Should King Dedede's infinite chaingrab be banned?

[Xyro77]

why indeed should we give them a "chance" if the tactic is not banworthy?
you haven't answered my point. why SHOULDN'T brawl used the same criteria used in melee and other fighting games when it was proven to work?

assuming the 6 and dd are at high levels

its VISUALY/TACTICALY(be that a word?) obvious that it prevents those 6 from winning. Again you dont see that, maybe its because you main some one out of low tier.

WHY shouldnt brawl use the same criteria?

Simple.

Its PLAYED(mentaly/physically) different than any other game. The tactics used are different(aside from common stuff like baiting). The engine is different. its 100% different than marvel,tekken,mortal K, street fighter, dead or alive.......ect( i thought all of this was common sense)

therefore SOME criteria needs to be changed.

and to clear the OVER CENTRALIZE debate. common sense, of course it doesnt cause EVERYBODY to go to ddd but its ADDING TO the number of DDDs. You need to look at the whole picture.....which is hard for the peopl here in this thread.

 

[XxBlackxX]

point being, infinites are just plain cheap. goto a tournament play a character and lost because you got stuck in a infinite over and over.

lol
i happen to think MK is cheap. i happen to think Fox is cheap. i also happen to think Falcon is cheap. Let's ban them all because some random person thinks they're cheap!!
/sarcasm

The tactic IS banworthy, it's so frustrating that people in the community are debating this when the ban has no downside. Anti-infinite ban people should start practicing their debating and rhetoric skills in another thread...

hell no it's not banworthy. the fact that you think it is shows something about YOUR debating skills. the best pro-ban supporters even agree with me on this. according to the criteria used in the best, it's not banworthy. however, they want to make an exception for this one tactic, that is where we disagree.
also, that it has no "downside" is completely subjective. since i don't feel like repeating it, go read some of adumbrodeus' posts about slippery slope.

WHY shouldnt brawl use the same criteria?

Simple.

Its PLAYED(mentaly/physically) different than any other game. The tactics used are different(aside from common stuff like baiting). The engine is different. its 100% different than marvel,tekken,mortal K, street fighter, dead or alive.......ect( i thought all of this was common sense)

therefore SOME criteria needs to be changed.

*sigh*
i guess we'll just have to "agree to disagree". tbh im tired of this discussion, both sides argued this to death already. let's just see what SBR thinks, and even then, if you don't agree, you can host/ask your TO to host tournies that ban this. it's absolutely fine to do that. however, i am against banning this in the recommended ruleset.

jesus man, seriously, "why should we give them a chance if the tactic isn't banworthy?" dude, xyro hit it right on the nose, even WITHOUT the cheapass infinite cg, DDD STILL has a heavy advantage on all of those characters, and being as many stages were banned simply due to the fact that DDD could infinite against a wall, or CG off the side of the stage, why allow an infinite chaingrab to remain like his? all its doing is making the barrier between viable and unviable characters larger and overcentralizing the metagame even moreso than it is now. Sure its not overcentralized to the point of only MK vs MK, but its getting to the point where there are less and less viable characters.

first, cheapass is so subjective and therefore moot.
second, walk-offs and walls could be abused by more than just D3's CG's, for example falco's laserlock. also, those were universal. one-grab, one-stock applied to EVERYONE. therefore, it over-centralized around characters who could abuse those stages better, is that so hard to understand?
and third, ive already stated this, we don't ban things to make more viable characters.

 

[cutter]

The tactic IS banworthy, it's so frustrating that people in the community are debating this when the ban has no downside. Anti-infinite ban people should start practicing their debating and rhetoric skills in another thread...

Considering the infinite is not overcentralizing nor does it completely break the game, I don't see why it would warrant a ban.

The pro ban side has failed to give any valid explanation for why this should legitimately be banned.

@ Xyro: If you want to give ****ty characters a chance, why can't we also give characters like Fox a chance against Pikachu and ZSS as well? What makes just DK/Mario/Luigi/Samus so special that you can't do anything to give other bad characters a chance?

 

[gantrain05]

Considering the infinite is not overcentralizing nor does it completely break the game, I don't see why it would warrant a ban.

