Should King Dedede's infinite chaingrab be banned?

[Yuna]

I think if a character was discovered to have a technique that made all those top tiers in Melee nonviable, it would have to be banned.

You thought wrong.

Your thoughts = Facts

Those 4 characters are too popular and there would be an outcry to ban the technique to keep the game the way it is, to prevent people from swarming to Pikachu for free wins and creating an unnecessary CP frenzy in tournaments nationwide. It would just be hell until it's banned.

The majority isn't always right. Public outcry from whiners who lack valid reasons for a ban? Sounds a lot like the whining about Meta Knight... and this.

What did it accomplish? That's right. Nothing.

The majority isn't always right. The intelligent and knowledgeable people in power (SBR, other people with insight and influence) will ignore the ignorant and shrill masses if they cannot bring valid reasoning to the table.

If a character was dicovered to counter all of the Top Tiers, they just wouldn't be Top Tiers anymore! They'd fall down to High, Mid or Lower. The former Highs would take their place. It's the way Competitive gaming works!

Now put yourself in the shoes of our friends at the DK and Bowser character boards. They are living in a hellish environment whenever they attend tournaments because they cannot use their favorite character at all.

Competitive gaming is not about giving everyone the option of playing as their favorite character. You're playing to win, not to play as your favorite character.

My main in Melee, Peach, now sucks. I was forced to switch in order to stand a chance at even placing high, ever. And I did. I didn't whine about it (I had to debate some twits who insisted she was still High Material, though), I didn't demand things be banned, I didn't even really mind much. In Soul Calibur IV, my main (Xianghua) just went from "Best character in the game" from the previous two games to being "Mid Tier, probably". I'm probably going to switch eventually once I've got enough time to learn Sophitia.

It's the way Competitive gaming works! If you want to win, sometimes, you can't play as your favorite character! Deal with it!

If you want to play as your favorite character, no matter what, go back to Casual play.

They are probably dying to see this infinite banned. We shouldn't not listen to them, just because they represent only a couple of the game's cast of characters.

No, but we shouldn't listen to them because they have yet to preset sufficient valid reasoning for a ban. Just them whining is not enough.

Fair enough, than it is up to the SBR to come up with a ban-criteria of their own, because by this point in the debate it's all morals of different people, and just however many are on one side is going to decide what happens.

They already have one (however fuzzy it might be). This does not fall under it.

There will be people who think we need to balance by bans and think they see no other way, and then there are people who think there are other options out there that might right now be unknown.

Yes, the world is filled with idiots. Nobody cares.

Neither side is technically right or wrong.

Yes they are.

We need the SBR's ruling immediately, and along with it an official ban criteria for all to see and accept.

"It over-centralizes the game" is pretty much the universal ban criteria.

 

[Eddie G]

There is a lot of "nobody" spurted in your posts Yuna. I'm not trying to be provocative, but there are people out there that care about whatever issues come about. Don't speak for everyone.

 

[Yuna]

There is a lot of "nobody" spurted in your posts Yuna. I'm not trying to be provocative, but there are people out there that care about whatever issues come about. Don't speak for everyone.

There's an unspoken "Intelligent/Knowledgeable/Credible/etc." between "Nobody" and "Cares".

 

[Eddie G]

There's an unspoken "Intelligent/Knowledgeable/Credible/etc." between "Nobody" and "Cares".

Perhaps it should be added then. Don't assume that your opposition is going to know what you mean every time when you post it like that. Otherwise, it will look like a simple logical fallacy on your part.

Carry on. ^.^

 

[M15t3R E]

Yuna, there is no single technique that made Peach all of a sudden less viable. Same with your Xianghua. So this is different.
Notice I am not asking for the game to be changed to help low tier characters become more viable. I'm only calling for one measly tactic to be banned to help characters that are otherwise very viable.

Btw Yuna, what makes you think the over-centralization factor is the only part of the criteria for banning?
There are more reasons to ban things than just over-centralization.

 

[Kinzer]

Too late.

Yes, the world is filled with idiots. Nobody cares.

What the Hell called for this, what did my post have to do with whatever this is?

 

[Yuna]

Yuna, there is no single technique that made Peach all of a sudden less viable. Same with your Xianghua. So this is different.

No it's not. Why should we randomly ban things to alleviate characters from ****ty match-ups just because it's a single technique(s)? It's still the same thing, it's banning things to change match-ups just because insteed of accepting the match-ups for what they are and move on.

Also, Sheik's chaingrab in NTSC Melee says "Hi" (Ganondorf vs. Sheik, not that bad... except for NTSC Melee Sheik's **** chaingrab on Ganondorf!). Sophitia's "Death fist" says "Hi". Chun-Li's various moves into quarter-circle x 2 + Kick says "Hi". Various literal 0-death combos from Naruto: Gekitou Ninja Taisen 4 say "Hi". Testament's new BS loop of quasi-infinity says "Hi".

Notice I am not asking for the game to be changed to help low tier characters become more viable. I'm only calling for one measly tactic to be banned to help characters that are otherwise very viable.

Out of the characters D3 renders unplayable because of his infinite (two characters), only one is viable. Donkey Kong. Or are you claiming Bowser is "very viable"? Heck, if you're claiming Samus, Luigi and Mario can be infinited (and they can't be), are you claiming they are "very viable"?

Btw Yuna, what makes you think the over-centralization factor is the only part of the criteria for banning?

It's the current standard for, among other things, Brawl.

There are more reasons to ban things than just over-centralization.

"Makes a match-up ****ty" has never, ever been an acceptable ban criteria.

What the Hell called for this, what did my post have to do with whatever this is?

