Should King Dedede's infinite chaingrab be banned?

[da K.I.D.]

yuna and adum are being highly subjective right now, dont argue with them, they will drown you in worthless text, personal attacks, ad hominem, stats and numbers that dont really have anything to to with the actual game when its in progress and overly complecated hypotheticals

just take your free wins and leave it alone...

 

[Yuna]

yuna and adum are being highly subjective right now, dont argue with them, they will drown you in worthless text, personal attacks, ad hominem, stats and numbers that dont really have anything to to with the actual game when its in progress and overly complecated hypotheticals

just take your free wins and leave it alone...

Our arguments are based on facts, logic and the history of Competitive games. Yours are based on... opinions alone.

Don't make me get eloquent!

 

[TheReflexWonder]

If you can beat my Melee Sheik as Melee Bowser on Final Destination (in Melee), then we'll ban it.

Does it have to be Final Destination?

 

[Yuna]

Does it have to be Final Destination?

Yes. Because my Sheik's not even good. But I can still destroy him if it's FD. The chaingrab's just that good.

 

[TheReflexWonder]

Also, my controller's actually smoother than most normal ones as a result of all the "ruining" I've done by breaking out of grab quickly.

It even has teeth marks as a result of getting chaingrabbed for the thousandth time. <3

 

[ShadowLink84]

Also, my controller's actually smoother than most normal ones as a result of all the "ruining" I've done by breaking out of grab quickly.

It even has teeth marks as a result of getting chaingrabbed for the thousandth time. <3

Just mash those buttons no need to bite your control.

Whirl thee control stick and then use your fingers to run over the buttons.
1 button input reduces the time you are held by 8 frames.

 

[Dark Sonic]

Also, my controller's actually smoother than most normal ones as a result of all the "ruining" I've done by breaking out of grab quickly.

It even has teeth marks as a result of getting chaingrabbed for the thousandth time. <3

That's actually pretty cool. Talk about the fastest way to "break in" a controller.

 

[adumbrodeus]

Just mash those buttons no need to bite your control.

Whirl thee control stick and then use your fingers to run over the buttons.
1 button input reduces the time you are held by 8 frames.

Dude, his method is MUCH better.

Magnus's method is the best that doesn't require that however, at least so far.

 

[TheReflexWonder]

Just mash those buttons no need to bite your control.

Biting the top-center of the controller was anger management in the early stages of Brawl for me. I don't bite anything for mashing out.

Better than throwing it at a wall and potentially messing something up. My controller handles like a charm.

Also, I think my method's been pretty effective as it is...and it seems that if your hands are at least as big as mine (which isn't tough; my hands are slightly smaller than the average), your thumb can effectively run over all four "right-hand" buttons instead of just B/A/X.

Maybe we can see a break at 140+% soon.

 

[Dark Sonic]

I wonder if we should just make a video of one person trying to do the DDD infinite and the other person breaking out at ridiculous percentages.

 

[TheReflexWonder]

So, I've a question I've been meaning to ask for a while now since originally seeing this thread.

For Mario/Samus/Luigi, I was under the impression that you only needed one pummel per grab, but most people in this thread have said that you need two.

Which is it?

 

[bobson]

For Mario/Samus/Luigi, I was under the impression that you only needed one pummel per grab, but most people in this thread have said that you need two.

It's one normally. Two if you've staled it ridiculously, but it's easier to unstale it just by fighting.

 

[adumbrodeus]

So, I've a question I've been meaning to ask for a while now since originally seeing this thread.

For Mario/Samus/Luigi, I was under the impression that you only needed one pummel per grab, but most people in this thread have said that you need two.

Which is it?

There are 9 moves on the list, if there are 5 dthrows or more on the list you cannot regrab.

1. dthrow 1
2. pummel
3. dthrow 2
4.pummel
5. dthrow 3
6. pummel
7. dthrow 4
8.pummel
9. dthrow 5

So, for the last one you've gotta double pummel, the rest you can single pummel. That gives a much greater option for escaping, plus easier to mess up.