The pro ban side has failed to give any valid explanation for why this should legitimately be banned.

@ Xyro: If you want to give ****ty characters a chance, why can't we also give characters like Fox a chance against Pikachu and ZSS as well? What makes just DK/Mario/Luigi/Samus so special that you can't do anything to give other bad characters a chance?

failed to give an explanation that fits YOUR definition, its certainly valid to us, and we are all (well most) are very competetive and skilled players. its not overcentralizing the game by itself, but it DOES overcentralize the game more than it already is, its just adding to the list of crap that makes brawl so much less competetive than melee or any other fighting game.

 

[Xyro77]

I can break out of it consistently under 90% and I have the tech skill of an asparagus. I can't even pull off Metaknight's glidetoss consistently. If I can do it until around 90, anyone who enters a tournament should be able to.

with a sig and a username like yours....im sure you can.

with a join date like yours, im sure you can.

with no vids to prove what you just said, im sure you can.

 

[Xyro77]

@ Xyro: If you want to give ****ty characters a chance, why can't we also give characters like Fox a chance against Pikachu and ZSS as well? What makes just DK/Mario/Luigi/Samus so special that you can't do anything to give other bad characters a chance?

relax.

im only fighting for these 6 chars because im included in these 6 chars.

i use samus.

However, if theres certain trash that effects your fox/zs due to pika. then i highly recommend you fight for that a well. I wont be against you.

 

[bobson]

with a sig and a username like yours....im sure you can.

with a join date like yours, im sure you can.

with no vids to prove what you just said, im sure you can.

Whatever you say. Try it yourself if you want.

 

[XxBlackxX]

failed to give an explanation that fits YOUR definition, its certainly valid to us, and we are all (well most) are very competetive and skilled players. its not overcentralizing the game by itself, but it DOES overcentralize the game more than it already is, its just adding to the list of crap that makes brawl so much less competetive than melee or any other fighting game.

lol.
you state that you want brawl to be as competitive as melee.
you're sure forgetting something there...

ahem.....that melee USED the criteria cutter mentioned...ahem....

 

[1048576]

It's like we can't have counterpicks anymore. OMG Samus goes 70-30 against D3 we must ban something.

Believe it or not, trying to ban moves to make every matchup 50-50 is not only impossible; it would ruin the game.

 

[smasher?o.0]

wouldn't this mean that
IC's CG could be banned?
i would hate it if this gets banned because then people are really going to be whining about other things since it would seem to them that they already have control from banning one thing

 

[Yuna]

It's not really weakening DDD. He has the advantage vs. DK and Bowser even without his infinite.

Debatable. Also, your logic, as usual, is nonexistent.

How is it not weakening him when you worsen his match-ups?! Does it not count as weakening him as long as he still holds the advantage, no matter how small? Would it not be weakening MK is we banned things to make all of his match-ups at least 60-40?

~~...And then I skipped to the last page...~~ (334 )

and yes i understand that you COULD break out of it before 130% but be realistic, 9 out of 10 times it doesnt happen. In fact 9 out of 10 people cant do it on command no matter who grabs who. If it wernt true this thread wouldnt have been made.

Who cares about what ****ty people who are bad mashing and who do not know the proper way to mash out of D3's chaingrab can't do?!

failed to give an explanation that fits YOUR definition, its certainly valid to us, and we are all (well most) are very competetive and skilled players. its not overcentralizing the game by itself, but it DOES overcentralize the game more than it already is, its just adding to the list of crap that makes brawl so much less competetive than melee or any other fighting game.

No, it does not over-centralize the game.

Or are you saying we're seeing a magical influx och D3 players just to counter DK and Bowser?

However, if theres certain trash that effects your fox/zs due to pika. then i highly recommend you fight for that a well. I wont be against you.

Did you just say that anything "unfair" should have bans installed to change the match-ups to make the game "more fair"?

It's not that I'm surprised. I just want to make sure that this is really your position.