You brought up two opposing sides who hold opposing values and opinions. I was labeling one of those sides idiots.

 

[Kinzer]

It's very easy to flame over the internet, isn't it?

I could call you people grudge-holders, because wather it be true that you do or don't, apparently doesn't matter when it gets down to being uncivilized.

I would take the advice, as well as add that nobody will give a s*** what you have to say if you have no other way to get your points across.

Want to continue, or be smart and let it die? Either way I'm cool with it, because even if you choose the more ******** path, it's not like I don't deal with this during my life anyway.

 

[M15t3R E]

No it's not. Why should we randomly ban things to alleviate characters from ****ty match-ups just because it's a single technique(s)? It's still the same thing, it's banning things to change match-ups just because insteed of accepting the match-ups for what they are and move on.

It's more than a ****ty match-up! ****ty match-ups need not be "fixed". However, unwinnable match-ups do.

Also, Sheik's chaingrab in NTSC Melee says "Hi". Sophitia's "Death fist" says "Hi". Chun-Li's various moves into quarter-circle x 2 + Kick says "Hi". Various literal 0-death combos from Naruto: Gekitou Ninja Taisen 4 say "Hi". Testament's new BS loop of quasi-infinity says "Hi".

Most, if not all of these examples are not as devastating nor as reliable as DDD's infinite. Anyway, what makes you think there is no one who would want such techniques banned?

Out of the characters D3 renders unplayable because of his infinite (two characters), only one is viable. Donkey Kong. Or are you claiming Bowser is "very viable"? Heck, if you're claiming Samus, Luigi and Mario can be infinited (and they can't be), are you claiming they are "very viable"?

Well Bowser is mid-tier, not low-tier. Sliq shows what Bowser can do.

It's the current standard for, among other things, Brawl.

Says who? You? The SBR has certainly never stated this. And you didn't answer my question. Again I ask you, what makes you think there is no other ban criteria than just the over-centralization factor?

"Makes a match-up ****ty" has never, ever been an acceptable ban criteria.

Again, it's not ****ty match-ups that need to be fixed. We are talking about literally unwinnable match-ups. No match-up should ever be allowed to exist that gives one character no chance of victory. Brawl was not designed perfectly so we need to fix it ourselves.

You brought up two opposing sides who hold opposing values and opinions. I was labeling one of those sides idiots.

****, you are not a polite debator. You need to grow up.

 

[Yuna]

It's very easy to flame over the internet, isn't it?

I'd like to know where I flamed you or anyone else specifically in this thread.

I called the people who "think we need to balance by bans and think they see no other way" idiots, because it is my view such people are idiots. Because only people who have no insight into Competitive gaming would want to do that. That's not flaming anyone in particular.

I could call you people grudge-holders, because wather it be true that you do or don't, apparently doesn't matter when it gets down to being uncivilized.

Sure, I can hold a grudge. But why is that relevant to this debate?

I would take the advice, as well as add that nobody will give a s*** what you have to say if you have no other way to get your points across.

Besides that one thing, I'd like to know where else I've flamed anyone. Harsh words =/= Flames. Biting wit =/= Flames.

You need to grow thicker skin. Just because my voice is raised does not mean I'm currently flaming you.

Want to continue, or be smart and let it die? Either way I'm cool with it, because even if you choose the more ******** path, it's not like I don't deal with this during my life anyway.

Refute my points instead of resorting to side-tracking by trying to refute my way of putting them on the table the 19282481th time I've had to repeat myself. It's like everyone assumes what they have to say is "new" and "fresh", which forces me and others who have been in this thread since the very beginning to once again go through the same old, by now stale, arguments and refute them with the same old arguments.

 

[Yuna]

It's more than a ****ty match-up! ****ty match-ups need not be "fixed". However, unwinnable match-ups do.

No they don't.

NTSC Melee Sheik vs. Melee Bowser. I'd like to know who is capable of winning that match-up as Bowser if Sheik is being wielded by one of the best Sheik-players in the world. Plenty of games have unwinnable match-ups, winnable only if the other player screws up repeatedly again and again and again and again.

Nobody fixes them.

Most, if not all of these examples are not as devastating nor as reliable as DDD's infinite. Anyway, what makes you think there is no one who would want such techniques banned?

They are devastating enough. We never see the underdogs win those match-ups when the characters with the advantage are being wielded by the best players in the world.

Well Bowser is mid-tier, not low-tier. Sliq shows what Bowser can do.

Sliq's Bowser doesn't win or place Top 5 at major tournaments. Nobody's Bowser does. Please, name one single Bowser who has ever placed Top 5 at a major tournament. And by major, I mean bigger than local tournaments with pretty few skilled players. Viable generally means "Can place well at major tournaments". You said "very viable", so that should mean "Can win major tournaments". Yet Bowser isn't even placing at major tournaments. He's only placing at smaller ones.

Tell me, if Sliq shows us how what Bowser can do, how come he doesn't even win most of the tournaments he attends? Bowser's not that good, that's why.

Says who? You? The SBR has certainly never stated this. And you didn't answer my question. Again I ask you, what makes you think there is no other ban criteria than just the over-centralization factor?

It's by default the main criteria for the collective Competitive gaming scenes of the world. And the SBR have pretty much implicitly stated this. It's one of the reasons why MK wasn't banned.

Because the other criterias that have been suggested insofar have been insufficient. And a lot of the time, illogical.

Again, it's not ****ty match-ups that need to be fixed. We are talking about literally unwinnable match-ups. No match-up should ever be allowed to exist that gives one character no chance of victory.

