Should King Dedede's infinite chaingrab be banned?

[Arturito_Burrito]

It's funny how people argue against the DDD mains calling for the ban.

 

[Fletch]

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.

I thought it was pretty clear that it was a joke.

 

[CO18]

It's funny how people argue against the DDD mains calling for the ban.

I know ain't it?

All the people Anti-Ban dont main D3 or the characters being affected by the BS.

 

[Flayl]

It's funny how people argue against the DDD mains calling for the ban.

They don't even play Dedede. I think they're just really afraid of Donkey Kong or something o_O

 

[The Halloween Captain]

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



I don't mind planking at all.

Really? Most people find it to be a combination of boring and evil. It's also pretty much a form of stalling.

 

[BentoBox]

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.

You're paying no attention whatsoever ._."

 

[DRaGZ]

They don't even play Dedede. I think they're just really afraid of Donkey Kong or something o_O

Wouldn't it make more sense for third-party members not affected by the match-up to talk about it anyway? Like in a court?

Iunno.

Really? Most people find it to be a combination of boring and evil. It's also pretty much a form of stalling.

It's fun, to me at least.

 

[Punishment Divine]

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

It's pretty obvious. The whole "Don't ban something unless it totally, 100% breaks the game" this stems from Sirlin.

Read CO18's post. It makes perfect sense. 100:0 matchups shouldn't be allowed, and this one is an infinite in which you are in control of your opponents actions. Doing this infinite is no different than slapping a controller out of someone's hands. Should that be legal? Play to win right?

 

[CO18]

It's pretty obvious. The whole "Don't ban something unless it totally, 100% breaks the game" this stems from Sirlin.

Read CO18's post. It makes perfect sense. 100:0 matchups shouldn't be allowed, and this one is an infinite in which you are in control of your opponents actions. Doing this infinite is no different than slapping a controller out of someone's hands. Should that be legal? Play to win right?

Yeah im gonna start doing that now. Ill just bring a tranquilizer gun and when the match starts whip it out and shoot my opponent.

It would be the same ending result in the match as if it was D3 vs someone he can infinite.


Also Someone counter my Item argument please.

 

[HeroMystic]

Wouldn't it make more sense for third-party members not affected by the match-up to talk about it anyway? Like in a court?

Iunno.

...Even when the D3 mains who cause it ALSO agree that it should be banned?

lol @ Smashboards.

 

[DRaGZ]

It's pretty obvious. The whole "Don't ban something unless it totally, 100% breaks the game" this stems from Sirlin.

Read CO18's post. It makes perfect sense. 100:0 matchups shouldn't be allowed, and this one is an infinite in which you are in control of your opponents actions. Doing this infinite is no different than slapping a controller out of someone's hands. Should that be legal? Play to win right?

I honestly don't think people were thinking of Sirlin because the Internet breaks down people's inner inhibitions and someone would've mentioned it out of uncontrolled impulse.

And it's quite different from slapping the controller out of the opponent's hands because that's just rude and it wouldn't matter what game you're playing.

...Even when the D3 mains who cause it ALSO agree that it should be banned?

lol @ Smashboards.

I don't think all of them are. It's just that the ones who are for the ban are safe from reproach because it's the most PC thing to do right now while all the others probably fear the backlash they would receive. I mean, look what happened to the MK mains who fought for their side in the MK-ban topic.

 

[Flayl]

Wouldn't it make more sense for third-party members not affected by the match-up to talk about it anyway? Like in a court?

Iunno.



It's fun, to me at least.

I can understand your inherit reluctance to ban something, but Brawl was poorly designed and this technique is truly, TRULY, broken. So don't.

 

[cutter]

Why should we cater to some characters to remove nightmare matchups while low tier characters get left in the dark?

 

[Nanaki]

Yeah im gonna start doing that now. Ill just bring a tranquilizer gun and when the match starts whip it out and shoot my opponent.

It would be the same ending result in the match as if it was D3 vs someone he can infinite.


Also Someone counter my Item argument please.

Careful. The counterpick to your tranq gun could be devastating. And counterpicking seems to be the answer to this problem.

 

[Arturito_Burrito]

Wouldn't it make more sense for third-party members not affected by the match-up to talk about it anyway? Like in a court?

