Should King Dedede's infinite chaingrab be banned?

[viparagon]

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

you play fox, who is subject to pikachu... is that playing to win?

 

[Punishment Divine]

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?

You are aware, because it is your mindset. Playing to Win, don't ban unless it breaks the game. This logic applies in a lot of situations, and I will agree with it, but it can't be held in every situation.

In Jurisprudence, there's a couple different theories on law: One of them is REALISM. This defies some classic ways of thinking. As in, new situations call for you to look at something from a reasonable point of view, not just a factual point of view where you base everything on past precedence. Do you honestly think it's reasonable and best for the community as a whole if planking and infinites like this still thrive?

 

[Woozle]

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.

I really, really, REALLY don't want to start an argument here. At all. I am asking a question because I still don't get it.

Why is DDD's infinite >> then the IC's? I have heard the grab range story, but that still doesn't excuse them from "When you're stuck in an infinite, there is no conflict."

I just don't understand.

 

[cutter]

"Broken"

Something is "broken" when it overcentralizes the metagame due to how power it is, becoming the only viable choice in competitive play.

ie, IDC is broken.

 

[viparagon]

ban the infinite (a design faux) or 5 characters? let's think about that...

 

[Flayl]

I really, really, REALLY don't want to start an argument here. At all. I am asking a question because I still don't get it.

Why is DDD's infinite >> then the IC's? I have heard the grab range story, but that still doesn't excuse them from "When you're stuck in an infinite, there is no conflict."

I just don't understand.

Well that's because you somehow manage to overlook the fact that you can seperate the ICs every single time that argument comes up?

 

[DRaGZ]

You are aware, because it is your mindset. Playing to Win, don't ban unless it breaks the game. This logic applies in a lot of situations, and I will agree with it, but it can't be held in every situation.

In Jurisprudence, there's a couple different theories on law: One of them is REALISM. This defies some classic ways of thinking. As in, new situations call for you to look at something from a reasonable point of view, not just a factual point of view where you base everything on past precedence. Do you honestly think it's reasonable and best for the community as a whole if planking and infinites like this still thrive?

Hey, you're talking to someone who wanted MK banned.

 

[Arturito_Burrito]

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

I can "it stops the match until the metaknight has the advantage"

O wait thats the IDC well both do the same thing so w/e.

 

[Punishment Divine]

I really, really, REALLY don't want to start an argument here. At all. I am asking a question because I still don't get it.

Why is DDD's infinite >> then the IC's? I have heard the grab range story, but that still doesn't excuse them from "When you're stuck in an infinite, there is no conflict."

I just don't understand.

You can mash out of the IC's, their grab range is A LOT shorter, they need both Nana and Popo to achieve this.

I'm not saying let IC's keep their infis, though. Their grab combos are cool but things like bthrow to bthrow, etc. should be banned, while some like P dthrow to N fair are fine

EDIT: @ Dragz - you have to have the weirdest opinions. Ever.

 

[DanGR]

DDD's infinite is the only infinite, CG, or brutal matchup that makes a perfectly viable character (without the infinite) unviable in tournament play.

That's the reason it should be banned and the others shouldn't. It's that simple guys.

Spoiler

This thread is moving too fast.

 

[cutter]

I can "it stops the match until the metaknight has the advantage"

O wait thats the IDC well both do the same thing so w/e.

Except IDC affects all characters.

Unlike D3's infinites.

 

[Nanaki]

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

Since you've posted the same thing 3 times, I'll throw you a bone.

You make a good point. Learning DDD's infinite to auto-win against 5 characters is an efficient use of time for you, much more so than learning Pika to beat Fox. You could argue that you might see Fox more than the other 5 since they're so horribly crippled right now, but it would be a bad argument.

 

[XienZo]

Why is everyone ignoring my argument which will ban the infinite and cure cancer?

Since you've posted the same thing 3 times, I'll throw you a bone.

You make a good point. Learning DDD's infinite to auto-win against 5 characters is an efficient use of time for you, much more so than learning Pika to beat Fox. You could argue that you might see Fox more than the other 5 since they're so horribly crippled right now, but it would be a bad argument.

Edit: woot, a bone!

Well, that would assume that Fox is more popular than all 5 characters combined. Only the top tier is that popular so only a technique that 100:0 them would be advantageous. Good luck finding that.

 

[Flayl]

This pattern is going to repeat in the SBR, most of the people who don't even play dedede or any of the infinitable characters are going to vote no on the ban

 

[The Halloween Captain]

Why is everyone ignoring my argument which will ban the infinite and cure cancer?

You win the internet.

 

[Punishment Divine]

Why is everyone ignoring my argument which will ban the infinite and cure cancer?

I looked at your post, my friend, and I must say there were quite a few flaws in it. You can't really compare something infinite to something not

 

[Ulevo]

I really, really, REALLY don't want to start an argument here. At all. I am asking a question because I still don't get it.

