Should King Dedede's infinite chaingrab be banned?

[Pi]

Hm, it would appear the debate is regressing...

Here's some questions...


The criteria we use to determine what is ban-worthy and what is not
Works, taking counter picks into effects
In which case, **** near everything would work

So tell me. 'over-centralizing the meta-game' works;

• Why wouldn't banning the move work?
• Why is banning a move that works across the board the line we have to draw, and not one that affects a small number of characters?
• Why are stages banned; Just CP to the same character and problem solved
• Where do you draw the line, what % of characters need to be effected in order for a move to be banned?

Here are the facts, please listen

• Banning the move would work.
• This is not a slippery slope as long as we have the community here, and especially the SBR.
• Yes, the criteria we use works, but it is FAR from perfect, it is a vague game to game standard that severely needs to be individualized for each game and each situation.
• Stages are banned to make matches more interesting.

The fact is we don't ban things because we are AFRAID
But there is not a **** thing to be afraid of! We have plenty of intellectual individuals at the top moderating the official tournament decisions
This will not get out of hand, count on it!
All infinite should be banned.

I stand by this 100%
And why not? Because it's 'part of the game'?
Stalling is part of the game
All the stages are part of the game
Stage builder, tournament function, damage ratio, items
THESE ARE ALL PART OF THE GAME

Why don't we use them? Because we have determined that match ups become 'unfair' and 'not fun' to watch. Isn't that it?

Well here we are, with match up's becoming un-fair and not fun to watch yet again
Why don't we ban? Are we getting too close to the edge? Is it because it's a new idea? Are you all just scared of change? Scared of trying something new? Or do you just want to debate?

This would work, and there would be no downside

Stop limiting it to whether or not it affects 50% of the cast, it doesn't need to be that way


This. Will. Work.
.

 

[XxBlackxX]

To get to 200% takes way to long, and by then it's mostly just takes a well-placed hit for D3 to take the stock.

You might as well just leave the infinite in with that said, you either need to lower your standards (you really do), or ban/leave the infinite.

80% is reasonable, because the opponent isn't going to die from any hit D3 chooses to use, and D3 will still have to work to get the K.O., that's the point of the limit.

But I just say 80% because I'm thinking of the CG on Fox Pikachu has.

but then that WOULD be "helping" these characters, however slightly. >_>
like i said, this damage cap is ONLY to take away the stalling properties. 80 is too low.
the point isn't to give the affected characters a handicap...

@knihT

stuff

this doesn't over-centralize or break the metagame as a whole, it doesn't need to be banned. stalling does break the game AS A WHOLE. so do walk-offs and walled stages, because it would over-centralize on characters that abuse them the best.
where do we draw the line?
when the character/tactic in consideration becomes the only viable tactic in competitive play. such as "pick character X/do tactic Y or lose". the infinites are nowhere close to this, as it isn't universal.

you say this will not get out of hand, yet at the same moment you want to ban something that isn't warranted.... whaat makes you think the anti-bans believe YOU?
because the reasons you gave for banning don't make sense, and if we went by them many things would be banned.

who are you to say "this will work"?, the fact that banning it is the "simple" thing to do doesn't mean it's the RIGHT thing to do.


and no, NOT all infinites should be banned if they don't break the game as a whole!
if a MK discovered an infinites and it only worked on falco, i wouldn't be complaining for a ban....

we need to understand **** happens, deal with it.

 

[Pi]

but then that WOULD be "helping" these characters, however slightly. >_>
like i said, this damage cap is ONLY to take away the stalling properties. 80 is too low.
the point isn't to give the affected characters a handicap...

It's not giving them a handicap

It's playing 1v1
instead of 3v1

It's taking DDD's handicap away

It's taking a move that shouldn't be in the game away to make matches, and the metagame, more interesting.

It's bettering the game.

If we ban this
And there are no repercussions

Would the game be better?

 

[XxBlackxX]

It's not giving them a handicap

It's playing 1v1
instead of 3v1

It's taking DDD's handicap away

It's taking a move that shouldn't be in the game away to make matches, and the metagame, more interesting.