 

[da K.I.D.]

lern2readingcomprehension >_>

did you even READ the thing i wrote, instead of picking off random bits and saying i contradict myself?

because i made it CLEAR that the first sentence referred to "fixing" the criteria used in other competitive games. (because xyro suggested we shouldn't use the ban criteria used in other games)

and the 2nd sentence talked about how they "break" individual matchups. NOT the whole game, and just because i KNEW some ****** was gonna pull something like this, i even wrote, this breaks matchups, but not the whole game, which is what the critieria is for banning.

EDIT: seriously, if you have nothing to add, you need stop thinking you're a smart*** and shut the **** up. it's people like you that makes me think the pro-ban people are all scrubs >_>

in the first quote you talked about how we shouldnt fix things that arent broken, you were strictly talking about the infinite in relation to that sentance, thus, you were saying it wasnt broken.
as in you were saying that it was broken at all.
in the second quote, you go on to say that the infinite IS broken, but not to a bannable extent.
I read and analysed everthing you said, and it still came out contradictory, because one time you said it isnt broken and thats why it shouldnt be banned, but then you say that it IS broken, just not enough to be banned.

your stance that it shouldnt be banned stands, as you dont contradict the basis of what you are saying. but that doesnt change the fact that you are constantly back talking and saying thing that you contradict minutes or even seconds later.

Also, if you know that im going to bring it up when you contradict yourself, how about instead of getting mad at me for pointing out your failing, why dont you just shape up, and learn to speak your mind with out saying the complete opposite thing moments later.

If you dont contradict yourself, I would have nothing to point out, very simple.

 

[Toesrus]

People want to ban this move not because it is "broken" as you guys put it.

IT'S BECAUSE IT IS EASY.

Fox's waveshine infinite on link wasn't banned because it is hard as hell to pull off without messing up somewhere.

All DDD has to do is keep down throwing the character over and over again. He doesn't even have to move. Tell me that isn't something that would make you aggravated, having NO CHANCE whatsoever to beat DDD once you are grabbed.

I know you are all thinking, "Just don't get grabbed."

Why should death be a penalty for getting grabbed for DK, when a mere 12% damage is penalty for DDD being grabbed by DK?

I rest my case.

DDD inf. grab is easy. Bowser's, IC'S, and such are not.

 

[Wylde]

Just because something is easy isn't a reason for a ban.

Snake has an 'easy' 21% with a fresh forward tilt.
Metaknight has an 'easy' move that is hard to escape and racks up damage quick.

 

[da K.I.D.]

why indeed should we give them a "chance" if the tactic is not banworthy?
you haven't answered my point. why SHOULDN'T brawl used the same criteria used in melee and other fighting games when it was proven to work?

because the fact that it works is subjective, xyro said that 5 characters being playable in melee, doesnt exactly count as working.

point being, infinites are just plain cheap. goto a tournament play a character and lost because you got stuck in a infinite over and over.

this

The tactic IS banworthy, it's so frustrating that people in the community are debating this when the ban has no downside. Anti-infinite ban people should start practicing their debating and rhetoric skills in another thread...

and this.

jesus man, seriously, "why should we give them a chance if the tactic isn't banworthy?" dude, xyro hit it right on the nose, even WITHOUT the cheapass infinite cg, DDD STILL has a heavy advantage on all of those characters, and being as many stages were banned simply due to the fact that DDD could infinite against a wall, or CG off the side of the stage, why allow an infinite chaingrab to remain like his? all its doing is making the barrier between viable and unviable characters larger and overcentralizing the metagame even moreso than it is now. Sure its not overcentralized to the point of only MK vs MK, but its getting to the point where there are less and less viable characters.

Super this

Its PLAYED(mentaly/physically) different than any other game. The tactics used are different(aside from common stuff like baiting). The engine is different. its 100% different than marvel,tekken,mortal K, street fighter, dead or alive.......ect( i thought all of this was common sense)
and to clear the OVER CENTRALIZE debate. common sense, of course it doesnt cause EVERYBODY to go to ddd but its ADDING TO the number of DDDs. You need to look at the whole picture.....which is hard for the peopl here in this thread.

this is very true...

first, cheapass is so subjective and therefore moot.
as are the majority of your arguments.
second, walk-offs and walls could be abused by more than just D3's CG's, for example falco's laserlock.
a large majority of the cast has a jablock that functions exactly the same as falco laser lock on a wall, if anything, this makes people better at teching, cus if you tech everything, you never have to worry about locks like that.
also, those were universal. one-grab, one-stock applied to EVERYONE. therefore, it over-centralized around characters who could abuse those stages better, is that so hard to understand?
The system we have in place NOW is focused around characters that can abuse stages...
and third, ive already stated this, we don't ban things to make more viable characters.

bridge of eldin and hanenbow plox!