 

[Dark Sonic]

Wait, wait. So you have to double pummel on the 5th throw? If that's true, then DDDs infinite really might not be "infinite" until over 300%, which is already over the damage cap anyway (if you can pull off the grab break method seven times in about 2 1/2 seconds, which is hard, but not impossible).

 

[Arturito_Burrito]

There are 9 moves on the list, if there are 5 dthrows or more on the list you cannot regrab.

1. dthrow 1
2. pummel
3. dthrow 2
4.pummel
5. dthrow 3
6. pummel
7. dthrow 4
8.pummel
9. dthrow 5

So, for the last one you've gotta double pummel, the rest you can single pummel. That gives a much greater option for escaping, plus easier to mess up.

If you pummel again wouldn't it be

1. pummel
2. dthrow 2
3.pummel
4. dthrow 3
5. pummel
6. dthrow 4
7.pummel
8. dthrow 5
9. pummel?

I don't see a double pummel in there. There can actually be 5 d throws in the list at once it just has to be removed before the Dthrow is used again.

 

[adumbrodeus]

Wait, wait. So you have to double pummel on the 5th throw? If that's true, then DDDs infinite really might not be "infinite" until over 300%, which is already over the damage cap anyway (if you can pull off the grab break method seven times in about 2 1/2 seconds, which is hard, but not impossible).

Actually, I was wrong, it's 10, you gotta double pummel TWICE, I'm not sure where the optimal location for that is though, probably the last 2.

Sirlin mentions it, part 5.

And for the cannot regrab after 5, tests here.

If you pummel again wouldn't it be

1. pummel
2. dthrow 2
3.pummel
4. dthrow 3
5. pummel
6. dthrow 4
7.pummel
8. dthrow 5
9. pummel?

I don't see a double pummel in there. There can actually be 5 d throws in the list at once it just has to be removed before the Dthrow is used again.

actually, the pummel is already there, it's just gone because the list was 9 moves, or so I thought.

The major issue is if there are a total of 5 throws on the list when the throw is used INCLUDING THE THROW ITSELF, you're out of range, it's useless.

 

[Dark Sonic]

^^So I guess it's not true and the threshold is still....some arbitrary number greater than 129% (we really should test how high the threshold is. All we know so far is that it is not lower than 130%, which doesn't tell us much).

edit: Wait a minute, the attack list is 10 attacks long? That makes you right again on the double pummel.

Okay, now I'm confused.

 

[adumbrodeus]

^^So I guess it's not true and the threshold is still....some arbitrary number greater than 129% (we really should test how high the threshold is. All we know so far is that it is not lower than 130%, which doesn't tell us much).

edit: Wait a minute, the attack list is 10 attacks long? That makes you right again on the double pummel.

Okay, now I'm confused.

Nah, he's wrong, that'd still be 5 throws on the list after execution unless he throws in another pummel.


Let me phrase this properly.


If you dthrow while there are 5 dthrows on the list, Luigi, Mario, and Samus will move out of range.

Nah, doesn't work.

 

[Yuna]

^^So I guess it's not true and the threshold is still....some arbitrary number greater than 129% (we really should test how high the threshold is. All we know so far is that it is not lower than 130%, which doesn't tell us much).

Yes, that's just the number at which we know it's humanly possible to get out of a grab. It's the percentage (137-147% or whatever) at which we know someone has done it before in a match (IIRC). If we test it and just mash the hell out of it, I'm sure we can go higher.

 

[Dark Sonic]

Nah, he's wrong, that'd still be 5 throws on the list after execution unless he throws in another pummel.


Let me phrase this properly.


If you dthrow while there are 4 dthrows on the list, Luigi, Mario, and Samus will move out of range.


That's all there is to it, were there a list of 9, you'd require 1 double pummel. There's 10 so you require 2.

