You're still free to play anyone else other than these 6 (which number in the 29's) and still stand a stand of winning.

With walk-offs legal, your options are severely limited.


Yes, basically.

16% <<<<<< 66%.

We ban things that overcentralize the metagame. Not just anything that limits it.


At least 50% would be a good start. And must I repeat myself for the the 29th time: The D3 chaingrabs is not the only thing which will combo you off of walk-offs.

Because your whole post can be resumed in that one bolded sentence...

Like I said

Why should we half-*** a decision on making a "grab = 1 stock" unviable at high levels of play?

We already DID remove a part of the game to solve the issue but we did NOT totally get rid of the problem at hand. You have yet presented no good reason as to why we suddenly STOPPED enforcing rules following that same train of thought, and why that would be the only way to go. Overcentralization is a point that was brought up in the MK ban discussion, if it wasn't viable then as a reason, it isn't now. I believe that it is only logic for us to follow through with our original intentions. Not doing so because "hey, the game is fine as it is, those remaining characters can just suck it up" is in no way a proper argument for the cause, and I'm surprised you of all people are advocating it.

About your last sentence... Indeed, I did also mention Yoshi's release grab CG amongst many others. So why can't the "don't get grabbed/tilt-locked" apply here?

 

[Flayl]

cutter, Yuna, DRaGZ and shadowlink84 all share one thing in common, can you guess what it is?

 

[The Halloween Captain]

So far the best arguement for banning D3's infinite standing grab:

It's stupid.

Seriously, D3's Dthrow is a form of Planking that does damage.

 

[XienZo]

I believe that the infinites should be banned because they make the characters unviable.

HOWEVER, this is not JUST because they have a 100:0 against others, since the EASE OF USE seperates his INFINITES from Fox's sucky match-ups.

I know it has been argued time and time again that ease of use makes no matter in the competitive scene. I disagree. Ease of use is a factor in EFFECIENCY in learning it. The more efficent it is, the more likely people are to learn something they would otherwise not. Here's an example of DDD's infinite vs Pika owning Fox.

You're maining some random character, and you want to learn how to win as MANY matches as possible in the LEAST amount of time. Now, 100:0 match-ups are a quick way to win more matches. So, you look into 2 possibilities: Pika for Fox and DDD for the 5.

Pika counters Fox because of his entire playstyle; you would need to learn how to CG, how to QAC, how to get in a kill move, how to gimp, and Pikachu's playstyle in general in order to obtain that 100:0 matchup. You would have to spend a few days at minumum to practice all of these to gain that 90:10 matchup. Its basically a few days to win all your matchups for one character. HOWEVER, if you had spent that time practicing with your main, you could have gotten good enough to win more matches in GENERAL! Learning to play Pika is simply a lose-lose.

DDD counters the 5 because of his CG; you just need to learn to spam waddles till they come close, then its just cstick grab, pummel, down throw, repeat. It'll take you a few hours, maybe a day if you're super slow. You end up spending only a FEW hours to counter ALL matches with FIVE characters. This is MUCH more matches won than if you had just kept practicing with your main; its in YOUR FAVOR to learn DDD.

Now, this is a generaliation; some people might have a natural affinity for Pika, some people might still get 3 stocked as DDD against Mario. There are also other cases of 90:10, but they too, often are not worth the time, even if they only take a few hours to learn; DDD countering FIVE characters is what really makes it effecient. However, for MOST people, the only choice that would HELP them is to learn DDD JUST enough to win every match against the five. Therefore, assuming most people are smart; NEARLY EVERYONE should know how to use DDD well enough to counter the five, while BARELY ANYONE would learn Pika SOLELY to counter Fox.

Therefore, DDD's infinite simply changes the metagame and makes characters unviable like no other technique does.

 

[CO18]

Under yourlogic we should ban anything that makes a character completely unviable.
Ban anyone that has a massive advantage on Ganondorf.
Ban the infinites on Wario.
Ban the IC's infinite.
Ban Falco's laser and CG.
ban anything that puts a character at a major advantage.

Again this point of yours is o****ered by the fact we have a CP system.
You run into a **** matchup, you switch, and you're good.

Again if we go along with such logic, we would be banning alot more things.
Its as simple as that.



Skill required to eprform an infinite doesn't matter.
The ends a re the same.
0-death=infinite=banned under your logic.
Which means we should ban a **** load of things in melee.

The difference being that ecach character had different oppurtunities to be infinited let alone thef act that infinites did not define smash 64.
learn 2 player and the infinites are not as big a deal as it is made out to be,

I have to fear playing Luigi, Wario and MK when I choose Sonic.
I have to fear playing Pikachu, Sheik and ZSS when I choose Fox.
When I choose Diddy I have to worry about Falco.
Guess what? Its par tof the gmame, you will always have a matchup where you are disadvantaged. Don't like it? Thats a pity.
Unless it breaks the game like Akuma or even Old Sagat, it shouldn't be banned period.

Lets ban fireball users because E honda gets ***** by them

That is how all games work.
Very few games are well balanced.
Its not a glitch.

because they DOMINATE the ENTIRE metagame. They BREAK the game.
DDD's infinites, don't.

How many of those said things cause for a 100:0 matchup? None

Ganon has no 0:100 matchups
Wario has no 0:100 matchups
IC's dont have an 100:0 matchup on anyone
Falco doesnt have an 100:0 matchup on anyone

**** the counterpick system. Im tired of hearing this bull****. Im not hear to play a game where I completely cannot use 5 characters even if they are my favorite because someone has to grab me once to win.

Its the dumbest ****ing argument imo because it basically shows a "screw it its in the game attitude". I wouldnt go to tourneys to play with All Items on high and every stage legal.
That **** is in the game. Why is Green Greens and Shadow Moses banned? Its in the game who cares if characters can infinite there amirite?
No, its the stupidest point and makes me mad whenever someone brings it up.

I DEMAND WE PLAY ALL ITEMS ON HIGH WITH ALL STAGES NOW BECAUSE ITS IN THE GAME. I dont see you saying that.
Why not?

 

[DRaGZ]

cutter, Yuna, DRaGZ and shadowlink84 all share one thing in common, can you guess what it is?

We play characters that are not affected by DeDeDe's infinite?

So far the best arguement for banning D3's infinite standing grab:

It's stupid.

Seriously, D3's Dthrow is a form of Planking that does damage.

I don't mind planking at all.

 

[Punishment Divine]

So basically people are just meatriding Sirlin and saying "But if it doesn't break the game we shouldn't b7!!!"?

Wow. If you people can't use common sense to see that this is broken and removes skill from the game, I fear the future of this game.

 

[Flayl]

We play characters that are not affected by DeDeDe's infinite

That and you don't play Dedede either. It's quite amazing.

 

[DRaGZ]

So basically people are just meatriding Sirlin and saying "But if it doesn't break the game we shouldn't b7!!!"?

Wow. If you people can't use common sense to see that this is broken and removes skill from the game, I fear the future of this game.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think anyone mentioned Sirlin.

That and you don't play Dedede either. It's quite amazing.

*shrugs*

If someone found an easy infinite against R.O.B. and just R.O.B., I wouldn't be against it. Same for Ganondorf.