IT'S BECAUSE IT IS EASY.

Fox's waveshine infinite on link wasn't banned because it is hard as hell to pull off without messing up somewhere.

All DDD has to do is keep down throwing the character over and over again. He doesn't even have to move. Tell me that isn't something that would make you aggravated, having NO CHANCE whatsoever to beat DDD once you are grabbed.

I know you are all thinking, "Just don't get grabbed."

Why should death be a penalty for getting grabbed for DK, when a mere 12% damage is penalty for DDD being grabbed by DK?

I rest my case.

DDD inf. grab is easy. Bowser's, IC'S, and such are not.

Its funny how many people try to dismiss this dispite the overwhelming validity of the statement.

 

[Yuna]

its VISUALY/TACTICALY(be that a word?) obvious that it prevents those 6 from winning. Again you dont see that, maybe its because you main some one out of low tier.

WHY shouldnt brawl use the same criteria?

****ty match-ups exist. Deal with it.

No it is not. The game is not 100% different. And it is not different in ways which forces us to invent new criteria for banning things!

Being different =/= Being different in all sorts of ways
Being different =/= Requires this one thing which something else, which is different, doesn't

Brawl is not different from the average Competitive fighting game in any way which makes it so that we have to ban D3's infinite whilst it would never be banned in any other Competitive fighting game. Please tell us why it is.

and to clear the OVER CENTRALIZE debate. common sense, of course it doesnt cause EVERYBODY to go to ddd but its ADDING TO the number of DDDs.

Yes, and? It's not over-centralizing the game. It's just making more people play as D3. It's like saying that the entirety of Top Tier is over-centralizing in such a way we have to ban them all because people flock to them.

The infinite causes more centralization, not over-centralization.

Its funny how many people try to dismiss this dispite the overwhelming validity of the statement.

Only people lacking in logic would think this statement is valid. Just because the infinite will only be screwed up once in every 10 blue moons whilst this other really great thing will only be screwed up once in every 2 blue moons doesn't mean the infinite must be banned while the other thing must not.

If it is humanly possible to learn how to do consistently, people will learn it. How often do you see people at the highest level of Competitive play screw up combos/chaingrabs?

 

[Teh Future]

If it is humanly possible to learn how to do consistently, people will learn it. How often do you see people at the highest level of Competitive play screw up combos/chaingrabs?

All the time...

 

[Deleted member]

ok, so let's say we don't ban it. how do you propose that players can use talent to negate the infinite?

 

[bigman40]

ok, so let's say we don't ban it. how do you propose that players can use talent to negate the infinite?

You can't....One single grab means infinited...Talent will only prolonged yourself from being grabbed.

 

[1048576]

Or prevent it altogether...

Ban combos?

 

[Blad01]

Talent could be exploited with counterpicks... But that is still annoying for those characters. Their players have to main two characters competitively, because there are plenty of DDD.

 

[cutter]

ok, so let's say we don't ban it. how do you propose that players can use talent to negate the infinite?

If you play as Mario, Luigi, and Samus, learn to button mash better to break out of the infinite.

Otherwise, justplay another character who isn't an infinite victim. You have technically negated the infinite.

Problem solved.

 

[Teh Future]

Or prevent it altogether...

Ban combos?

Says the person whos never played DeDeDe before...

 

[rehab]

1048576, don't be a douche. You act really pissed off that somebody could possibly care about the infinite this much, make a whole separate thread to pi** in, and act unreasonably condescending about the stuff, but you're not affected at all. Some people actually care about their characters more than other people who (justifiably) use them as tools to compete, make some kind of effort to understand that much.