It's bettering the game.

If we ban this
And there are no repercussions

Would the game be better?

banning is a LAST RESORT, not a first, we don't ban to "better the game" either because that's completely your opinion, i for one would hate brawl a lot more if infinites were banned, because it goes against my logic and reasoing.

no, there are NOT no repercussions.....i thought i proved this wrong yesterday yet you STILL spout it as if it were fact....

and no, it's not taking D3's handicap away, the infinites were already in the game, therefore to artificially help these matchups would be giving handicaps.

 

[MysticKenji]

Stages are banned to make matches more interesting.

No they aren't o_O
If a TO's goal is to make more interesting matches, he'd make more stages legal not less.

 

[Pi]

banning is a LAST RESORT, not a first, we don't ban to "better the game" either because that's completely your opinion, i for one would hate brawl a lot more if infinites were banned, because it goes against my logic and reasoing.

no, there are NOT no repercussions.....i thought i proved this wrong yesterday yet you STILL spout it as if it were fact....

and no, it's not taking D3's handicap away, the infinites were already in the game, therefore to artificially help these matchups would be giving handicaps.

Items are already in the game
Stalling is already in the game
Walk off stages, walled stages they were already in the game

You're only argument seems to be that it doesn't affect enough characters to be an issue

I have a problem with this, because it is selfish.

You could say we are selfish for asking
But we shouldn't have to ask

Last resort
What other resorts do we have? There is no hope of getting out of it
There's no hope of going a whole match without getting grabbed 3 times
This is it, you get grabbed, you die, that's it

That is a boring match, that's why we banned walk offs, that's why we banned stalling, that's what bans really come down to

And this fits in the criteria.

No they aren't o_O
If a TO's goal is to make more interesting matches, he'd make more stages legal not less.

No, I'm pretty sure walk-off and walled stages were banned because of fox's shine and fast kills due to throwing

Why didn't we just say don't get grabbed then?
why didn't we say don't get shinedashed then?

Why? Because it affected everyone's character, THEREFORE - EVERYONE complained
The matches were **** - and nobody enjoyed watching them

The fact is that people are sticking to a warn out 'rule' that was intended as a vague base for banning moves
not an end-all reason for what is and what is not ban-worthy.



If you would like to solve this (SBR) announce an official ban criteria for Smash bros 64, melee, and brawl

 

[TK Wolf]

Some areas have the following rule:

DDD must dash between multiple grabs.

This has no effect on his matchups other than ones where he has a standing/walking infinite. In those matches, it reduces the effectiveness of his grab to that of his normal chaingrab. I'm generally against banning, but DDD's grab is SO easy to pull off and set up, that I don't think an infinite is a fair payoff for how frequently it happens and the low risk DDD has for attempting it.

It's not like ICs where they legitimately need to set up a grab. (Having the ICs close enough, opponent within their short grabrange, etc)

 

[XxBlackxX]

Items are already in the game
Stalling is already in the game
Walk off stages, walled stages they were already in the game

You're only argument seems to be that it doesn't affect enough characters to be an issue

I have a problem with this, because it is selfish.

You could say we are selfish for asking
But we shouldn't have to ask

Last resort
What other resorts do we have? There is no hope of getting out of it
There's no hope of going a whole match without getting grabbed 3 times
This is it, you get grabbed, you die, that's it

That is a boring match, that's why we banned walk offs, that's why we banned stalling, that's what bans really come down to

And this fits in the criteria.

oh my god. this shows you have NO clue whatsoever on why things on banned. not to flame you personally, but holy ****.
we do NOT ban things to make matches more interesting, if so, NOTHING would be banned, especially not items and stages.
2nd, there IS another resort and that is CP'ing.
3rd, it isn't selfish because we only ban what breaks the game as a whole
4th, all the things you mentioned were banned because they broke the game as a whole (well items not really, but were too random and luck-based to be allowed in tournies where winning matters). the infinites don't break the gmae as a whole.

 

[MorphedChaos]

It's not giving them a handicap

It's playing 1v1
instead of 3v1

It's taking DDD's handicap away

It's taking a move that shouldn't be in the game away to make matches, and the metagame, more interesting.