Funny, yet they still exist. Many of them. Just because these two match-ups are more unwinnable than Melee NTSC Sheik vs. Bowser does not mean Melee NTSC Sheik vs. Bowser wasn't unwinnable.

Brawl was not designed perfectly so we need to fix it ourselves.

No. We don't. It's not so flawed we have to fix it by banning things such as this.

****, you are not a polite debator. You need to grow up.

I call it as I see it. I speak the truth even when it hurts. I'm bitingly honest. Sometimes, that requires you to not be polite. Calling someone an idiot is not necessarily immaturity. Sometimes, it's quite warranted. Being polite is overrated.

 

[Kinzer]

D'oh forget it, point is you shouldn't have made that post regardless, and if you're getting tired of saying the same things over and over then just find something better to do with your time than being an butthole about it, I know that by this point anything mentioned before, will only be addressed again and again until the SBR decides to do something about this... I shouldn't be here with that same logic, but you just had to pull me back in by insulting me/anybody else Pro-ban, didn't you? It doesn't matter that you weren't directing it at me, you know that you were being unreasonable to one side, and that's about as problem-solving as somebody ignoring that they have a deadly disease such as cancer... it's there, and you can't deny the fact that people will see this argument differently than you.

 

[Yuna]

I shouldn't be here with that same logic, but you just had to pull me back in by insulting me/anybody else Pro-ban, didn't you?

I didn't insult all pro-banners, I insulted "people who think we need to balance by bans ". As in, people who think we have to do it or else and people who want to re-balance the game by banning multiple things in order to make it some kind of beacon of balance. If you meant "People who think we should ban this one thing in order to make the game more balanced", then whatever. People who think like that are not the people I just called idiots.

I'd call people like that misguided.

Be careful what you write. And when I reply to it, if what I just said sounds ludicrous, re-read what you wrote. Sometimes, what you wrote might not be what you think you wrote.

It doesn't matter that you weren't directing it at me, you know that you were being unreasonable to one side

No, not really. I truly believe people like that have no place in Competitive gaming. Because they obviously have very little insight into Competitive gaming if they believe that's what Competitive gaming is about, re-balancing the game into infinity with bans (and trust me, people like that exist and they have debated in this thread) is anti-Competitive.

And that's about as problem-solving as somebody ignoring that they have a deadly disease such as cancer... it's there, and you can't deny the fact that people will see this argument differently than you.

When have I ever denied such people exist? When I see them, I bury them under refutations and facts.

 

[Brinzy]

Off topic, but... Yuna, I'm getting SC4 very, very soon... X got nerfed? Oh well. I use Zasalamel and Seong Mina... how are they holding up, tier wise?

Four edits, god.

 

[M15t3R E]

Yuna, it's never acceptable to resort to name-calling for people you disagree with.
I see now why you're not a mod... nor a smash debater for that matter.

 

[Yuna]

Off topic, but... Yuna, I'm getting SC4 very, very soon... X got nerfed? Oh well. I use Zasalamel and Seong Mina... how are they holding up, tier wise?

Four edits, god.

I haven't kept up with the latest in SC4. Seong Mina looked kinda the same-ish. I think Zasalamel got nerfed slightly.

X got nerfed to hell. She's slower, less safe, all of her BnB is gone and they replaced her "Nanchattes" with a new "Nanchatte" + a slew of news ones. Her new "Nanchattes" are no longer instant cancels which make you go back to neutral. Pretty much all of her old combos are gone... with no new good combos to replace them.

First, you strike an inane pose (which takes well over 12-15 frames!), then, from there, you can only do one out of 3 moves, two of which, IIRC, are highs. None can be comboed from. It doesn't help that the vast majority of these "cancels" come out at the very end of natural strings, so if they see them, they can just hit you out of it since you would be unsafe or at least forced to block anyway! The only good thing is that one of these moves, if "charged" guard breaks.

Gue (Crybaby) was nerfed, yet again. She cannot do it on backturn anymore (and so many throws put you in backturn now), she'll stand up and do her backturn A-move (which is pretty bad).

 

[Brinzy]

To say that someone doesn't hold a title because of a way that you perceive them is to make a fallacious statement, when you're not the one to make that judgment.

 

[Yuna]

Yuna, it's never acceptable to resort to name-calling for people you disagree with.

No, in this case, I believe it is. It's not that I disagree with them. I never call people names just for disagreeing with me. It's that I truly believe that people such as those are idiots. As in, less intelligent people. Not for disagreeing with me, but for holding idiotic opinions and values.

I view people who agree with me as idiots if they do and/or say idiotic things. Whether or not someone agrees/disagrees with me does not affect my view of their intelligence. I'm awesome like that.

I see now why you're not a mod... nor a smash debater for that matter.

I'm not a mod because I've never applied for it. I've never thought of applying for it. I believe that's one of the key reasons why. Whether or not I'd be accepted is a whole other matter. The vast majority of users on these boards would never be accepted. And no one cares. Why should it matter whether someone would be allowed to be a mod? Are you saying only mods should be allowed to debate?

Also, there's no such thing as a "Smash Debater". There's a Debate Hall, though, for general debate. And I'm actually a member of it.

 

[M15t3R E]

Perhaps I should have worded it in that I believe it's a good thing he's not a mod. Because mods should not act like him.

Yuna.......
How would you know if they are idiots? Just because of some opinions they have about a **** video game? You can't judge their overall intelligence off of that. And if you think you can, then maaaaybe you are the idiot.

And what do you mean there's no such thing as a smash debater??!?!?!?!
Those with their names in pink are smash debaters, and you are not one.

 

[Kinzer]

Too many postses, go to #3164 for the response to this.