Iunno.

Not really because right now its pretty much the DDD mains saying they are guilty. no jury needed.

 

[Nanaki]

Why should we cater to some characters to remove nightmare matchups while low tier characters get left in the dark?

Aren't all the characters affected by this low tier characters? Many people seem to think Luigi's "mid" rating was too high.

Edit: Bowser's "mid" rating was certainly too high, as well. Either way, the point is that the characters in question are lower tier and ARE being catered to.

 

[cutter]

IIRC, "broken" means something is so ridiculously powerful that is becomes the ONLY viable strategy in a game.

Like the IDC. Or Akuma. Or Yawgmoth's Will.

@ scorptile: Bowser is not a low tier character according to the SBR tier list.

 

[CO18]

I love how 99.9% of the people who dont want this to be banned would be crying, balling and whining if Dedede could do this to their character.

Also how would people's views change if Dedede did this to everyone but Metaknight.

Metaknight would then be the only viable character in the game however You can still counterpick Metaknight against Dedede so it should be perfectly fair according to their logic and not ban worthy.

 

[DRaGZ]

Not really because right now its pretty much the DDD mains saying they are guilty. no jury needed.

There are actually quite a few ways to get around that in an American court of law, but this is not the place to argue such things.

I love how 99.9% of the people who dont want this to be banned would be crying, balling and whining if Dedede could do this to their character.

I wouldn't.

 

[Punishment Divine]

I honestly don't think people were thinking of Sirlin because the Internet breaks down people's inner inhibitions and someone would've mentioned it out of uncontrolled impulse.

And it's quite different from slapping the controller out of the opponent's hands because that's just rude and it wouldn't matter what game you're playing.

Thinking of Sirlin is almost second nature, because by second hand we are fed that what Sirlin says it right about all fighting games. IMO people shouldn't quote Sirlin because he's outdated and Smash is soooo different from other fighters. but the point is this idea is generally accepted, as is this play to win strategy, and people are just sucked into this thought process without using basic human things like common sense.

And how is it different? I'm preventing my opponent from doing anything, I'm doing it in a simple, mongol-esque way. What makes it so very different?

EDIT: lol CO18 so true. and whoever said Yawg Will, don't get me started before I get into a whole Magic comparison

 

[cutter]

I love how 99.9% of the people who dont want this to be banned would be crying, balling and whining if Dedede could do this to their character.

I would just suck it up and switch to a different character

Sheik did the same thing in Melee; she limited the viability of the cast but there wasn't as much crying about her as there is with D3.

 

[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.

I hate being last post on page... thoughts?

 

[DanGR]

The biggest difference between DDD's infinite and any other infinite, CG, or brutal matchup is that DDD's infinite is the ONLY one that makes a perfectly viable character (without the infinite) unviable in tournament play.

That is why it should be banned.

 

[BentoBox]

CO18: People are ignoring our arguments :[

 

[DRaGZ]

Thinking of Sirlin is almost second nature, because by second hand we are fed that what Sirlin says it right about all fighting games. IMO people shouldn't quote Sirlin because he's outdated and Smash is soooo different from other fighters. but the point is this idea is generally accepted, as is this play to win strategy, and people are just sucked into this thought process without using basic human things like common sense.

And how is it different? I'm preventing my opponent from doing anything, I'm doing it in a simple, mongol-esque way. What makes it so very different?

Well, for one, slapping away an opponent's controller gives him free reign to slap yours away as well, so it would actually put you both in a neutral position.

And to be 100% honest, I, at least, was not thinking of Sirlin. I've...barely even heard of Sirlin other than a few quotes that have been put on these boards back in the Melee vs. Brawl debates.

EDIT: Oh, also, I heard he was directing SSFIITHDR, so yeah, there is also that.

 

[viparagon]

I'd like to point out that getting grabbed doesn't mean the loss of 1 stock, but three if you are both on the same life. the d3 can simply stall the whole match infiniting you then bthrow you at the last second for an autokill. stupid infinites...

 

[Punishment Divine]

Well, for one, slapping away an opponent's controller gives him free reign to slap yours away as well, so it would actually put you both in a neutral position.