(relevant: infinite won't realistically be BR-banned, being real)

+1

 

[camzaman]

Like I said earlier, the anti-ban side needs to be less concerned with the finer points of debate and rhetoric and the fundamentals of persuasive writing, and just ask themselves simple question:

Does banning the infinite make sense?

The answer is yes. Atlantic North banned it - they're top players weren't obsessed with stupid courtroom arguments, they just did what made sense. And OMG, look, Brawl is doing just fine in that region, it hasn't degenerated into a slippery slope of technicalities and bans.

IF the majority of the community places a high value on tourney character diversity, THEN we as a community should take appropriate steps to preserve that diversity. It's part of what makes competitive brawl fun.

BAN DDD's INFINITE. IT'S SIMPLE AND EASY. JUST DO IT.

 

[gantrain05]

this isn't exactly the same thing as a "****ty matchup" as you people keep saying, its PART of what makes a ****ty matchup, but in itself is a cheap broken technique, EVEN if it only affects SIX characters, thats still a rediculous tech, if DDDs infinite CG affected only MK, snake, falco, G&W, Marth, and himself, it would already be banned.

 

[Yuna]

The answer is yes. Atlantic North banned it - they're top players weren't obsessed with stupid courtroom arguments, they just did what made sense. And OMG, look, Brawl is doing just fine in that region, it hasn't degenerated into a slippery slope of technicalities and bans.

Didn't they ban all infinites? That is a slippery slope, since they also got rid of IC infinites. They removed the thing that made ICs barely viable.

if DDDs infinite CG affected only MK, snake, falco, G&W, Marth, and himself, it would already be banned.

No it would not. Styop saying this as if repeating this lie would make it less untrue. Those characters would just don't be viable and popular anymore. Other characters would rise to the Top Tier and become popular. That is how Competitive gaming works.

 

[gantrain05]

Didn't they ban all infinites? That is a slippery slope, since they also got rid of IC infinites. They removed the thing that made ICs barely viable.

IC's are still viable w/out infinites, they still have chaingrabs > Fair spike combo, they don't need the infinites to be effective.

 

[cutter]

Like I said earlier, the anti-ban side needs to be less concerned with the finer points of debate and rhetoric and the fundamentals of persuasive writing, and just ask themselves simple question:

Does banning the infinite make sense?

The answer is yes. Atlantic North banned it - they're top players weren't obsessed with stupid courtroom arguments, they just did what made sense. And OMG, look, Brawl is doing just fine in that region, it hasn't degenerated into a slippery slope of technicalities and bans.

IF the majority of the community places a high value on tourney character diversity, THEN we as a community should take appropriate steps to preserve that diversity. It's part of what makes competitive brawl fun.

BAN DDD's INFINITE. IT'S SIMPLE AND EASY. JUST DO IT.

So I just checked AN and I looked at one of Bum's tournies:

Bans within characters

the standing and walking ddd chain grabbed is banned. don't like it don't come.

anyone that can constantly grab ness or lucas is banned. don't like it don't come.

ice climbers infinite is banned.

LMFAO. Not only does he ban the standing infinites, but he also bans the walking chaingrabs, which are NOT infinites, but FINITE chaingrabs.

He also bans Ice Climbers' infinites and grab release infinites.

 

[gantrain05]

well guess what, its bum's tourney, he runs it, his rules, and he gets a good turnout just about every time from what i see, it seems to be working fine for him.

 

[cutter]

If I lived in AN, I would seriously be ****ing pissed that he bans ALL of the Ice Climber's infinites.

Congrats, Bum just killed a character that already struggles to even place in tournaments even WITH the infinites. By banning ICs infinites, the Ice Climbers have lost their leverage over all characters.

 

[XxBlackxX]

in the first quote you talked about how we shouldnt fix things that arent broken, you were strictly talking about the infinite in relation to that sentance, thus, you were saying it wasnt broken.
as in you were saying that it was broken at all.
in the second quote, you go on to say that the infinite IS broken, but not to a bannable extent.
I read and analysed everthing you said, and it still came out contradictory, because one time you said it isnt broken and thats why it shouldnt be banned, but then you say that it IS broken, just not enough to be banned.

your stance that it shouldnt be banned stands, as you dont contradict the basis of what you are saying. but that doesnt change the fact that you are constantly back talking and saying thing that you contradict minutes or even seconds later.