I just used that as an example, and now your making stuff up, not the majority of pro-ban people think all things have to be sovled by bans. For one, the Fox/Pikachu matchup is next to @#$% as the unlucky 5, but what do I say to Fox? Play VERY VERY GOOD, because the CG solves itself after a while, and even though Fox is at a huge disadvantage (maybe not so much if the CG were limited or not used at all), it still comes down to player skill... just Fox has to really play strategic and smart, but that's not on the community's shoulders. What does it come down to playing D3 against the 5? Press the Z button or whatever, and connect with it ONCE. The difference is Fox is still not at killing %ages when it comes to attacking as Pikachu, he still has to land a few more hits before Fox will get killed. I don't want to even go on the what should competitive be like, because not only do people interpret competitive differently, but if it we wanted it to be all up to skill, we might as well be playing Fox only, Final D, no items. Please don't ask or make a post having me imply my opinion, because it just goes further into the majority of what people think, wather it should be balanced so that everybody has a chance, or wather people need to bulk up and make the smarter choices (which BTW isn't going to do anything if we want to further Brawl's shallow metagame).

Those people I will admit, are *******, because some things can be solved, but how do you solve the infinite, by avoiding it? Wrong, things will happen, and you will get grabbed, it is enivitable, and so far, nobody has come close to finding a way out of this other than incompitence on the part of the D3 player. I'll go ahead and save you the trouble by saying that another example would be to leave MK in tourneys, and make people work to find counters to him, but you go ahead and tell me of a way the infinite can be broken if that's even possible by this time.

The last part isn't even worth keeping alive to my standards.

 

[Brinzy]

I haven't kept up with the latest in SC4. Seong Mina looked kinda the same-ish. I think Zasalamel got nerfed slightly.

X got nerfed to hell. She's slower, less safe, all of her BnB is gone and they replaced her "Nanchattes" with a new "Nanchatte" + a slew of news ones. Her new "Nanchattes" are no longer instant cancels which make you go back to neutral. Pretty much all of her old combos are gone... with no new good combos to replace them.

First, you strike an inane pose (which takes well over 12-15 frames!), then, from there, you can only do one out of 3 moves, two of which, IIRC, are highs. None can be comboed from. It doesn't help that the vast majority of these "cancels" come out at the very end of natural strings, so if they see them, they can just hit you out of it since you would be unsafe or at least forced to block anyway! The only good thing is that one of these moves, if "charged" guard breaks.

Gue (Crybaby) was nerfed, yet again. She cannot do it on backturn anymore (and so many throws put you in backturn now), she'll stand up and do her backturn A-move (which is pretty bad).

Dear Christ. Well I'll find someone else to work with. They got X but they missed Sophitia, eh... those are some pretty severe nerfs. Z getting slightly nerfed makes me sad, too. I bet Kilik's still running rampant.

I probably should not be discussiing this right now in this thread.

 

[Yuna]

Perhaps I should have worded it in that I believe it's a good thing he's not a mod. Because mods should not act like him.

Actually, the mods share my views for the most part. And I've seen several mods call the people I call idiots idiots. You heard me.

Yuna.......
How would you know if they are idiots? Just because of some opinions they have about a **** video game? You can't judge their overall intelligence off of that. And if you think you can, then maaaaybe you are the idiot.

Either they're idiots or they're wholly ignorant. Because Competitive gaming is irreconcilable with such views. So either they know how Competitive gaming works, yet holds those views (idiots) or they know nothing about how Competitive gaming works (ignorance), yet they argue deep and important thing such as these (which would, ironically, made them idiots).

And what do you mean there's no such thing as a smash debater??!?!?!?!
Those with their names in pink are smash debaters, and you are not one.

Did you know, that's called the Debate Hall and it's about general debate (as I just said)? Did you also know that just because someone's name is currently blue does not mean they cannot be a member of the Debate Hall? You can only identify as a member of one single group, after all!

Also, I did not know I had, apparently, upon checking, recently lost my membership in the Debate Hall, most probably due to inactivity. I haven't been there for quite a while, whatever. Does change the fact that there is no such thing as a Smash Debater or a Smash Debate Hall.

I just used that as an example, and now your making stuff up, not the majority of pro-ban people think all things have to be sovled by bans.

Who's makign stuff up, did you say?

When did I say that the majority of pro-ban people think all things have to be solved by bans? I said that I view people who think that all things have to be solved by bans (not really, but something close to it) as idiots.

I didn't accuse anyone specifically of this crime. I simply stated that these specific people, in my eyes, are idiots.

I'll go ahead and save you the trouble by saying that another example would be to leave MK in tourneys, and make people work to find counters to him, but you go ahead and tell me of a way the infinite can be broken if that's even possible by this time.

Just because it has no workaround does not mean it must be banned.

Dear Christ. Well I'll find someone else to work with. They got X but they missed Sophitia, eh... those are some pretty severe nerfs. Z getting slightly nerfed makes me sad, too. I bet Kilik's still running rampant.

The thing is that they went the Brawl-way. Everyone's slower and more unsafe. But the Death Fist is still alive and overpowered. It's more unsafe, as well, but since the vast majority of things are now unsafe, if she sees you doing anything even remotely unsafe, wham! Death fist. And then you die.

"You dare bring Xianghua's crouching K to my lair? You must die!"

It even has an extra just frame for extra damage now. One JF when inputting the first hit and one JF when inputting the second "hit" (the drawing out of the sword) = ;__;

 

[Brinzy]

....... and they buffed that? Dear Christ. >_>

That *****. Well I hope she's not overwhelmingly all around anyway outside of that. If she's just roughly the same, then I can deal with her... I hope she didn't get buffed all around.