It's bettering the game.

If we ban this
And there are no repercussions

Would the game be better?

Lol, thats what we said about MK, yet hes not banned, is he? This wont be banned, as the criteria people keep making for it also fits MK.

 

[XxBlackxX]

Lol, thats what we said about MK, yet hes not banned, is he? This wont be banned, as the criteria people keep making for it also fits MK.

if all you're gonna do is compare this to MK, get out and go to the MK ban discussion...seriously...i haven't seen ONE post (not ONE) from you in this thread that didn't relate to that....

>_>

This has no effect on his matchups other than ones where he has a standing/walking infinite. In those matches, it reduces the effectiveness of his grab to that of his normal chaingrab. I'm generally against banning, but DDD's grab is SO easy to pull off and set up, that I don't think an infinite is a fair payoff for how frequently it happens and the low risk DDD has for attempting it.

this is still giving them a handicap...
and besides, ease/difficulty of something doesn't affect whether it should be banned.

 

[Pi]

oh my god. this shows you have NO clue whatsoever on why things on banned. not to flame you personally, but holy ****.
we do NOT ban things to make matches more interesting, if so, NOTHING would be banned, especially not items and stages.
2nd, there IS another resort and that is CP'ing.
3rd, it isn't selfish because we only ban what breaks the game as a whole
4th, all the things you mentioned were banned because they broke the game as a whole (well items not really, but were too random and luck-based to be allowed in tournies where winning matters). the infinites don't break the gmae as a whole.

No.

We ban things;

• to reduce the game to SKILL and not LUCK
• To make matches more interesting

This part I'm really sure about


And how is neglecting the few not selfish?
How is thinking only of yourself not selfish?

Selfish would be if we gave low tiers handicaps versus high tiers
Selfish would be demanding that someone play differently versus your character

We are not demanding this
Dedede does not play this way versus everyone
He only plays this way versus us (us being the chars affected by his infinite)
We are asking to be treated the same way as every other character (In a very general sense, removing this infinite from your playstyle)

this is still giving them a handicap...
and besides, ease/difficulty of something doesn't affect whether it should be banned.

How is this a handicap? He doesn't have the infinite on every character, THEN it would be a handicap

And to some extent, yes, ease of use will affect whether or not a move is banned because if it was so easy to use
And everyone used it
Everyone would have experienced it and banning it would gain more support.

 

[Magus420]

Fiction escaped at 129% against M2k's DDD after 1 pummel.

V

Did he really?

V

Yes it is in a video on youtube.

 

[ShadowLink84]

VV

I figured I might as well continue after making that **** up

 

[XxBlackxX]

No.

We ban things;

• to reduce the game to SKILL and not LUCK
• To make matches more interesting

This part I'm really sure about


And how is neglecting the few not selfish?
How is thinking only of yourself not selfish?

Selfish would be if we gave low tiers handicaps versus high tiers
Selfish would be demanding that someone play differently versus your character

We are not demanding this
Dedede does not play this way versus everyone
He only plays this way versus us (us being the chars affected by his infinite)
We are asking to be treated the same way as every other character (In a very general sense, removing this infinite from your playstyle)




How is this a handicap? He doesn't have the infinite on every character, THEN it would be a handicap

And to some extent, yes, ease of use will affect whether or not a move is banned because if it was so easy to use
And everyone used it
Everyone would have experienced it and banning it would gain more support.

you are sure? but you are not RIGHT and that is why you are pro-ban.

first, yes, we ban things to get rid of luck, but how is it to make matches "more interesting". that is clearly stupid and if you continue to spout that nonsense this argument is meaningless. even now i think you have NO insight into competitive gaming, but ill continue for now.

it isn't really selfishness why? because i am not only thinking of myself, but instead for the good of the metagame. sure it sucks to main the affected characters, but they gotta deal with it.

it is a handicap PRECISELY because it affects those characters, and we're helping their matchups but not others'

 

[beamswordsman]

No.

We ban things;
to reduce the game to SKILL and not LUCK
To make matches more interesting We should keep items and all stages on by that logic.