No you're wrong, the 5th throw does allow a regrab. Rewatch the video.

If you dthrow while there are 5 dthrows on the list they will move out of range.

But still, with a 10 move decay list you'd have

1.pummel
2.d-throw
3.pummel
4.d-throw
5.pummel
6.d-throw
7.pummel
8.d-throw
9.pummel
10.d-throw

Which would support your original statement of needing to double pummel once in the set.

 

[adumbrodeus]

No you're wrong, the 5th throw does allow a regrab. Rewatch the video.

If you dthrow while there are 5 dthrows on the list they will move out of range.

You're right, his words must've messed me up, muted it and I counted just fine.

1. dthrow 1(gone, or not yet?)
2. pummel
3. dthrow 2
4.pummel
5. dthrow 3
6. pummel
7. dthrow 4
8.pummel
9. dthrow 5
10. pummel
11. dthrow 6


Ok, now it depends on when the replacement happens, if that first dthrow is still on the list then it's screwed up, but if it's gone before knockback is calculated then it doesn't matter.

But still, with a 10 move decay list you'd have

1.pummel
2.d-throw
3.pummel
4.d-throw
5.pummel
6.d-throw
7.pummel
8.d-throw
9.pummel
10.d-throw

Which would support your original statement of needing to double pummel once in the set.

Not sure, I need to know when a move is removed from the list to say that.

 

[bobson]

If you dthrow while there are 5 dthrows on the list, Luigi, Mario, and Samus will move out of range.

Wrong. If you dthrow while there are 5 dthrows at the beginning of the list, they'll move out of range. The staling factor decreases the farther the move is down the stale moves queue. You never need to use a double pummel if you do it properly.
I just saved a replay of me using a standing regrab with single pummels (I even missed one accidentally in the middle of the chain) on an AI Mario until ~280% if you need proof.

Edit: This is actually kind of fun. I've done it four times now.

 

[Dark Sonic]

^^That's true, I haven't thought about that. Oh well, no double pummel for us.

 

[adumbrodeus]

Wrong. If you dthrow while there are 5 dthrows at the beginning of the list, they'll move out of range. The staling factor decreases the farther the move is down the stale moves queue. You never need to use a double pummel if you do it properly.
I just saved a replay of me using a standing regrab with single pummels (I even missed one accidentally in the middle of the chain) on an AI Mario until ~280% if you need proof.

Edit: This is actually kind of fun. I've done it four times now.

Ok, that kills that, didn't know that staling decreased based on position, the more you know.

 

[Pi]

Sigh...I feel like most of you are arguing for the sake of arguing

Um how should I start here...

Yes it would be nice to have a game where every character (different) was tourney viable
And of course brawl, melee, and SSB are not one of these games, I understand this

Don't think of it as laziness, for me not wanting to HAVE to counterpick
I really wouldn't mind moving to a 'better' match up
But the idea of HAVING to move to a VIABLE matchup bothers me a bit, especially when we have power to prevent it ^.^

I don't mind counterpicking, say, a shiek to counter a marth (melee)
or a diddy to 'counter' a MK
or something to give you maybe a slightly better chance to win

But do you understand where I'm coming from here? This thing, that could so easily be eliminated from play, with **** near no negative effects, I'm really not seeing a logical reason to NOT ban it

I hear a lot of 'it doesn't warrant a ban'
Because of it not 'over centralizing the meta game'

If you wanna delve deep into it, it really does affect the overall metagame of Brawl
(to an extent)
by making the characters it affects less popular
But that apparently doesn't live up to the pre-determined standards set on ban-worthy moves

It does not overcentralize the metagame, it does not meet the standards you have set for ban-worthy. If you restrict ban-worthy to these standards, it does not meet them, and your opinion will not change. And you will always see the move, and ones like it, as perfectly acceptable.