 

[Yuna]

....... and they buffed that? Dear Christ. >_>

It wasn't buffed per se. It's just different. But since everyone has been nerfed and made more unsafe, it's still the big whopper that breaks match-ups.

That *****. Well I hope she's not overwhelmingly all around anyway outside of that. If she's just roughly the same, then I can deal with her... I hope she didn't get buffed all around.

She's roughly the same. Everyone is roughly more unsafe than in SC3, though. Death Fist still tech crouches, is fast as hell and painful as hell. It can even leave you in stun, allowing her to combo you from it. Yay!

 

[M15t3R E]

Okay, I really don't care about why you choose to call people idiots, but there IS such a thing as a Smash Debater.

Look at my friend's profile here and tell me what title is labeled under his pink-colored name.
http://www.smashboards.com/member.php?u=52428

 

[Brinzy]

Well wonderful!

I'll just have to play around with the characters for a while until I eventually become bored and just play Sophitia anyway.

 

[Yuna]

Okay, I really don't care about why you choose to call people idiots, but there IS such a thing as a Smash Debater.

Look at my friend's profile here and tell me what title is labeled under his pink-colored name.
http://www.smashboards.com/member.php?u=52428

Then it's wrong. Or "Smash" is just in there for the heck of it. It means you're a member of the Debate Hall, which happens to be filed under General Discussion. It has nothing to do with Smash (talk of Smash should be held in their respective sub-forums).

Well, you weren't wrong. The forum is wrong.

 

[M15t3R E]

LOL, how can the forum be wrong??

And yes, I know the Debate Hall has nothing to do with talk about Smash Bros. or any videogames.
I just wanted to show you that a group does exist called Smash Debaters. "Smash Debaters" doesn't mean debating about Smash Bros., it just means you are a smasher who likes to debate about real-world issues.

 

[Yuna]

LOL, how can the forum be wrong??

Read: The people who are in control of the forum are "wrong". Unless Smash is just an arbitrary affix.

 

[ShadowLink84]

Yuna should be a mod. Just tossing it out there.

*shot*

Hmm I was going to get into SC4 since Raphael mentioned it , but now I am rather afraid of the death fist T_T.

I saw someone abuse the **** out of it at Inui's tournament last time. It was rather traumatizing XD.

Edit: Mister E you're going off topic. Yo must prove that the criteria for a ban are wrong.

 

[Sesshomuronay]

Just like how items were banned and stuff like planking was banned we should fix this game to however we please. Sakurai obviously did a bad job so im glad for things like hacked wiis for the ability to turn off random tripping for better competitive play.

I would say that this infinate should be banned because its overall better. I mean Dedede doesnt need to **** these characters, I wouldnt feel bad if dededes infinate was banned but I would feel bad if some scrub beat a really good bowser or DK player because of the infinate.

Yes some people say that competitive video games do have broken matchups and cheap tactics and stuff like that. But we dont have to be like other video games, I mean planking was banned in a lot of tournaments because of how it was dumb.

I just dont think that something HAS to overcentralize the metagame before its banned. Im fine with this infinate being banned because only good can come of banning this infinate.

 

[M15t3R E]

Edit: Mister E you're going off topic. Yo must prove that the criteria for a ban are wrong.

Wth... I've been ON-TOPIC for the past god knows how many pages, and I'm not only talking about last night. Leave me alone.
And what's the point in more arguing when we disagree on the fundamental reason for a ban?

I've said that there are more reasons to ban than just over-centralization and that is something your side cannot disprove.

 

[ShadowLink84]

Wth... I've been ON-TOPIC for the past god knows how many pages, and I'm not only talking about last night. Leave me alone.

Where is this coming from?
Did someone pee in your cheerios or soemthing. I was speaking about how you went off on a tangent on how mods shouldn't be like Yuna etc etc.

And what's the point in more arguing when we disagree on the fundamental reason for a ban?

to convince the other side they are wrong.

I've said that there are more reasons to ban than just over-centralization and that is something your side cannot disprove.

Otherway around. The burden of proof lies upon you.
The established criteria of a ban is overcentralizing, it is on you, the pro ban side to show there is more criteria for establishing a ban.

So I shall ask you.
What are the proposed criteria for a ban and why is it a criteria that should be supported?

 

[Pi]

'Doesn't fit the ban criteria'

Is a old, tired, played out argument and needs to stop being used as the SOLE REASON to NOT ban this technique.

Sure, competitive games share SOME similarities, but they are NOT THE SAME

This 'criteria' is a GENERAL GUIDELINE that works for MOST games
Actually, no, it WORKS for ALL games

But it is NOT PERFECT!
It is NOT a viable argument, it is a LAZY FALLBACK

It's so easy to ride on someone elses coat tails, it's an entirely different thing for you to THINK FOR YOURSELF


Whenever one of the anti-ban people speak, or respond, or reply, to any argument about why this technique should be banned they respond with 'it doesn't fit the ban criteria, it doesn't over-centralize the metagame'

Why? Because you can't prove that this will hurt the game
This will NOT hurt the game

This WILL work, it WILL!

The current 'criteria' that you all set your standards by is NOT PERFECT!

They need to be refined, and individualized for different games!

FFS, this is not SF, this isn't even melee! Similarities exist but stop falling back on the old tired criteria to ban moves

And for the record, I feel all infinite's should be banned

Stocks were not meant to be lost in 1 'combo'

Otherway around. The burden of proof lies upon you.
The established criteria of a ban is overcentralizing, it is on you, the pro ban side to show there is more criteria for establishing a ban.