This part I'm really sure about


And how is neglecting the few not selfish?
How is thinking only of yourself not selfish?

Selfish would be if we gave low tiers handicaps versus high tiers
Selfish would be demanding that someone play differently versus your character
This is preety much what the ban seems like.
We are not demanding this
Dedede does not play this way versus everyone Exactly. Why are we banning if it's not universal?
He only plays this way versus us (us being the chars affected by his infinite) If it works, people will use it.
We are asking to be treated the same way as every other character (In a very general sense, removing this infinite from your playstyle) Too much contradiction in that statement.

knihT, please tell me how the chaingrab and infinite are on different levels for it to be banworthy. Please.

 

[Pi]

you are sure? but you are not RIGHT and that is why you are pro-ban.

first, yes, we ban things to get rid of luck, but how is it to make matches "more interesting". that is clearly stupid and if you continue to spout that nonsense this argument is meaningless. even now i think you have NO insight into competitive gaming, but ill continue for now.

it isn't really selfishness why? because i am not only thinking of myself, but instead for the good of the metagame. sure it sucks to main the affected characters, but they gotta deal with it.

it is a handicap PRECISELY because it affects those characters, and we're helping their matchups but not others'

Although I do believe that it is SOMEWHAT to make matches more interesting
I'll drop the argument

It is NOT a handicap, and I'll use an analogy similar to the one I used before

10 people are in the desert
All 10 are given water
6/10 are given 10 cups of water
4/10 are given 1 cup of water

Would it be a handicap if we gave the 4/10 people 5 more cups of water?
In essence we are HELPING those people, but no more than we are HELPING the 6/10 people with water to begin with.

I'll ask you to drop it being a handicap as an argument
Because it is not



More:

To some extent Dedede's infinite is based more on luck than it is on a skill

Items take some skill to use properly as well
But the ratio is too great

Foxes shine takes skill to use as well

The odds are too great here

knihT, please tell me how the chaingrab and infinite are on different levels for it to be banworthy. Please.

The chain grab doesn't guarantee a stock, regardless of perfect you pull it off
Every one of your posts is leading me to believe you are not understanding what is under debate here

We are NOT debating dedede's CHAIN GRAB, that is OKAY, it's always and will forever be OKAY

We ARE debating dedede's INFINITE which can ONLY be preformed on these 6 characters

Are you SURE that you understand all this?
For reference:
Chaingrab - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u5aBzao3Aus - OKAY, ACCEPTABLE, NO PROBLEMS HERE

Infinite - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=23UyrHXK36A - NOT OKAY, THIS IS WHAT WE ARE SAYING NEEDS TO BE BANNED


And no, walk off stages reduce matches to shinedashing
Walled stages reduce matches to JC shines
Items reduce matches to getting lucky
These are not more interesting to watch

"This is preety much what the ban seems like."

It's not
It's asking to be treated like the rest of the cast
Chaingrab us, bair us, camp us, do all you want just like you would do on most of the cast
Just don't abuse the INFINITE to win the match against us

 

[brinboy789]

Foxes shine takes skill to use as well

if your talking about the shine infnite, then its just spamming down B. no skill at all, just button mashing. if your not, then ignore this post plz

 

[XxBlackxX]

Although I do believe that it is SOMEWHAT to make matches more interesting
I'll drop the argument

It is NOT a handicap, and I'll use an analogy similar to the one I used before

10 people are in the desert
All 10 are given water
6/10 are given 10 cups of water
4/10 are given 1 cup of water

Would it be a handicap if we gave the 4/10 people 5 more cups of water?
In essence we are HELPING those people, but no more than we are HELPING the 6/10 people with water to begin with.

I'll ask you to drop it being a handicap as an argument
Because it is not



More:

To some extent Dedede's infinite is based more on luck than it is on a skill

Items take some skill to use properly as well
But the ratio is too great

Foxes shine takes skill to use as well

The odds are too great here




The chain grab doesn't guarantee a stock, regardless of perfect you pull it off
Every one of your posts is leading me to believe you are not understanding what is under debate here

We are NOT debating dedede's CHAIN GRAB, that is OKAY, it's always and will forever be OKAY

We ARE debating dedede's INFINITE which can ONLY be preformed on these 6 characters

Are you SURE that you understand all this?