The ONLY way to change your opinion on this, would be to change what you see as ban-worthy

I have a feeling some of you WON'T change
But let me give it a go

I ask for your open-mindedness while you read what I have to say
Try to keep your head free of emotions and pre-concieved notions on my character or intellect

Let's set some bases...

Assume that Dedede's infinite guarantee's a stock
Assume that is is truly infinite
Also Assume that given the opportunity, players will CP D3 and will use this infinite in tournaments

Now, having assumed all this, this removes 2 characters from competitive play, yes?

We, as the community, have the full ability to tell players to stop using this technique, to completely remove this technique as an option, to bring these 2 characters back into competitive play.

Why shouldn't we enforce it?
Nobody is going to get ban happy, this is a unique situation, a unique technique, that is easily differentiated from what is 'broken', as it is freely used, and what is truly 'broken'.

There should be no fear here of people becoming ban-happy, it just isn't vaiable here
This is inescapable
It is easy to set up
It guarantee's a stock

AFAIK, DI isn't even a factor here, you might as well put down your controller
You get grabbed, you die =\

IF this is banned
There will be no repercussions
There will be no downside

We bring 2 characters back into the metagame
We MAKE the game a bit deeper
We IMPROVE the game

Please, just spend some time thinking about what you think warrants a ban
This is a new game

I just don't think that what currently warrants a ban is a perfect solution

Let's not wait for this to become a problem (as it obviously has the ability to) before we have to fix it
We have the insight and the knowledge to know what this could turn into, and we have the ability to safely put a stop to it ^.^

If this were anything but an infinite and sure fire way to lose a stock
I wouldn't care
But it is, and that's why I'm in support of the ban

 

[Yuna]

Don't think of it as laziness, for me not wanting to HAVE to counterpick
I really wouldn't mind moving to a 'better' match up
But the idea of HAVING to move to a VIABLE matchup bothers me a bit, especially when we have power to prevent it ^.^

Then Competitive Smash is definitely not for you. Because there are tons of match-up in Competitive Smash where you, statistically, have to switch characters to stand a viable chance of winning.

If you don't want to do that, then be my guest, stop playing. Don't demand things are banned to artifically bloat the match-ups. And don't be a hypocrite about it.

If this is your reason, then you have to demand Melee Sheik's chaingrabs are banned. You have to demand Pikachu's chaingrab on Fox be banned. You have to demand various grab-release infinites and combos be banned.

I stopped reading after this. Because it's most probably the same old, stale, refuted and wholly inane arguments we've seen time and again. Just as this one.

We bring 2 characters back into the metagame
We MAKE the game a bit deeper
We IMPROVE the game

(except for this part)

Using that inane logic, we can ban a jillion things with "no downsides" while bringing back unviable characters and making them viable (not that Bowser ever will be viable)! Using that logic, we could ban until the cows go home and everyone is at 50-50 in their match-ups! Let's do that!

Let's not wait for this to become a problem (as it obviously has the ability to) before we have to fix it

(and this part)

This will never ever become such a problem we'll have to fix it. It does not have the ability to! It only works on two characters! How in the world could that possibly become a huge problem we have to fix?!

What, if 99% of the world's players decided they didn't want to play any characters but those two? Then screw them! Let them lose badly. It's their choice.

(These two parts were still old, stale, inane, etc. I just felt like addressing them)

 

[Pi]

Then Competitive Smash is definitely not for you. Because there are tons of match-up in Competitive Smash where you, statistically, have to switch characters to stand a viable chance of winning.

But this is to a greater extent than what you are talking about =\
You get grabbed, you die, this is a pretty large window =\

If you don't want to do that, then be my guest, stop playing. Don't demand things are banned to artificially bloat the match-ups. And don't be a hypocrite about it.
Please explain to me why it should not be banned. Pleeeease pretty pleaasee


If this is your reason, then you have to demand Melee Sheik's chaingrabs are banned. You have to demand Pikachu's chaingrab on Fox be banned. You have to demand various grab-release infinites and combos be banned.
If I had my way, they would be banned , and the metagame would hardly be affected, or would it? If it were it would be in a positive way


I stopped reading after this. Because it's most probably the same old, stale, refuted and wholly inane arguments we've seen time and again. Just as this one.