So I shall ask you.
What are the proposed criteria for a ban and why is it a criteria that should be supported?

So basically you are saying 'I have no proof, we have no proof, our only argument is using a worn-out vague guideline and treating it like an iron clad law.

Your side needs proof too
Your side is the one who's losing the poll
If you can't PROVIDE proof, then your side has a problem


You want our proof? Our arguments?

1) It renders 2 characters useless
2) It renders 4 other characters useless past 129%
3) Banning it would not hurt the game in any way shape or form
4) Banning it would positively affect the metagame


And Yuna, what tha hell

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.

You admit sakurai made mistakes
You say that good fighters have teams working to develope them

But you seem more than ready to resign us to the game as it was given to us

We can be the team to refine the game

You don't want balance any more eh?

 

[pure_awesome]

To the anti-ban side: Over-centralization is not, in any way, the only criteria for a ban. If it were, items would not be banned.

We weren't considering banning Metaknight because he "over-centralized the game". We were considering banning Metaknight because he broke the counterpick system.

We are not automatons. We are capable of critical thought. We do not have to say that banning this technique doesn't look like anything we've ever done before, and therefore we can't do it.

To the pro ban side: How do you respond to people who say that there is nothing wrong with DK being relegated to being a counterpick character, much like many other characters in the game? After all, keeping the infinite doesn't completely remove DK from the game, it just removes him from the game where there is a possibility of facing DDD. You can still bring him out to wreck Metaknight.

 

[Pi]

To the pro ban side: How do you respond to people who say that there is nothing wrong with DK being relegated to being a counterpick character, much like many other characters in the game? After all, keeping the infinite doesn't completely remove DK from the game, it just removes him from the game where there is a possibility of facing DDD. You can still bring him out to wreck Metaknight.

Relegated, that's a new one...

We're fine with CP's, makes match-ups more interesting

But we feel there should be more than 1 technique that a character does to warrant a CP

If a character out-classes another character due to range/priority/speed/lag on attacks
That's fine, that's overall just a better character-but by no means unbeatable
It would just be in your best interest to counter pick to BETTER your chances however slightly to win the match

But when it's just 1 technique that completely wrecks a character? No, that's not okay.

 

[ShadowLink84]

To the anti-ban side: Over-centralization is not, in any way, the only criteria for a ban. If it were, items would not be banned.

Everyone goes after the items in an item format. It is stupid NOT to go after the items.
A person who gets an item can make use of it and tip the amtch to his favor. Let alone the random and luck based factor.
Either way it was, use the items.

We weren't considering banning Metaknight because he "over-centralized the game". We were considering banning Metaknight because he broke the counterpick system.

breaking the counterpick system is hardly anything to ban a character for especially when you consider Marth in melee who was also rather CP resilient.

We are not automatons. We are capable of critical thought. We do not have to say that banning this technique doesn't look like anything we've ever done before, and therefore we can't do it.

What?
I'll let you think about this one for a moment.

To the pro ban side: How do you respond to people who say that there is nothing wrong with DK being relegated to being a counterpick character, much like many other characters in the game? After all, keeping the infinite doesn't completely remove DK from the game, it just removes him from the game where there is a possibility of facing DDD. You can still bring him out to wreck Metaknight.

So we should save Dk, but we must not save mario Luigi, sonic, Fox, Ganondorf, Captain Falcon etc etc all of which are characters who must counter pick or lose?
I am sorry when did we start making special cases just because we could?

'Doesn't fit the ban criteria'

Is a old, tired, played out argument and needs to stop being used as the SOLE REASON to NOT ban this technique.

And yet you have shown no reason why it doesn't work.

Sure, competitive games share SOME similarities, but they are NOT THE SAME

Competitive games share the same qualities when it comes to banning.
yu-gh-ih
magic The gathering
SF2
Smash melee
Smash brawl
Soul Calibur series

This 'criteria' is a GENERAL GUIDELINE that works for MOST games
Actually, no, it WORKS for ALL games

So you know this and yet

But it is NOT PERFECT!
It is NOT a viable argument, it is a LAZY FALLBACK

You fall down toth is.
considerinf that this criteria works for all games and we have seen from experience that it has worked for us and those other games, in what way is it lazy to bring it up?
This is the precedent, we don't toss it away just because you feel it is lazy.
Prove that it does not work and that your proposal does work.

It's so easy to ride on someone elses coat tails, it's an entirely different thing for you to THINK FOR YOURSELF

You just said everyone on the anti ban side are lazy and have not put a thought into their argument.
Very nice.

Whenever one of the anti-ban people speak, or respond, or reply, to any argument about why this technique should be banned they respond with 'it doesn't fit the ban criteria, it doesn't over-centralize the metagame'

And when the pro ban people speak its always "its not fair"

yeah totally should listen.

Why? Because you can't prove that this will hurt the game
This will NOT hurt the game

DDD users are forced to play in a different manner when facing those characters.
DDD loses a tool which factors into those bad matchups.

If there is no affect from banning it then why ban it period?
Just because we want to save those characters?
Then save every other character as well.

This WILL work, it WILL!

Putting things in bold and then repeating it like the gospel doesn't help your argument.

The current 'criteria' that you all set your standards by is NOT PERFECT!

Proof?

They need to be refined, and individualized for different games!

Again proof?

FFS, this is not SF, this isn't even melee! Similarities exist but stop falling back on the old tired criteria to ban moves

Again proof?
Why shouldn't we use something that has been shown to work not only in fighting games but even CARD GAMES.
Genres completely unrelated fall down tot he same criteria because that criteria is what it comes down to naturally.