.......YES I AM SURE I UNDERSTAND THIS. i havent said anything like "it isn't broken in the specific matchups". because it is. but still not universal and still doesn't break the metagame.

two problems i find with the analogy:
1. people aren't going to die from being infinite-ed
2. there is an alternative already, and that is CP



"interesting to watch" is subjective.
what if i like watching matches in which all there is is infinites?

 

[MorphedChaos]

D3's infinite only affects Bowser and DK, as the other people it affects can use a tech to get out of his grab. (3 if D3 infinites himself off the edge, but that doesn't count towards the argument, as then it would be a D3 ditto.)

 

[Pi]

.......YES I AM SURE I UNDERSTAND THIS. i havent said anything like "it isn't broken in the specific matchups". because it is. but still not universal and still doesn't break the metagame.

two problems i find with the analogy:
1. people aren't going to die from being infinite-ed
2. there is an alternative already, and that is CP



"interesting to watch" is subjective.
what if i like watching matches in which all there is is infinites?

I was talking to the guy talking in blue text not you (about understanding)

1. I think I understand what you're trying to say here, but the ironic part is that yes, they will die from being infinited (or at least the throw at the end lol)
2. Yes, we have discussed CP's already, and I have no problem with them, I just don't think they should be NECESSARY, ya feel me?


Yes, it is subjective, but wouldn't you agree that the people who watch video's would be more inclined to see matches brought down to skill

Infinites have a novelty affect, as far as viewing goes (to me at least), I'll watch wobbling a few times, say hey that's cool
But to be anticipating a great epic match full of mindgames, predictions, epic moments, and have it reduced to 3 stock via wobbling? Meh, loses it's entertainment value pretty quick

wouldn't you agree?

D3's infinite only affects Bowser and DK, as the other people it affects can use a tech to get out of his grab. (3 if D3 infinites himself off the edge, but that doesn't count towards the argument, as then it would be a D3 ditto.)

I believe this 'tech' you speak of is in the video?
I myself was not aware of the 'tech' until watching this video (which I had merely glanced at before)
And if said tech is the tech in the video...I guess I can live with that, button mashing
I'll have to practice it xD (I play samus for the record)

 

[beamswordsman]

Chaingrab us, bair us, camp us, do all you want just like you would do on most of the cast
Just don't abuse the INFINITE to win the match against us

People are gonna use effective tactics. Every character has a pet peeve.

I understand but still, even without the infinite, there are other tactics from other characters that have a high POTENTIAL to kill multiple characters like the infinite. By that logic, we should ban a lot of tatctics that give any character an advantage.

 

[TheReflexWonder]

VV

Man, that picture is unnerving, XD.

 

[Pi]

I understand but still, even without the infinite, there are other tactics from other characters that have a high POTENTIAL to kill multiple characters like the infinite. By that logic, we should ban a lot of tatctics that give any character an advantage.

Please enlighten me as to which moves have the potential to kill that is as devastating as the infinite is...


And I think you're taking this a little to lightly (no offense)
But be realistic, you're still assuming that you get grabbed you die right?
That's a little more harsh than just a pet peeve
A pet peeve is more like what I have against tiny characters (some of my moves go over their head)
this is like...
It's not JUST an advantage, we're talking...match up breaking technique here

 

[ShadowLink84]

Man, that picture is unnerving, XD.

You should make it your avatar. XD

 

[XxBlackxX]

again "enertainment value" isn't why we ban things. many scrubs enjoy playing with items, many like playing at temple. what if i personally like infinites (not true, but an example)?

and so what if it is matchup-breaking.
many techniques are matchups-breaking, pika's cg against fox, falco's cg->against ike, for example. but both are not universal and both are not the only viable tactic in the whole game. so they aren't banned.

neither should the infinites.

it doesn't really matter, btw, whether you LIKE or DON'T LIKE CP'ing. this is just another thing you have to deal with if you want to win. CP'ing is a necessary part of the game. im sure no one would saty fox against a pika, no one would go sonic against MK, they may not LIKE CP'ing, but it is necessary to avoid a horrible(in this case **** near unwinnable) matchup. CP'ing is ALREADY necessary.