Also, if you know that im going to bring it up when you contradict yourself, how about instead of getting mad at me for pointing out your failing, why dont you just shape up, and learn to speak your mind with out saying the complete opposite thing moments later.

If you dont contradict yourself, I would have nothing to point out, very simple.

no, you just need to ****ing understand reading comprehension. i spoke very clearly, and no one else brought anything up regarding this. i made it CLEAR, you just chose to pick out any random 2 sentences from my post, and slap it together saying i contradict myself.

all this shows is you didn't read/understand my first post, then when i clearified it for your dumb skull, you come back and STILL think i am the one who is wrong? oh wow...
the intelligence level of the people in this thread is falling considerably >_>

if DDDs infinite CG affected only MK, snake, falco, G&W, Marth, and himself, it would already be banned.

not true and we've already disproved that so stop brining it up please

 

[gantrain05]

no, you just need to ****ing understand reading comprehension. i spoke very clearly, and no one else brought anything up regarding this. i made it CLEAR, you just chose to pick out any random 2 sentences from my post, and slap it together saying i contradict myself.

all this shows is you didn't read/understand my first post, then when i clearified it for your dumb skull, you come back and STILL think i am the one who is wrong? oh wow...
the intelligence level of the people in this thread is falling considerably >_>

to be honest, i read your post as well, and you do comprehend yourself. just admit your wrong and move on.

 

[XxBlackxX]

to be honest, i read your post as well, and you do comprehend yourself. just admit your wrong and move on.

no i will not admit i am wrong when i am clearly not.

okay, i will explain it for you 1st graders one last time:

my first sentence: broken referred to the ban criteria! if you read my convo with xyro, he said smash shouldn't use the same criteria, that smash was different so we should fix some things. therefore, i brought up the phrase: "don't fix what's not broken". that's talking about the ban criteria (that xyro apparently thought needed to be "fixed", but i said it's not "broken" because it worked on almost all competitive games in the past, therefore it's a good criteria)

in my second paragraph, i talked strictly about infinites, using the word "broken" as saying it makes the MATCHUPS broken, but doesn't make the game as a WHOLE broken, so no ban.

seriously, guys, if you can't even understand something as simple as this ^, no wonder you can't understand our arguments on why they shouldn't be banned.

 

[gantrain05]

oh rly? cuz how exactly is "ban criteria" broken, that doesn't even make sense lol.

 

[beamswordsman]

oh rly? cuz how exactly is "ban criteria" broken, that doesn't even make sense lol.

Probably when people can exploit loopholes in the criteria.

 

[XxBlackxX]

oh rly? cuz how exactly is "ban criteria" broken, that doesn't even make sense lol.

broken NOT in the sense we used many times in this thread. not in the sense a tactic is broken duh.
broken as in it's doesn't work. isn't this obvious?

 

[MasterRaichu]

I'm up for some healthy debate on this. Please read my whole post.

First of, many could argue that Smash Bros. Brawl is NOT a competitive fighting game due to its amazing amount of non-competitive mechanics. Even Masahiro Sakurai himself has said in a Nintendo Power interview that the game is NOT a fighter, and in his own opinion it's more akin to a sports game.

However, if one wants to argue in the sense that this game IS a competitive fighter, as to whether or not the infinite chain grab (not just of King Dedede, but ANY character) should be banned, I would argue for it being banned from competitive play.

Here's why: Infinite moves do not breed competitive play. Coupled with the fact that grabbing in Brawl is much easier than the previous two games, Infinites discourage aggressive fighting out of fear of getting grabbed. What's the point of playing a match when you know that if you are grabbed, there is nothing you can do to escape? At almost any given time, you are able to be grabbed, aside from invulnerability and super armor frames (I've seen many instances of someone getting grabbed out of smash attacks in Brawl), so when you are grabbed by someone who can perform an infinite, there's a pretty good chance you will lose.