Why is DDD's infinite >> then the IC's? I have heard the grab range story, but that still doesn't excuse them from "When you're stuck in an infinite, there is no conflict."

I just don't understand.

Because Ice Climbers are a flawed character. They have requirements in order to perform the infinites.

- They need to be desynched
- CPU needs to be alive
- They need to be close together

All three of those circumstances must be in place in order for an infinite to take place, plus they need to grab you. And it is usually very easy to separate the two, or prevent an infinite from happening.

King Dedede has no requirements. He just grabs you, and it's over. With the best non tether grab range in the game, that isn't hard to do.

Also, I know how everyone argues that "easy" isn't an valid point, but lets think in reality terms here. How often do you see a King Dedede mess up an infinite in a match that counts, as opposed to the Ice Climbers who can infinite anyone? There's a reason IC aren't destroying tournaments everywhere.

There's also a reason King Dedede destroys those five characters.

 

[Arturito_Burrito]

Except IDC affects all characters.

Unlike D3's infinites.

thats why you only ban it in these 5 match ups unlike the IDC. Double standards aren't very nice.

 

[bob-e]

**** 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.

Counter picking is one of the fundamental principals of Brawl tournaments. If anything, Dedede's infinite emphasizes this system. Don't use DK on the first round, and don't use him if you know your opponent is playing Dedede; simple as that, no more 0:100 match ups. He still goes even with half a dozen top/high tier characters.

If someone isn't willing to take advantage of one of the very things that tournaments are built around, then they're probably playing the wrong game.

 

[viparagon]

I just don't see why its so bad to do anything that makes the game better (something as drastic as letting 5 characters compete)

 

[Fletch]

Maybe part of the problem...?

Why is this a problem? There's tons of other characters I would love to play as well competitively, but they aren't viable either.

We know that. Go away.

Wow, good point.

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.

Again though, where do we draw the line? Banning MK would make a lot more characters viable, but you don't see the community doing that do you? Competitive games aren't about banning things for variability, but only for banning things that are completely broken and have no counters. D3 has counters, and this shouldn't be banned.

 

[cutter]

thats why you only ban it in these 5 match ups unlike the IDC. Double standards aren't very nice.

Why ban something that isn't broken again?

 

[CO18]

Except IDC affects all characters.

Unlike D3's infinites.

SO ACCORDING to YOUR Logic. IF Dedede were to Infinite EVERY character in this game BESIDES Metaknight it is perfectly fair and everyone should only use Metaknight.

That is what you are saying you can't change it.

If this were to occur, Would you still play this game? I know I wouldn't and Im sure 99.9% of other people would not.

So we are now as a community of Human Beings beneath this tactic and are forced to not play a game do to the "counterpick system" and the fact that it doesnt effect all
characters.

Mankind is now beneath the "z" button on the gamecube controller because of the "counterpick" system.

I LOL at you. Sorry.

 

[XienZo]

I looked at your post, my friend, and I must say there were quite a few flaws in it. You can't really compare something infinite to something not

Oh, then what were the flaws? A 90:10 is a 90:10, I gave neither scenario special treatment because they were/were not an infinite. I don't see why you can't compare them.

 

[Fletch]

Counter picking is one of the fundamental principals of Brawl tournaments. If anything, Dedede's infinite emphasizes this system. Don't use DK on the first round, and don't use him if you know your opponent is playing Dedede; simple as that, no more 0:100 match ups. He still goes even with half a dozen top/high tier characters.

If this is the case, and you're a DK main, you can even use this to your advantage with the CP system. If you know your opponent is going D3 to CP your DK, you can go MK in the double-blind and be at an advantage! But nevermind actually having to learn another character, that must be too difficult, especially one as difficult to learn as MK.

 

[Nanaki]

SO ACCORDING to YOUR Logic. IF Dedede were to Infinite EVERY character in this game BESIDES Metaknight it is perfectly fair and everyone should only use Metaknight.

That is what you are saying you can't change it.

If this were to occur, Would you still play this game? I know I wouldn't and Im sure 99.9% of other people would not.

So we are now as a community of Human Beings beneath this tactic and are forced to not play a game do to the "counterpick system" and the fact that it doesnt effect all
characters.

Mankind is now beneath the "z" button on the gamecube controller because of the "counterpick" system.

I LOL at you. Sorry.

You beat me to it.

 

[BentoBox]

cutter: Why should we half-arse a decision on making a "grab = 1 stock" unviable at high levels of play? Why not follow through with our original intentions? Why is it ok to ban aspects of the game (all maps with walk-offs/walls) to ensure that a majority of the cast would not get infinited, and yet arbitrarily stop and decide not to take care of the rest of the cast that is still affected by said technique? Where is the logic behind that? Dragz simply answered "because its unnecessary". I hope you'll come up with something smarter than that.

Double standards much? Yes, yes indeed.

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.