 

[Pi]

again "enertainment value" isn't why we ban things. many scrubs enjoy playing with items, many like playing at temple. what if i personally like infinites (not true, but an example)?

and so what if it is matchup-breaking.
many techniques are matchups-breaking, pika's cg against fox, falco's cg->against ike, for example. but both are not universal and both are not the only viable tactic in the whole game. so they aren't banned.

neither should the infinites.

it doesn't really matter, btw, whether you LIKE or DON'T LIKE CP'ing. this is just another thing you have to deal with if you want to win. CP'ing is a necessary part of the game. im sure no one would saty fox against a pika, no one would go sonic against MK, they may not LIKE CP'ing, but it is necessary to avoid a horrible(in this case **** near unwinnable) matchup. CP'ing is ALREADY necessary.

I know entertainment value isn't the main reason, which is why I agreed to drop it as an argument

And I also know that if you want to play to win, statistically, logically, you are going to need to CP I've seen it done at the top levels of melee, I don't feel I am the exception

But I'd like to think that my match up is a little more reasonable than it is with the infinite. You kinda understand what I'm getting at?

I'd like to hold out hope that winning a tournament with a mid tier character is at least feasible

Call me a scrub, call me whatever you want
But you can't deny that it's POSSIBLE
But this infinite brings that possibility down to the point where even scrubs, optimistic scrubs, would lose hope

(Covering ***: Hope is not the reason I'm fighting for this)

 

[beamswordsman]

Please enlighten me as to which moves have the potential to kill that is as devastating as the infinite is... I honestly don't know, but other characters have to deal with matchups that are lopsided like the victims of the infinite.


And I think you're taking this a little to lightly (no offense)
I see it as an issue that has to be thought about as well. But is seems as though the pro-ban side just wants the ban to help their characters, when it should because it breaks the game.
But be realistic, you're still assuming that you get grabbed you die right? Yep, still in my head.
That's a little more harsh than just a pet peeve
A pet peeve is more like what I have against tiny characters (some of my moves go over their head)
this is like...
It's not JUST an advantage, we're talking...match up breaking technique here. Think of the other characters that have lopsided matches as well, then.Is the infinite the ONLY tactic they use?

But I'd like to think that my match up is a little more reasonable than it is with the infinite. You kinda understand what I'm getting at? That could be said for many counter matchups.

I'm willing to listen.

 

[M15t3R E]

KnihT has a point. We banned items and walk-off stages to make the game about skill.
This is because competitive fighters need to be about skill prevailing to determine the winner, or else the game is terrible and not fit for competition.

Banning DDD's infinite would make the game about skill. It takes NO SKILL to use an infinite to 200% or over on each of your opponent's 3 stocks to win.
Ta Da! So it DOES fit the banning criteria.

 

[XxBlackxX]

I know entertainment value isn't the main reason, which is why I agreed to drop it as an argument

And I also know that if you want to play to win, statistically, logically, you are going to need to CP I've seen it done at the top levels of melee, I don't feel I am the exception

But I'd like to think that my match up is a little more reasonable than it is with the infinite. You kinda understand what I'm getting at?

I'd like to hold out hope that winning a tournament with a mid tier character is at least feasible

it IS feasible.....but not if you're going to stick with the same character the whole time.
with those characters, CP'ing is definitely necessary if you want to win.

sure, i kinda understand, however, it still doesn't change my stance, despite the fact that i think it does suck for the affected characters. however, the infinites are just not ban-worthy enough and probably will never be....

KnihT has a point. We banned items and walk-off stages to make the game about skill.
This is because competitive fighters need to be about skill prevailing to determine the winner, or else the game is terrible and not fit for competition.

Banning DDD's infinite would make the game about skill. It takes NO SKILL to use an infinite to 200% or over on each of your opponent's 3 stocks to win.

um no we didnt.
we banned items to get rid of the luck factor.
we banned walk-offs because they would over-centralize on characters who could abuse them the best.