And for the record, I feel all infinite's should be banned

Stocks were not meant to be lost in 1 'combo'

Ban DK's death combo on Fox in melee then.

So basically you are saying 'I have no proof, we have no proof, our only argument is using a worn-out vague guideline and treating it like an iron clad law.

Anti ban side has proof. many, many examples in which that criteria is fulfilled.
you have yet to show otherwise.

1) It renders 2 characters useless

Those two characters cant be used ever? I am sorry but it sounds like you are just ignoring everything laid against you.
learn to counter pick.

2) It renders 4 other characters useless past 129%

Wait so,its bad for when they will most likely die anyway?
Did you read this part?

3) Banning it would not hurt the game in any way shape or form

Considering DDD loses a tool in the matchup that hurts DDD.
Considering you are saving specific characters and not others is biased.
If banning it doesn't hurt the metagame at all.
How does not banning it hurt the metagame?
Why does the pro ban side only bring up the good of the metagame when it suits their argument?

4) Banning it would positively affect the metagame

I call bull****.
Sorry 5 matchups out of 700+ is not affecting the metagame.

We're fine with CP's, makes match-ups more interesting

but its not okay in this case?

stuff

Its great to feel you are right but no matter how you feel it doesn't prove your argument.
in fact, under that logic we should not ban Akuma because he didn't just destroy characters only due to 1 technique.
We shouldn't ban ravager decks from MTG because they don't destroy other decks based on just a singular technique.

 

[Pi]

And yet you have shown no reason why it doesn't work.

It does work. But we can better it. You refuse to for reasons beyond me

Competitive games share the same qualities when it comes to banning.
yu-gh-ih
magic The gathering
SF2
Smash melee
Smash brawl
Soul Calibur series

They don't have to. They are not the same. Their rules can be fine tuned and bettered for each individual game, because each individual game has individual factors that play into it.

So you know this and yet

You fall down toth is.
considerinf that this criteria works for all games and we have seen from experience that it has worked for us and those other games, in what way is it lazy to bring it up?
This is the precedent, we don't toss it away just because you feel it is lazy.
Prove that it does not work and that your proposal does work.

I'm not saying it doesn't work, I'm saying it doesn't have to be so strict
(hell, you have failed to draw the line for what over-centralizes the metagame, is it 20% 30% 50% 60% of the characters?)
It's lazy because you say it without thinking
Of course it works, but it relies on CP's, and it doesn't have to

You just said everyone on the anti ban side are lazy and have not put a thought into their argument.
Very nice.

They have put very little. All they fall back on is the same thing 'it doesn't meet the criteria'

And when the pro ban people speak its always "its not fair"

Ah, no, it is not. That is not the only argument we use, but it is a viable one
Just don't look at it as whining
You act like we can do something to prevent it from happening (Aside from CP)

DDD users are forced to play in a different manner when facing those characters.
DDD loses a tool which factors into those bad matchups.

Don't whine, learn2play your character without overpowered gimps o.O
Or is that too much to ask?

If there is no affect from banning it then why ban it period?
Just because we want to save those characters?
Then save every other character as well.

Every other character is not in this situation, stop using it, it's a weak argument.
These are 95:5 match ups, not 60:40

Putting things in bold and then repeating it like the gospel doesn't help your argument.

Proof?


Again proof?

Again proof?

Proof that it will work? The proof is that you haven't presented any reason it wouldn't. 'Innocent until proven guilty' Prove this ban will negatively affect the game.

Why shouldn't we use something that has been shown to work not only in fighting games but even CARD GAMES.
Genres completely unrelated fall down tot he same criteria because that criteria is what it comes down to naturally.

We could use it, it would work. But why not fine tune it? Why resign ourselves to an imperfect guideline when we have the time and ability to go into more detail?

Ban DK's death combo on Fox in melee then.

Uh, as I said, I'm in favor of banning all infinite. 1 technique should not determine a match, that is far too easy.

Anti ban side has proof. many, many examples in which that criteria is fulfilled.
you have yet to show otherwise.

Anti-ban side has no proof other than 'this worked for this other game'
Which is weak, and not thought out.

Otherwise what? Of course it works, people are forced to counterpick
You act like this is a perfect solution o.O

Those two characters cant be used ever? I am sorry but it sounds like you are just ignoring everything laid against you.
learn to counter pick.

I'm not ignoring anything
Your character will just get CP'd to D3 then what? Then you lose.
It doesn't have to be this way, stop resigning yourself to it

I'll CP when a character out-classes my own due to a multitude of reasons, not 1 big broken one.

Wait so,its bad for when they will most likely die anyway?
Did you read this part?

'most likely'? That's not real solid bud
That's like giving G&W's bair/nair the same KB as falcon punch
With proper DI you're not gonna die unless you get hit by a big, difficult to land move
This is easy as **** to land. But we're ignoring difficulty here.

Considering DDD loses a tool in the matchup that hurts DDD.
Considering you are saving specific characters and not others is biased.
If banning it doesn't hurt the metagame at all.
How does not banning it hurt the metagame?
Why does the pro ban side only bring up the good of the metagame when it suits their argument?

A tool? No, this is a gun in a knife fight. It doesn't hurt DDD, it just gives him more characters to combat. If you're whining about that then I'd call you lazy

Not banning it hurts the metagame because it would be wasteful to put your time into mastering one of these characters when any reasonable tourney goer is just going to CP D3 and 3 stock you.

I call bull****.
Sorry 5 matchups out of 700+ is not affecting the metagame.

It does, however slightly

but its not okay in this case?

No, it's not
Because it's 1 technique that is making the match a 95:5 instead of a 60:40
1 technique that is ban worthy
1 technique that is easily monitored, easily performed, and ****s you over.