 

[Arturito_Burrito]

Why ban something that isn't broken again?

it is though. When used it stops the entire match until the DDD is in the advantage. Its the exact same definition as the IDC. The reason the IDC was banned was not because it could be used against every character.

 

[Punishment Divine]

SO ACCORDING to YOUR Logic. IF Dedede were to Infinite EVERY character in this game BESIDES Metaknight it is perfectly fair and everyone should only use Metaknight.

That is what you are saying you can't change it.

If this were to occur, Would you still play this game? I know I wouldn't and Im sure 99.9% of other people would not.

So we are now as a community of Human Beings beneath this tactic and are forced to not play a game do to the "counterpick system" and the fact that it doesnt effect all
characters.

Mankind is now beneath the "z" button on the gamecube controller because of the "counterpick" system.

I LOL at you. Sorry.

You win, CO18. I knew I could trust ZMT when he said good things about you lol.

 

[Nanaki]

Again though, where do we draw the line? Banning MK would make a lot more characters viable, but you don't see the community doing that do you? Competitive games aren't about banning things for variability, but only for banning things that are completely broken and have no counters. D3 has counters, and this shouldn't be banned.

I understand your point, and I think it's a valid one, but I think the MK example is a little out of line with the DDD infinite. MK doesn't utterly destroy 5 characters the way the infinite does. If you happen to double blind into a DDD/DK matchup, you may as well just drop your controller and go make a sandwich.

 

[DRaGZ]

cutter: Why should we half-arse a decision on making a "grab = 1 stock" unviable at high levels of play? Why not follow through with our original intentions? Why is it ok to ban aspects of the game (all maps with walk-offs/walls) to ensure that a majority of the cast would not get infinited, and yet arbitrarily stop and decide not to take care of the rest of the cast that is still affected by said technique? Where is the logic behind that? Dragz simply answered "because its unnecessary". I hope you'll come up with something smarter than that.

Double standards much? Yes, yes indeed.

What double standard?

 

[Ulevo]

Why is this a problem? There's tons of other characters I would love to play as well competitively, but they aren't viable either.

Aren't viable? Like who?

"Capable of working successfully; feasible"

Notice how "capable" and "feasible" are in that definitive description?

Exactly who isn't viable? You are always capable of winning with any character, there is just a certain amount of skill involved in order for you to win depending upon the circumstances.

The bottom line is, with King Dedede, those five characters are not capable of working successfully, or are even feasible. They are not viable. You can sit here all day and tell me how "Ganondorf isn't viable boo hoo, so the infinite is fine". I have players like Sliq that would disagree with you.

 

[Woozle]

You can mash out of the IC's, their grab range is A LOT shorter, they need both Nana and Popo to achieve this.

I'm not saying let IC's keep their infis, though. Their grab combos are cool but things like bthrow to bthrow, etc. should be banned, while some like P dthrow to N fair are fine

EDIT: @ Dragz - you have to have the weirdest opinions. Ever.

I like this.

:]

 

[BentoBox]

What double standard?

laalalalaalal

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.

You can't advocate a position and then do the exact opposite when you see fit. If you have your mind set on a philosophy, you either take action or you don't. You don't half-*** it and then come and tell me that finishing the job is unnecessary. ZZZ

 

[bobson]

If this is the case, and you're a DK main, you can even use this to your advantage with the CP system. If you know your opponent is going D3 to CP your DK, you can go MK in the double-blind and be at an advantage! But nevermind actually having to learn another character, that must be too difficult, especially one as difficult to learn as MK.

If you're a DK main and use the CP system to ensure that you don't get matched up against Dedede, you are no longer a DK main. You can't choose DK in the first match without a large chance of your opponent picking Dedede and you can't stick with DK if you win any matches. You're only allowed to feasibly use DK as a counterpick.

 

[CO18]

*Is waiting for a response from Cutter.

 

[PKNintendo]

I want to count how many people main the unlucky 5.

 

[XienZo]

Again though, where do we draw the line? Banning MK would make a lot more characters viable, but you don't see the community doing that do you? Competitive games aren't about banning things for variability, but only for banning things that are completely broken and have no counters. D3 has counters, and this shouldn't be banned.

We almost did and we eventually will!

Why shouldn't we ban for variability?


BTW, I'd totally sig my argument just so people can read it, but its too long...

 

[DRaGZ]

laalalalaalal

I'm not sure that's a double standard. Having a lots of "unviable" characters versus 6 "unviable" seems like a large enough difference to me.

 

[Punishment Divine]

If you're a DK main and use the CP system to ensure that you don't get matched up against Dedede, you are no longer a DK main. You can't choose DK in the first match without a large chance of your opponent picking Dedede and you can't stick with DK if you win any matches. You're only allowed to feasibly use DK as a counterpick.

And this is the other logic people fail to notice. This makes the CP argument useless, because what sort of main is one you can't even use in the first match without risk, and an easy risk to prey on, of getting 100:0'd and having no chance of winning? Your main is now a CP itself.