This will never ever become such a problem we'll have to fix it. It does not have the ability to! It only works on two characters! How in the world could that possibly become a huge problem we have to fix?!
It's not a huge problem, obviously, it is only two characters, I understand, but why would it be such a problem to ban it?


What, if 99% of the world's players decided they didn't want to play any characters but those two? Then screw them! Let them lose badly. It's their choice.

It's always a choice, I get that, why should we CHOOSE not to ban it?

Using that inane logic, we can ban a jillion things with "no downsides" while bringing back unviable characters and making them viable (not that Bowser ever will be viable)! Using that logic, we could ban until the cows go home and everyone is at 50-50 in their match-ups! Let's do that!

I'm not really seeing how you're jumping to this type of conclusion o.o

The jillion things that you speak of could not possibly meet the same criteria as this infinite does

Come on yuna, you're grossly exaggerating here =\

This is not tornado, this is not nades, this is not a tilt a smash or a B move =\
This is an infinite technique

There are not a jillion infinites to be banned
And they surely would not reduce the game to 50-50 match ups if they were all banned =\

I see someone threadcromanced this.

I'll say this: Sure, it's impressive he could play with 3 different controllers at the same time. Sure it's impressive he could control them pretty well and, apparently, do neat stuff.

But that doesn't change anything about what the game that he churned out. He's an impressive player, in that he can control 3 characters as the same time, but if he set out to balance the game foremost, then he did a terrible job.

I've often wondered why the game was so horribly balance and beta tested. Now I know why. 1 man. 1 man did it all. Of course it's gonna get shot to hell, then. The makers of the most Competitive fighting games in the world have entire teams balancing the game and then they give it to a bunch of Competitive fighting game players to beta test and then they re-balance it several times!

A single person, no matter how good, will miss a few or many things since they're just one person. The more people involved, the better you'll be able to spot mistakes and flaws.

He put down tons of hard work, props for that. He can control 3 characters at the same time, props for that. He still can't balance a fighting game for the life of him, neither Competitively or Casually (even the Casual players I know complain about the game's balance).

My views of his ability to balance a fighting game have not changed in the slightest from this.

Now I'm really confused o.o

Don't you want balance yuna? We as the smash community can be that team you speak of! We can fine tune the game as we see fit!

Hell we could even change the god ****ed physics of it LOL!

But I'm not asking for us to used hacked versions of the game
I'm not asking for a perfect 50-50 on down the line

I'm asking for simple changes that we can make to balance the game ever so slightly

Don't you want that?

We have found the mistakes, the flaws of the game, and now you don't want to do anything to change them ._.

I don't understand

 

[beamswordsman]

Let's set some bases...

Assume that Dedede's infinite guarantee's a stock I'm still assuming....
Assume that is is truly infinite Kay.
Also Assume that given the opportunity, players will CP D3 and will use this infinite in tournaments Kay.

Now, having assumed all this, this removes 2 characters from competitive play, yes?

We, as the community, have the full ability to tell players to stop using this technique, to completely remove this technique as an option, to bring these 2 characters back into competitive play. That's telling them to 'suck'.

Why shouldn't we enforce it?
Nobody is going to get ban happy, this is a unique situation, a unique technique, that is easily differentiated from what is 'broken', as it is freely used, and what is truly 'broken'.
The way I see it, it is an example of slippery slope. MK is arguable, but this is not ban-wothy yet.
There should be no fear here of people becoming ban-happy, it just isn't vaiable here
This is inescapable
It is easy to set up Practice makes perfect.
It guarantee's a stock

AFAIK, DI isn't even a factor here, you might as well put down your controller
You get grabbed, you die =\
Don't give up. Will-power can do a lot of things.