So what do you get when you allow infinites in tournament play? You eliminate certain characters that could be "good" choices, but are suddenly not because they fail consistently against an infinite, regardless of how they were meant to play. You also increase the amount of people playing the characters that perform the infinites, SOLEY because they can perform the infinite and not because they are "good" characters with a well balanced set of techniques. But aside from changing the spread of character selection, allowing this technique changes the overall reason you play the game. Do you play Smash Bros Brawl because you want to have a spectacular battle of skilled combos, perfect shields, well-timed dodges and well-spaced character placement? Or would you rather settle for the game where two or three characters rule the tournaments because they are able to perform a technique that has so few flaws to its execution that it can almost never be beaten?

In the end, it comes down to a question of how healthy the technique is for the game's competitiveness. I believe that whatever is left of this game's tournament scene would die quickly if the infinite is allowed in standard tournament play. I hesitate to say it's a "broken" mechanic because it does what many people intend for it to do: to win. But it is a highly unbalanced tactic that is not good for the game of Smash Bros overall. In my opinion, it should be banned.

 

[RDK]

Thanks for the back up but these kids are 06-08 members....they dont know much. And then you have the liberal dem yuna......where can i start with him?

They dont get that DDD still has a MASSIVE advantage(70-30 or even 80-20) on those 6 even without the ICG. They just want to make it a n00b proof matchup by allowing a tech that a 6 year old can do. In other words, they want to PREVENT the 6 from ever having a CHANCE(slight as it may be) of winning the match up.

It's quite obvious you don't know how competitive fighting games work.

Giving DK and Bowswer a better matchup is not the job of the SBR (yes, DK and Bowser are really the only ones that are truly effected by the infinite; stop using 7--I don't even know where you got 6 from; you seem to be pulling random **** out of your *** at this point to make yourself look intelligent).

If it was the aim of the SBR to fix individual matchups, then this is the least of their problems.

They dont get that some people actually WANT to help the community and increase thier characters place on the tier list. People such as bum/neo/dire/gimpy/chu(yes ICs were once low tier) all got recognized by thier low tier and not there other characters. By allowing this broken trash in brawl, people LIKE them(bum/xyro/ mr.3000/deva) will never bring thier chars up the tier list in this game. But hey, you guys dont get that.

Oh well.

Pichu / Kirby / Mewtwo mains never got to see their characters place higher in tournaments. Wanna know why? Because Pichu / Kirby / Mewtwo blow. So does DK at this point. End of story.

TL ; DR: it's not our job to fix individual matchups. If you want to play a relatively balanced fighting game, take up GG. In case you haven't noticed, Brawl sucks in the balance department.

They dont get that placing top 4 is nearly impossible with top 6 (when tourneys have mass amounts of pro entrants) so they consider them unviable. This is not melee(sadly), so the standards should be a tad bit different(placing top 9 with low tier is still amazing) they dont get that.

No, I completely get it. I just don't give a ****.

People like you are unhealthy to the community. Your type of thinking helps tournament variety go down to what happened in melee(only 5 characters show up to tournaments).

All im for is giving ****ty characters a chance while not changing the match up. and banning the ICG does not make the matchup in favor of samus.

I'm sorry, but you're just an idiot and you have no idea what you're talking about.

You come in here calling people "kids" just because they don't agree with your opinion, and then expect people to actually take your posts seriously? Get over yourself. It's obvious you have close to zero experience with any fighting game, seeing as how you seem to think that 5 characters being primarily dominant in tournaments is somehowe a rare thing.

Edit:

STOP USING THE ARGUMENT THAT THE INFINTIE SHUTS DOWN 7 CHARACTERS. IT SHUTS DOWN 2, IF THAT.

 

[SkylerOcon]

It doesn't effect any character. I have yet to hear of a Bowser or DK main going to a tournament and everybody picking Dedede the moment that they see the player uses Bowser. One bad match-up doesn't make a character unviable, it just gives them a bad match-up. The infinite is part of Dedede's game and if you're so set on going Bowser only, then don't get grabbed.

One bad match-up doesn't make a character unviable.