The banning of all infinite's helps support the slippery slope theory?
Why? Are they trying to ban MK's tornado? Snakes Nades?
No, they banned infinites, and they are a healthy tourney scene.
If anything this supports the anti-slippery slope argument.
They banned IC's infinites despite them not even being Top Tier with them (despite them being universal; works on everyone (except another IC's, unless Nana's dead). There's your slippery slope.
They banned something which made a character that isn't even Top Tier worse for no good reason other than to arbitrarily boost some
other match-ups. They banned a strategy for no good reason, just as a consequence of banning D3's infinite.
Either they used almost all of the same reasoning for banning D3's infinites and then went "Ah, let's take out IC's infinites, too!" or they just went with "All infinites must be banned!" and to hell with anything else! This is a
perfect example of a slippery slope.
Even if they
have stopped, it's still a sloppery slope. They have
already done down that slope. Something that are in no way destroying the metagame, over-centralizing anything or even making a character very good was banned for no good reason other than whining about not wanting to lose a stock to a single grab.
Tell me, do you know how good IC's are
with their infinites?
Barely viable. So they just arbitarily
nerfed a character who doesn't stand that good of a statistical chance of winning, making them even
worse.
Also, "They banned it and their scene is still healthy" =/= Relevant
We can ban tons of stuff and the scene will still be healthy. Doesn't mean banning them would be warranted.
I could understand if maybe D3's chain down throw grab performed the same way on all characters had an effect on only 6 characters.
Stop whining about the number 6. The sixth character is D3. And no one in their right mind would argue that D3's infinite
on himself breaks his match-up against
himself.
There's absolutely no reason to ban it against D3 since if it's a ditto, both sides can use it, thus, no one's getting the short end of the stick.
For the rest of the characters, Bowser's is a short-step CG that will eventually end. It's almost an infinite since D3 barely has to move forward, so most people count is an infinite. D3's chaingrab on DK is always an infinite.
D3's chaingrab on Luigi, Mario and Samus is only an infinite past 135% or so since before that, they can break out.
So, it's only
two characters. For the other 4, it's either a ditto or something that is in no way broken or that breaks the match-up to hell.
Offensive Technique
- Increases in power due to a glitch in the game. (Ex. If we could some how glitch a move to do more damage than normal
This is
not a good reason to ban things. Oh, there's this glitch that makes something better. Well, hello Snakedashing. Ban nao?
Ensures the loss of a stock at any % in the match & can be performed on any surface on the map.
NTSC Melee Sheik's d-throw (with maybe an f-tilt or two in there) chaingrab from 0-death unless she just grabbed you right at the edge of a stage says "Hello". I think Ganondorf could 0-death some characters, as well (with his chaingrab).
- Has no matches at which said character is at a disadvantage OR has fewer than X amount of neutral match ups
- Has 1 or more moves that guarantee a stock at any % in the match (if TL's down A glitch was able to be reproduced accidentally, effectively, and consistently) WHICH cannot be banned or monitored.
[Note]Characters should NOT be banned altogether, but at the very most limited to ditto's
Wow. Just wow.
Again the argument "Has no disadvantage or fewer than X amount of neutral match-ups!" resurfaces. I won't touch it this time.
And wow at the inane reasoning of "Should not be banned altogether, but at most limited to dittos". Horrible, horrible reasoning. Either ban it altogether or don't ban it at all.
This is more like the type of criteria we should have
Not 'overcentralize the metagame'
This is the type of criteria
you want. No one with insight into how Competitive gaming works and who are of sound mind would agree.
We don't care that Competitive gaming isn't 100% fair. We don't care that you cannot always play as your favorite character and still stand a chance at winning. This is
not what Competitive gaming is all about. If you want to be able to win as whoever and instill tons of bans to ensure that, go back to Casual gaming.
just wanted to say that melee, had unviable characters, yes, but they were unviable because they were actually bad characters, not just because they were really good characters, but fell victum to one excrusiatingly broken move.
Ness and Lucas would be pretty viable if it weren't for grab releases. "It's one broken 'move'!" was used as a call to ban it. Do you support this?
Bowser is still bad. DK is kinda viable. Bowser? Not so much. Anyone who disagrees with this is wrong. There, I said it.
also, Bum's region didnt ban it because of Bum, read the post at the top of this page, they banned because it was STUPID, UNFAIR, AND ANTI-COMPETITIVE! In the real world, things actually get banned for that.
In the real world, this would never be banned. Bum's region is the only part of a Competitive gaming community that has ever banned something like this, as far as I know.
One more thing, they only banned IC INFINITES, as in, the CGs that you could reverse direction with, the CGs that always kept you moving in the same direction seem to be perfectly fine.
Yes, and the question would be:
Why? Even with the infinites unbanned, ICs are still only Mid Tier.
Why nerf a mid tier character?