IF this is banned
There will be no repercussions Yes there will, with DDD mains and others.
There will be no downside Yes, for the same reasons.

We bring 2 characters back into the metagame
We MAKE the game a bit deeper Not with restictions.
We IMPROVE the game No.

Please, just spend some time thinking about what you think warrants a ban
This is a new game

I just don't think that what currently warrants a ban is a perfect solution

Let's not wait for this to become a problem (as it obviously has the ability to) before we have to fix it
We have the insight and the knowledge to know what this could turn into, and we have the ability to safely put a stop to it ^.^. The future brings many things. Like an infinite counter.

If this were anything but an infinite and sure fire way to lose a stock
I wouldn't care

I still don't understand ya...

 

[Pi]

I still don't understand ya...

Hm...

"that's telling them to 'suck'."

I don't think removing a (would you agree to calling the move cheap?) INFINITE from gameplay is telling them to 'suck'

You are acting like we're forcing DDD to lose =\

"The way I see it, it is an example of slippery slope. MK is arguable, but this is not ban-wothy yet." (yet?)
Na, it's not a slippery slope I promise you
Come on, this is an infinite grab combo
This is wobbling (which, although apparently not banned at high level tournaments, WAS banned at some tourneys)
The line here is very clear, infinite grab combo

(side note, "Don't give up. Will-power can do a lot of things.", wouldn't this apply more to MK than an infinite grab?)

"Practice makes perfect."
DDD's grab is so easy to pull off, wouldn't you agree?

"Don't give up. Will-power can do a lot of things."
I like your optimism, but again, they call it an infinite for a reason
Really,trust me, I would love for this to be escapeable, but I really don't see how it is?
Are you expecting something to come along that would allow it to be canceled? That's a very slim chance =\, the physics of brawl, it's mechanics, pretty much are ensuring that it's infinite =\

"Yes there will, with DDD mains and others."
I really don't see how DDD mains would have room to complain
They can still chaingrab these characters, they just don't get a free stock when they grab them (you understand this part, about chaingrab vs infinite right?)

"Not with restictions."
Yea, by deeper I mean allowing more characters into competitive play, affecting the metagame in a positive way


It seems like you're holding out hope for a way to beat the infinite
But really, the chance is soooo slim
And our opportunity here is dwindling =\
(what I mean by that; if this thread, this ban get's shot down now
and we don't find a counter, ever
it can't be re-opened, ya feel me? It's now or never here)

 

[XxBlackxX]

knihT...

you obvious have all the WRONG ideas on why we ban things.
first, "unfair", "unplayable", "how easy it is", and "no downsides" are all not legitimately arguments.

But do you understand where I'm coming from here? This thing, that could so easily be eliminated from play, with **** near no negative effects, I'm really not seeing a logical reason to NOT ban it

that's what YOU think. one logical reason NOT to ban it is that it doesn't fit the criteria for banning, therefore will induce a "slippery slope". you CANNOT take this particular ban out of context and say it is an exception because it isn't. an infinite is really nothing more than a technique that renders certain matchups unplayable. deal with it. ****ty matchups exist and no, there's no reason to "fix" them if they don't break the game as a whole.

There are not a jillion infinites to be banned
And they surely would not reduce the game to 50-50 match ups if they were all banned =\

if you bring the ban-hammer on these infinites because of reasons listed above, what's stopping you from wanting to ban IC's infinites? what's stopping you from wanting to ban pika's cg against fox?

Don't you want balance yuna? We as the smash community can be that team you speak of! We can fine tune the game as we see fit!

we don't ban things to "balance" the game. why? because we will have to ban every character except 1, and every stage except 1. which brings me back to: there are ****ty matchups and unplayable characters, deal with it yourself. we cannot just "fine tune the game as we see fit" if it doesn't need to be fine-tuned in the first place.
btw, if this is another "majority rules" argument, lemme point out 3 things
1. im betting at least 1/4 of the people who voted never been to a tournament, therefore the poll is innaccurate

2. the majority cannot be trusted if their decision is not RIGHT. we want to make the BEST decision, not "what most people think".