 

[M15t3R E]

um no we didnt.
we banned items to get rid of the luck factor.
we banned walk-offs because they would over-centralize on characters who could abuse them the best.

You're splitting hairs here. It's the same thing.

Getting rid of the luck factor and over-centralization of the limited characters that can use the walk-off stages = reducing the game to be about skill and skill only.

 

[XxBlackxX]

You're splitting hairs here. It's the same thing.

Getting rid of the luck factor and over-centralization of the limited characters that can use the walk-off stages = reducing the game to be about skill and skill only.

in that case...let make it fox only, final destination, and no items. because only then can it be skill and ONLY skill.

 

[beamswordsman]

Shouldn't DDD be killing at 200% anyway?

 

[M15t3R E]

in that case...let make it fox only, final destination, and no items. because only then can it be skill and ONLY skill.

Okay, I shall now counter this statement for the millionth time.

Skill can still pull you through in disadvantaged match-ups, but NOT in a match-up of DDD vs. the unlucky 5 that can be infinited.

As long as skill can potentially determine the winner of the match, it is not a broken match-up.

 

[XxBlackxX]

Okay, I shall now counter this statement for the millionth time.

Skill can still pull you through in disadvantaged match-ups, but NOT in a match-up of DDD vs. the unlucky 5 that can be infinited.

As long as skill can potentially determine the winner of the match, it is fine.

but you said skill and only skill,
but all nitpicking aside.....

skill CAN potentially determine the winner. if someone who never touched D3 before and CP'ed him against the best Samus, i doubt the D3 will win.

either way, accept that ****ty and unwinnable matchups happen in fighting games, and deal with it. learn2CP.

because it doesn't warrant a ban.

 

[M15t3R E]

Lol, I find it hilarious you're speaking of a situation in which someone uses DDD against one of the 5 and doesn't know how to use DDD.

I'm talking about if the DDD knows about the infinite, which most SWF'ers do. Most tourney-goers are serious and have an account on SWF, so yeah.

Face it, we can ban DDD's infinite to accomplish the same goal for why we banned items.

 

[XxBlackxX]

Lol, I find it hilarious you're speaking of a situation in which someone uses DDD against one of the 5 and doesn't know how to use DDD.

I'm talking about if the DDD knows about the infinite, which most SWF'ers do. Most tourney-goers are serious and have an account on SWF, so yeah.

Face it, we can ban DDD's infinite to accomplish the same goal for why we banned items.

i find it even more funny that you think a game in which skill is the only factor will be achieved.

no, we banned items to take out the luck factor. the infinites have NOTHING to do with luck.

 

[Pi]

I'm willing to listen.

Thank you

Yes, I know it should be thought about, banning things I mean...it's a pretty definite decision
Once you ban things people will just accept it the way it is and nobody will be searching for a counter
In this case though, I believe we have reached the end of the rabbit hole, and there was nothing more to be found =\, there is no counter to this, it is or it isn't
And, it just so happens that it IS

Yea, characters have 'poor' match ups, but I do believe we've crossed that line here, don't you agree?

MK vs C.Falc is pretty **** terrible, but it's still less terrible than D3 vs one of these characters
Ya feel me?

And in the MK vs C.Falc match, it's not just 1 move that separates them, it's the character as a whole that is making the match up so terrible

In D3's case, it's just 1 move that is giving him this enormous advantage =\, that doesn't sit well with me

it IS feasible.....but not if you're going to stick with the same character the whole time.
with those characters, CP'ing is definitely necessary if you want to win.

sure, i kinda understand, however, it still doesn't change my stance, despite the fact that i think it does suck for the affected characters. however, the infinites are just not ban-worthy enough and probably will never be....

Your chances lessen if you use the same char over and over, I get that you have to change it up so your opponents don't read you as well, but it's still FEASIBLE, however small of a chance
And that small chance is still a whole lot more than the chance you would stand if you were one of these characters vs a D3
But make no mistake, I understand how necessary CP's are

Thanks for your understanding
If I could, I would like you to go in to extensive detail about why you think this ban on the infinite will harm the game :o

Lol, I find it hilarious you're speaking of a situation in which someone uses DDD against one of the 5 and doesn't know how to use DDD.