Its great to feel you are right but no matter how you feel it doesn't prove your argument.
in fact, under that logic we should not ban Akuma because he didn't just destroy characters only due to 1 technique.
We shouldn't ban ravager decks from MTG because they don't destroy other decks based on just a singular technique.

Here's what your problem is

We are talking about banning a MOVE

You are talking about banning a CHARACTER/DECK

The criteria SHOULD be different

Any criteria that is applies to such different aspects of a game is obviously flawed
Can't you see that?

Especially not a one sentence criteria

Look at contracts, they are pages and pages long going into details about every variable. This is a sweeping generalization of all competitive games. It should NOT be used as the only criteria, there are too many holes, too many variables to consider.

This is a guideline at best.





And hell
If we can't use our favorite character let's all just use metaknight

Why the hell not am I right?!

 

[adumbrodeus]

I think if a character was discovered to have a technique that made all those top tiers in Melee nonviable, it would have to be banned. Those 4 characters are too popular and there would be an outcry to ban the technique to keep the game the way it is, to prevent people from swarming to Pikachu for free wins and creating an unnecessary CP frenzy in tournaments nationwide. It would just be hell until it's banned.

Now put yourself in the shoes of our friends at the DK and Bowser character boards. They are living in a hellish environment whenever they attend tournaments because they cannot use their favorite character at all. They are probably dying to see this infinite banned. We shouldn't not listen to them, just because they represent only a couple of the game's cast of characters.

So... you're telling us we should support a ban because of the similarity to a situation that we wouldn't support a ban in ANYWAY?!

I'm sorry, that's ludicrous logic.

I would like to point out that this won't make them totally nonviable, Pikachu is still a bad lead choice because of the possibility of meeting ICs, granted pikachu would definitely move up because this would eliminate a number of very significant weaknesses, but the characters would still be quite viable given a secondary.

Oddly enough, the exact same situation holds with DK, give him an ICs secondary, and he's still viable, and a solid high tier.

Read: The people who are in control of the forum are "wrong". Unless Smash is just an arbitrary affix.

Because every title starts with "smash", as far as the forum is concerned it seems to be.

stuff

Shadowlink's response was fine, nothing to add.

To the anti-ban side: Over-centralization is not, in any way, the only criteria for a ban. If it were, items would not be banned.

There's a fundamental difference between the type of "banning" that occurs with items, as I explained before, items off is no different from "neutral guard off", the game forces a choice (and sticking with the defaults is choosing the defaults), so any choice is equally valid prior to specifics, and therefore any advantage is reasonable for choosing a new standard.

We weren't considering banning Metaknight because he "over-centralized the game". We were considering banning Metaknight because he broke the counterpick system.

That was the major reason that MK could be argued to overcentralize the metagame, the smart pro-banners were pointing this out.

Others... weren't.

Regardless, the criteria of "broke the counterpick system", fails miserably. It didn't deserve to be a ban criteria.

We are not automatons. We are capable of critical thought. We do not have to say that banning this technique doesn't look like anything we've ever done before, and therefore we can't do it.

Lol

Obviously you missed the part where we were explaining why it was the ONLY worthwhile criteria that had been suggested thus far.


We were not just blindly referring to it, we were constantly tearing down other suggested ban criterias, and pointing out that it left us with "overcentralizes the metagame".


Your criticism of us not thinking on this is far off-base.

 

[pure_awesome]

Relegated, that's a new one...

We're fine with CP's, makes match-ups more interesting

But we feel there should be more than 1 technique that a character does to warrant a CP

If a character out-classes another character due to range/priority/speed/lag on attacks
That's fine, that's overall just a better character-but by no means unbeatable
It would just be in your best interest to counter pick to BETTER your chances however slightly to win the match

But when it's just 1 technique that completely wrecks a character? No, that's not okay.

Makes sense.

But, following that course of logic, would we not also have to ban all the grab release infinites on Wario? What about in Smash 64, DK's cargo grab release infinite on Kirby?

I'm not saying this as an argument. I'm legitimately asking whether the pro ban side thinks these things should be banned.

Everyone goes after the items in an item format. It is stupid NOT to go after the items.
A person who gets an item can make use of it and tip the amtch to his favor. Let alone the random and luck based factor.
Either way it was, use the items.

Using items during a match is not over-centralized play. If you think it's stupid not to use items in an item match, I suggest you take the issue up with CPU and Ken, the two finalists of the Evo2k8 items tournament, who frequently throughout the tournament avoided picking up items in order to capitalize on another situation.
For example, in the finals themselves, Ken picked up a hammer. CPU calmly smashed him off the stage, where he fell to his death.
Saying that items play degenerates into "Get the items" is untrue.

Bottom line: Items are banned because they randomly affect the outcome of the match, not because they over-centralize play.
Ergo, over-centralization is not the sole factor for a ban.

breaking the counterpick system is hardly anything to ban a character for especially when you consider Marth in melee who was also rather CP resilient.

Yet, it's what the SBR was talking about.

What?
I'll let you think about this one for a moment.

If you don't understand, just ask me to clarify. There's no shame in not understanding what someone is trying to say over the internet, since the majority of human understanding comes from vocal intonation and body language. Just ask

So we should save Dk, but we must not save mario Luigi, sonic, Fox, Ganondorf, Captain Falcon etc etc all of which are characters who must counter pick or lose?
I am sorry when did we start making special cases just because we could?

Considering this was specifically addressed as an argument to the pro-ban side, I'm completely baffled as to why you decided to argue against it.
Lesson 1 of internet maturity: Not everyone is out to get you.