3. if the "majority" of SWF users thought you are an idiot and should be banned on SWF, are they necessarily correct?

 

[M15t3R E]

XxBlackxX- stop saying "it doesn't fit the criteria of banning" when there is no such criteria.

 

[Jack Kieser]

Look, I know it's been a while since I've had the time to chime in on one of these discussions, and I know that I usually play Devil's Advocate in situations like this...

...

...but I have to side with Yuna here, and the reason I disagree with knihT here is because the crux of his argument boils down to a fundamental change in the mindset of the community. The reason I used to argue on infinites, personally, was basically a numbers game. One grab should not equal one kill. That's overpowered. But, after playing D3 for a little while, and practicing with the IC's, I can fully admit that '1 grab = 1 kill' is an over-inflated estimate. Honestly, at BEST, the situation is '1 grab POTENTIALLY = 1 kill', because factors DO cause it to be a patience and skill thing.

But, ultimately, you're asking a community not to be open-minded, but to change a fundamental aspect of their thinking and nature. 'Broken' in fighting games means 'Akuma'. Sure, I'm kind of over-simplifying too, but really, that IS what it means in practice. The reason that this isn't banned is because this is nowhere near comparable. Now, the IC's grabs MAY POSSIBLY, MAYBE, KIND OF meet broken criteria, but D3's grabs certainly don't.

I've played Link ever since SSB64. I've accepted the fact that in every fighting game, there will be characters that get the shaft. It sucks, but it's life. What you're proposing is noble. Really, it is. I salute you for keeping that noble spirit, and I hope that you continue to find a way to 'beat the infinite'. But, 2-5 characters getting the shaft is NOT ban-worthy. Taking the grab 'infinites' off of these five won't magically make them mid-high tier. Sure, it will help, but it won't fix their other glaring flaws. And so, the very foundation of the beliefs of the fighting game community says that this is not ban-worthy. And you really don't have the right to suggest that the foundations of the community are wrong. That's like arguing with a Muslim just because you like to cross your legs when you sit (the soles of the feet are the ultimate insult in Muslim culture; see: President Bush's latest Iraq visit). You just don't have that capability. Or rather, you shouldn't have the expectation that anyone is going to accept such a fundamental change of perspective.

So, TL;DR: your heart's in the right place, but no.

 

[XxBlackxX]

XxBlackxX- stop saying "it doesn't fit the criteria of banning" when there is no such criteria.

o rly? >_>
i meant the criteria that melee and every other competitive fighting game uses when considering a ban.

 

[da K.I.D.]

knihT

it was a good effort, but some people are too hard headed to even contemplate ideas other than their own. in their mind, there is only one reason to ban things. and you are not going to convince them other wise. but i do want to say one thing...

you obvious have all the WRONG ideas on why we ban things.
first, "unfair", "unplayable", "how easy it is", and "no downsides" are all not legitimately arguments.

we don't ban things to "balance" the game. why? because we will have to ban every character except 1, and every stage except 1. which brings me back to: there are ****ty matchups and unplayable characters, deal with it yourself. we cannot just "fine tune the game as we see fit" if it doesn't need to be fine-tuned in the first place.

so can i play on bridge of eldin and hanenbow now?
cus thats what it looks like to me. it looks like by these definitions that banning stages was the wrong move to make

 

[M15t3R E]

Until there is an official, SBR-endorsed ban criteria, we should ban whatever hurts competitiveness and doesn't help it whatsoever. That means DDD's infinite.

 

[XxBlackxX]

Until there is an official, SBR-endorsed ban criteria, we should ban whatever hurts competitiveness and doesn't help it whatsoever. That means DDD's infinite.

how exactly does it hurt "competitiveness"?
the infinites are NOT universal, they don't over-centralize, and they dont break the game as a whole.