I'm talking about if the DDD knows about the infinite, which most SWF'ers do. Most tourney-goers are serious and have an account on SWF, so yeah.

Face it, we can ban DDD's infinite to accomplish the same goal for why we banned items.

DDD's infinite is on a different level than items, you'll surely agree to this

Items are a...loose comparison to say the least

But with this infinite it does reduce the game to a level in which nobody is comfortable with

The thing that is bothering me is that if the technique applied to all characters
it would be banned, because it is broken
And the only thing stopping the banning is the fact that only 6 characters get shafted by it =\

This doesn't seem reasonable to me because it's an entirely separate technique for these 6 characters than his CG is on the rest of the cast (or most)

I'm not asking for a special privilege for these characters
I'm asking for all infinite, character specific or not, to be removed from competitive play
I just don't see them affecting the game in a positive way

 

[M15t3R E]

i find it even more funny that you think a game in which skill is the only factor will be achieved.

no, we banned items to take out the luck factor. the infinites have NOTHING to do with luck.

Again you're splitting hairs.

DDD's infinite is not about luck- it's even more unfair than luck. It's pure unadulterated brokeness in DDD's favor. Banning it will make the match-up more about skill. We also banned items to make the game more about skill.
Then DDD still has his CG's, so he'll still have the advantage. There should be no qualms in banning such an infinite.

 

[XxBlackxX]

okay i will indeed elaborate. however since i am tired, ill pull up a post i made a while ago:


If it overcentralizes the metagame or breaks the metagame.
This is the only ban criteria EVERY competitive community agrees upon.

this is how it's run. and it WORKS. in the end, the metagame might hurt a little from a bit less characters, but overall it is healthy because people aren't ban-happy and learn to deal with their own matchup problems instead of complaining for a ban. seriously, banning something that doesn't warrant one is just like telling the community "we'll give you guys the easy way out, instead of dealing with your own problems by thinking, we'll just ban it so your lives are easier". and you know what happens then? since we discouraged thinking and dealing with your own problems, OTHER groups (again, fox comes to mind) will come and complain: hey, you guys banned a tactic for a 9:1 matchups, why not a 85:15, realistic, there is still very minimal chance of winning. soon, all we'll see is BAN, BAN, BAN because people have forgotten to think themselves before asking for a ban.
^and all this HURTS the metagame. that's why the ban criteria HAS to be met before banning something. and trust me, if you HAVE been a part of some other competitive gaming community, you'll know, the ruleset that has the least restrictions while keeping the game as a whole playable is a ruletset that WORKS, and works well.

Tl;Dr

it hurts the metagame overall because it discourages players THINKING and solving their own problems, added to that is the slippery slope.

however, all that was basically explained on sirlin.net (which you should read sometime if you got the spare time and want to know why people are anti-ban).

 

[TK Wolf]

and besides, ease/difficulty of something doesn't affect whether it should be banned.

I'm not talking about how easy it is to perform the input. Anything with difficult input can and will be mastered.

I'm talking about the ease to pull it off in a match against between two skilled opponents.

To further explain what I mean:
Pulling off a Warlock Punch. The input is obviously easy. Actually landing the move is VERY difficult. It's highpower is balanced by it's high risk.

Pulling off a grab with DDD is EASY. Attempting this move is not risky, and against some characters has a reward of taking a full stock. That is not balanced by any means. Heck, it's arguably not even balanced that he has a chaingrab across the stage. Banning the character-specific infinite is completely reasonable, IMO.

You can say "Don't get grabbed" against the ICs, because their grab is far more avoidable. Telling someone not to get grabbed against DDD is nuts, even to a highly skilled player.

As an example, Azen VS M2K. We all know that Azen has INSANE spacing and is an incredible player overall. I watched a series of 5 matches between them and M2K just narrowly won using DDD. If DDD had an infinite against Lucario, Azen would have gotten 3-stocked each time.