And to be 100% honest, I, at least, was not thinking of Sirlin. I've...barely even heard of Sirlin other than a few quotes that have been put on these boards back in the Melee vs. Brawl debates.

lol, but ironically DDD can infinite DDD! So it is comparable.

Also, even if you're not thinking of Sirlin, you're thinking of Sirlin.

 

[Woozle]

I still don't get why all of the smashers who want to ban infinites don't simply ask the regional TOs to implement a ban.

I'm sure at least ONE has to agree with you. And I'm sure if it was asked for a lot, it would just become standard.

I love that everyone is waiting with bated breath for the SBR to make some kind of announcement. Do it yourself.

 

[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.

****, it got lost again... anyone?

 

[The Halloween Captain]

CO18: People are ignoring our arguments :[

Actually, my "It's stupid" arguement was not meant to be an intelligent post.

Although I admit, "It's stupid" is a lot more humerous a reason to ban something than "It makes 15% of the cast unviable."

 

[Fletch]

I love how 99.9% of the people who dont want this to be banned would be crying, balling and whining if Dedede could do this to their character.

Not true. I wouldn't play a character in the first place that is subjected to this.

 

[Punishment Divine]

I still don't get why all of the smashers who want to ban infinites simply ask the regional TOs to implement a ban.

I'm sure at least ONE has to agree with you. And I'm sure if it was asked for a lot, it would just become standard.

I love that everyone is waiting with bated breath for the SBR to make some kind of announcement. Do it yourself.

Don't think I'm trying to change anything. Tournaments around me already ban the infi, ad even the little step CG. I'm just engaged in an intelligent discussion with some other members. kthxbai

 

[DRaGZ]

lol, but ironically DDD can infinite DDD! So it is comparable.

Also, even if you're not thinking of Sirlin, you're thinking of Sirlin.

But...I'm not even exactly sure what his "philosophy" is. Are you suggesting I'm thinking of him in a sexual manner? Because I'm not sure what he looks like either, so I guess I can imagine?

 

[Woozle]

Not true. I wouldn't play a character in the first place that is subjected to this.

Maybe part of the problem...?

Don't think I'm trying to change anything. Tournaments around me already ban the infi, ad even the little step CG. I'm just engaged in an intelligent discussion with some other members. kthxbai

Well, then, not you specifically.



I still stand by it.

 

[Flayl]

Not true. I wouldn't play a character in the first place that is subjected to this.

We know that. Go away.

 

[cutter]

So, can someone who is pro-ban prove that D3's infinites are "broken"?

 

[Nanaki]

Not true. I wouldn't play a character in the first place that is subjected to this.

This kind of confirms the major problem, though. You're not the only person that thinks like this. This IS the reason Mario, Luigi, Samus, and DK are not represented in regions where infinites are not banned.

Making a character unviable when they would otherwise be viable is not a good thing.

 

[Ulevo]

Define stalling. Is it delaying for the sole purpose of running the timer down? Obviously the infinite can easily result in a kill, so it's not just delaying unless you never kill.

From the SBR ruleset: "Stalling: The act of deliberately avoiding any and all conflict so that one may make the game unplayable. Running away from an opponent to reach a better position is not stalling, while doing an infinite grab endlessly against a wall is. Any infinite chain grabs most end quickly after 300% has been reached so as to prevent excessive stalling."

So long as the infinite is used to kill rather than stall it's not stalling. That should be pretty obvious. You can call it underhanded, cheap, and say it should be banned, but it's not stalling.

When you use the standing infinite on a character with King Dedede, your opponent virtually loses any and all control. That includes any ability to create or deal damage, or cause conflict. When you're stuck in an infinite, there is no conflict. It's just King Dedede winning. It makes the game unplayable. I have no idea what goal you had to accomplish by posting this, you only disproved your own point.

 

[Flayl]

So, can someone who is pro-ban prove that D3's infinites are "broken"?

Play against a Dedede with an infinitable and don't get grabbed once. If that's not enough for you I don't know what is.

 

[Woozle]

So, can someone who is pro-ban prove that D3's infinites are "broken"?

Not really, because one definition of broken isn't someone else's definition of broken.

If you gave me your definition, I could try?