 

[beamswordsman]

Hm...


I don't think removing a (would you agree to calling the move cheap?) INFINITE from gameplay is telling them to 'suck'
It's like saying "Don't use my weakness!" when you can use it. It's a little shameful.


You are acting like we're forcing DDD to lose =\
It's like tying weights to him. Magic word: handicap.
Na, it's not a slippery slope I promise you
Come on, this is an infinite grab combo
This is wobbling (which, although apparently not banned at high level tournaments, WAS banned at some tourneys)
The line here is very clear, infinite grab combo
Combos are usually inescapable unless the user messes up.

(side note, "Don't give up. Will-power can do a lot of things.", wouldn't this apply more to MK than an infinite grab?)
To be honest, this sounds more like the MK debate more and more.

DDD's grab is so easy to pull off, wouldn't you agree?
When you practice something regularly, the hardest things become easy.


I like your optimism, but again, they call it an infinite for a reason
Really,trust me, I would love for this to be escapeable, but I really don't see how it is?
They might *gasp* mess up!
Are you expecting something to come along that would allow it to be canceled? Not really. That's a very slim chance =\, the physics of brawl, it's mechanics, pretty much are ensuring that it's infinite =\


I really don't see how DDD mains would have room to complain
Resticting a tactic they had to practice and is part of their playstyle? They're gonna be ticked.
They can still chaingrab these characters, they just don't get a free stock when they grab them (you understand this part, about chaingrab vs infinite right? Enlighten me. I could be wrong.)


Yea, by deeper I mean allowing more characters into competitive play, affecting the metagame in a positive way


It seems like you're holding out hope for a way to beat the infinite
But really, the chance is soooo slim Be a little optimistic.
And our opportunity here is dwindling =\
(what I mean by that; if this thread, this ban get's shot down now
and we don't find a counter, ever
it can't be re-opened, ya feel me? "Should MK be banned?" Part 2 anyone? It's now or never here)

I want to use a Pokemon analogy so bad...but I'll try not to.

 

[Jack Kieser]

da K.I.D.: No, man, I don't think that's what he's trying to say. You KNOW what he's trying to say. Within game settings, we can alter certain aspects of Brawl, but those aspects, like stages or items, are all we really have access to. If you want to argue an issue of open-mindedness, argue about handicaps or damage ratios, something else we can control. What you're saying, though, is irrelevant.

We can't fine-tune the numbers under the hood of Brawl (i.e., re-program the game). Brawl+ is attempting it, but the chances of Brawl+ becoming the tourney standard are slim, at best. A supplemental game, sure, but NOT the focus.

 

[ShadowLink84]

so can i play on bridge of eldin and hanenbow now?
cus thats what it looks like to me. it looks like by these definitions that banning stages was the wrong move to make

banning the stage was a right move to make because they were detrimental to competitive play.
DDD's infinite is not.

The reasoning for those stage bans was because it harmed competitive play as a whole.
If Eldin's bridge was made available, then the game would overcentralize around 1 character/tactic and the game would suffer.

DDD's infinite cannot be banned simply because unlike those stages, it does not have the capability of harming the competitive nature of this game as a whole.
It sucks to be those 5 characters (they can break out) but in general, thats part of what happens in competitive games.

 

[M15t3R E]

how exactly does it hurt "competitiveness"?
the infinites are NOT universal, they don't over-centralize, and they dont break the game as a whole.

The main disconnect here is that your side thinks the infinite must be universal to be ban-worthy, and my side does not.

Here's the lowdown- the infinite DOES over-centralize the anti-metagame for the 5 characters that can be infinited. All you need to know to defeat them is to counterpick with DDD and use the infinite. That is called playing gay..... REALLY, REALLY gay. In doing so, the player with FAR less skill can easily dominate. If that doesn't hurt competitiveness, I don't know what does.